How To Argue With An AI Booster, Part One

This is an iHeart podcast.

Guaranteed human.

There's more to San Francisco with the Chronicle. There's more food for thought, more thought for food.
There's more data insights to help with those day-to-day choices.

There's more to the weather than whether it's going to rain.

And with our arts and entertainment coverage, you won't just get out more, you'll get more out of it. At the Chronicle, knowing more about San Francisco is our passion.

Discover more at sfchronicle.com. With Venmo Stash, a taco in one hand, and ordering a ride in the other means you're stacking cash back.
Nice.

Get up to 5% cash back with Venmo Stash on your favorite brands when you pay with your Venmo debit card.

From takeout to ride shares, entertainment, and more, pick a bundle with your go-to's and start earning cash back at those brands. Earn more cash when you do more with Stash.

Venmo Stash terms and exclusions apply. Max $100 cash back per month.
See terms at venmo.me slash stash terms.

Being diagnosed with multiple myeloma was life-changing for both me and my family. When my body stopped responding to treatment, I began searching for other options.

This led me to CAR T cell therapy, a personalized treatment that's made from my own blood cells, which are then genetically modified to find and attack cancer cells.

If your multiple myeloma treatment isn't working or your cancer has come back, learn more about CAR T cell therapy at discovercar T.com.

Then ask your doctor if CAR T Cell Therapy might be an option for you.

Are you a creator? This is your moment to elevate your content. Get ready for TikTok's Live Fest 2025, the biggest celebration of creators from around the world.

From singing to gaming to dancing, wherever your passion lies, there's an audience waiting for you.

Get a chance to take home real trophies and walk down the red carpet at their annual awards ceremony.

Check out hashtag LiveFest 2025 on TikTok to find out how you can be part of of this global celebration. Let's elevate live together.

Coolzone Media

Welcome to Better Offline. I'm your host, Ed Zitron.

And as ever, check out the episode notes for merchandise, my newsletter, various links, things that I just write for myself. I don't actually leave little notes, but maybe I should.

But as promised in my last monologue, we've got a three-part episode this week, and we're talking about AI boosters.

The people who insist, despite very little proof and all evidence to the contrary, that generative AI is the future.

Open AI and Anthropic are perfectly healthy companies, and what we're witnessing isn't an inflation of a massive, dangerous bubble that might eat our entire economy, but rather the emergence of a brand new paradigm in tech that's just as meaningful as the smartphone and cloud computing revolutions.

I even saying that out loud makes me feel a little crazy, but yeah, that's what they believe. These people exist, they're often wrong.
In fact, they're mostly wrong.

And they're also really, really annoying.

And so as a public service, I'm going to spend the next three episodes explaining how to talk with them without losing your sanity, will to live, or your ability to operate in society.

Now, what makes me qualified to do this?

Well, in the last two years, I've written no less than half a million words, with many of them dedicated to breaking both existent and previous myths about the state of technology and the tech industry itself.

Now let's start with something every critic has experienced, the massive double standard between those perceived as skeptics and those who are optimistic or optimists.

To be skeptical of AI is to commit yourself to a near-constant amount of demands to prove yourself, and endless nags of, but what about?

With each one, no matter how small, presented as a fact that defeats any points you may have had, have, or will have in the future.

Conversely, being an optimist allows you to take things like AI 2027, which I will fucking get to, seriously to the point that you can write an entire feature-length fan fiction piece in the New York Times and nobody will bat an eyelid.

In any case, things are beginning to fall apart.

Two of the actual reporters, the real ones at the New York Times, rather than columnists who kind of act like adult babies, reported in late August that Meta is yet again restructuring its AI department for the fourth time, and that it's considering downsizing their overall AI division, which sure doesn't seem like something you'd do if you thought AI was the future.

Meanwhile, the the markets are thoroughly spooked by an MIT study covered by Fortune that found that 95% of generative AI pilots at companies are failing and providing no RROI.

And though MIT Nanda has now replaced the link to the study with some sort of Google form to request access, you can find the full PDF linked in the show notes.

By the way, this is the kind of thing that is a PR firm wanting to try and set up interviews. Not for me, thank you.
Just like to read the thingy that you put out. Very rude.

In any case, the report is actually grimmer than Fortune made it sound, saying that 95% of organizations are getting zero return on generative AI.

The report says that adoption is high, but transformation is low, adding that few industries show the deep structural shifts associated with past general-purpose technologies, such as new market leaders, disrupted business models, or measurable changes in customer behavior.

And saying that out loud, that is right. What is being disrupted by AI? Search? Kind of.
That just means that search sucks.

Anyway, yet the most damning part was there was a part called the five myths about

AI in the enterprise, which is probably the most wilting takedown of this movement I've ever seen and I'm gonna quote it adverbatum okay number one and they present these as the first statement is something that isn't gonna happen or they're questioning AI will replace most jobs in the next few years what it actually says is research found limited layoffs from gen AI and only in industries that are already affected significantly by AI there is no consensus among executives as to hiring levels over the next three to five years another statement they challenge generative AI is transforming business.

No, no, no. Adoption is high, but transformation is rare.
Only 5% of enterprises have AI tools integrated into workflows at scale, and seven of nine sectors show no real structural change.

And I want to thank them for putting this there. I made this exact point in February in my newsletter, There's No AI Revolution.
Links in the show notes as ever.

Enterprises are slow in adopting new tech is another commonly held thing. And they say, enterprises are extremely eager to adopt AI and 90% have seriously explored buying an AI solution.

Another statement they challenge, the biggest thing holding back AI is model quality, legal data and risk.

And then they say, which is my favorite quote, what's really holding it back is that most AI tools don't learn and don't integrate well into workflows.

I really do love that. I love that so much because it's like, the thing holding AI back is that it sucks.

And the final one, the final challenge statement they make is the best enterprises are building their own tools. Internal builds fail twice as often and that's twice as often in that thing where 95

anyway these are brutal dispassionate points that directly deal with the most common boosterisms generative ai isn't transforming anything ai isn't replacing anyone enterprises are trying to adopt generative ai but it doesn't fucking work and the thing holding back ai is the fact it doesn't fucking work this isn't the case where the enterprise is suddenly going to save these companies because the enterprise has already tried and it is not working and what's hilarious as well is so many people say, well, there's just this enterprise opportunity they haven't got into yet.

Actually, they have. They've got into the enterprise.
They're sticking their fingers in all the bits of the SaaS and it isn't working. And the enterprise loves money.

The enterprise will do, even if it's a genuinely evil product, they will push it. Like, look at Salesforce, an entire company based on them.

Anyway, an incorrect read of the study that's been going around is that the learning gap that makes these things less useful is because of human issues, like human error.

When the study actually says that the fundamental gap that defines the Gen AI divide is that users resist tools that don't adapt, model quality fails without context, and UX suffers when systems can't remember.

This isn't something you, as a person, learn your way out of. These products don't do what they're meant to do, and people are realizing it when they try and use them.

Nevertheless, boosters will still find a way to twist this study to mean something else.

They'll claim that AI is still early, that the opportunity is still there, that we didn't confirm that the internet and smartphones were productivity boosting, or that we're in the early days of AI somehow.

Three years and hundreds of billions of dollars and thousands of articles it. Yeah, we're in the early days.
We're in the early days when all the money and all the land has gone into this.

And I'm tired. I'm tired of having the same arguments with these people.
And frankly, I'm sure you are too. No matter how blindly obvious evidence is to the contrary, they will find ways to ignore it.

They continually make these smug comments about people wishing things would be bad or suggesting you are stupid.

And yes, that is their belief, by the way, for not believing that generative AI is disruptive.

Today, and in this three-parter, I'm going to give you the tools to fight back against the AI boosters in your life.

I'm going to go into the generalities of the booster movement, the way they argue, the tropes they cling to, and the ways in which they use your own self-doubt against you.

They're your buddy, your boss, a man in a gingham shirt, epic steakhouse who won't leave you the fuck alone, a redditor, a writer, a founder, or just a common or garden con artist.

Whoever the booster in your life is, I want you to have the words to fight them with.

Running a business is hard enough. So why make it harder? With a dozen different apps that don't talk to each other.
One for sales, another for inventory, a separate one for accounting.

Before you know it, you are drowning in software instead of growing your business. This is where Odoo comes in.
Odoo is the only business software you'll ever need.

It's an all-in-one, fully integrated platform that handles everything. CRM, accounting, inventory, e-commerce, HR, and more.

No more app overload, no more juggling logins, just one seamless system that makes work easier. And the best part, Odoo replaces multiple expensive platforms for a fraction of the cost.

It's built to grow with your business, whether you are just starting out or already scaling up. Plus, it's easy to use, customizable, and designed to streamline every process.

So you can focus on what really matters, running your business.

Thousands thousands of businesses have made the switch so why not you try odu for free at odu.com that's odoo.com it's cold and wet out but the good news is that i bought a bunch of cashmere sweaters from quince which fit really nicely and are both warm and go with just about anything especially the leather racer jacket i got recently too i love their t-shirts and i'm currently eyeing one of their leather messenger bags their gloves as well and they've got some fetching boots.

I really like Quince and everything I've bought so far has felt high quality. like I'd get from a high-end department store, despite being much cheaper.
I've genuinely been really impressed.

And Quince is able to do this by partnering directly with trusted factories with high standards of craftsmanship and ethical practices, cutting out the middleman and selling stuff at half the cost of high-end brands.

I'm really impressed by everything I've got, and I'm gonna get more. Get your wardrobe sorted and your gift lists handled with Quince.
Don't wait.

Go to quince.com/slash better for free shipping on your order and 365-day returns. Now available in Canada too.
That's quince.com slash better.

Free shipping and 365 day returns. Quince.com slash better.

Still jumping between tools just to update your website? Framer unifies design, CMS and publishing on one canvas. No handoff, no hassle.
Everything you need to design and publish in one place.

Think unlimited projects, unlimited pages, unlimited collaborators, and all the essentials. Vectors, 3D transforms, gradients, wireframes.
everything you need to design totally free.

And while Framer already built the fastest way to publish beautiful production-ready websites, it's now redefining how we design for the web.

With the recent launch of Design Pages, a free canvas-based design tool, Framer is more than a site builder. It's a true all-in-one design platform.

From social assets to campaign visuals to vectors and icons, all the way to a live site. Framer is where ideas go live, start to finish.
Ready to design, iterate, and publish all-in-one tool?

Start creating for free free at framer.com slash design and use code offline for a free month of Framer Pro. That's framer.com slash design and use promo code offline.

Framer.com slash design promo code offline. Rules and restrictions may apply.

Hey, I'm Frank and I have Hydrodonitis Superativa. HS.
Before starting Cosintics, I was so uncomfortable with my symptoms, like not being able to sleep on white sheets or wear white clothes.

Now I can appreciate the little things.

Cosentic secukinumab is prescribed for adults with moderate to severe hydridinitis supra tiva, HS. Don't use if allergic to Cosentics.
Get checked for TB before starting.

Increased risk of infections and lowered ability to fight them may occur, like TB or other serious bacterial, fungal, or viral infections. Some were fatal.

Tell your doctor if you have an infection or symptoms, like fevers, sweats, chills, muscle aches, or cough, had a vaccine or plan to, or if IBD symptoms develop or worsen, serious allergic reactions and severe eczema-like skin reactions may occur.

Learn more at 1-844-COSENTIX or COSENTIX.com. You're stronger than H is.
Ask your dermatologist about Cosentix.

So an AI booster is not, in many cases, an actual fan of artificial intelligence.

People like Simon Willison or Max Wolf, who actually work with LLMs on a daily basis, don't see the need to repeatedly harass everybody or talk down to them about their unwillingness to pledge allegiance to the graveyard smash of generative AI.

In fact, the closer I've found someone to actually building things with LLMs, the less likely they are to emphatically argue that I'm missing out on something by not doing so myself. No, no, no.

The AI booster is symbolically aligned with generative AI.

They're fans in the same way that somebody is a fan of a sports team, their houses emblazoned with every possible piece of tat and crap they can find, their Sundays living and dying by the successes of the team, except even fans of the Dallas Cowboys have a tighter grasp on reality.

But not Micah Parsons.

Anyway, Kevin Roos and Casey Newton are two of the most notable boosters, and as I'll get to later in this series, neither of them have a consistent or comprehensive knowledge of AI, despite being at the New York Times.

Though Casey Newton is a contractor, he is a contractor just for a podcast, which I can't insult

due to my own contractual relationships.

Nevertheless, they will insist that everybody is using AI for everything, which is the title of an article they put out, a statement that even a booster should realize is incorrect based on the actual abilities of the models.

But that's because it isn't about what's happening. It's not about what's actually happening.
It's about allegiance.

AI symbolizes something to the AI booster, a way that they're better than other people, that makes them superior because they're, unlike cynics and skeptics, able to see the incredible potential in the future of AI, but also how great it is today, though they never seem to be able to explain why it is other other than it replaced search for me and I use it to draw connections between articles I write, which is something I do for free without AI with my fucking brain.

Boosterism is a kind of religion interested in finding symbolic proof that things are getting better in some indeterminate way, and that anyone that chooses to believe otherwise is ignorant or stupid or...

I actually don't know what it is that they're meant to be missing. Let me give you an example.
Thomas Patachic,

he wrote a piece called My AI Skeptic Friends Are All Nuts, and it was catnip for boosters, a software engineer using technical terms like interact with Git and MCP, vague charts, and of course an extremely vague statement that says hallucinations aren't a problem.

And I quote, now I'm sure there are still environments where hallucination matters, but hallucination is the first thing developers bring up when somebody suggests using LLMs, despite it being more or less a solved problem.

Is it?

Anyway, my favorite, favorite part though, let me quote this. A lot of LLM skepticism probably isn't really about LLMs, it's projection.

People say LLMs can't code, but what they really mean is LLMs can't write Rust, which by the way is a coding language. Fair enough.

But people select languages in part based on how well LLMs work with them. So Rust people should get on that.
What?

Nobody projects more than an AI booster.

They thrive on the sense that they're oppressed and villainized after years of seemingly every other, every goddamn outlet on earth claiming they're right, regardless of whether there's any proof.

They sneer and jeer and cry constantly that people not showing adequate amounts of awe when an AI lab says we did something in private, we can't share it with you, but it's so cool, and constantly act as if they're victims as they spread outright misinformation, either through getting things wrong or never really caring enough to check if they're right.

Also, none of the booster arguments actually survive a thorough response, as Nick Suresh proved with his hilarious and brutal takedown of Patasek's peace. Suresh is a great guy.

He's been on the show before, and I've linked to his piece in the show notes, and I'm going to bring him back on. He's written for my newsletter as well.
Absolute legend.

Now there are, I believe, some people who truly do love using LLMs, yet they are not the ones defending them.

But Tasik's piece drips with condescension, to the point that I feel like he's trying to convince himself how good LLMs are because boosters are eternal victims.

He wrote them a piece that they could send around to skeptics saying, heh, see, without being able to explain why it was such a brutal takedown, mostly because they can't express why other than, well, this guy gets it.

One cannot be a big, smart genius that understands the glory and power of AI while also acting like a scared little puppy every time somebody tells him it sucks. You know what?

This is a great place to start. This is a great place to get into how to deal with AI boosters.
Because AI boosters love being victims and you should not play into it.

When you speak to an AI booster, you may get the instinct to shake them vigorously or respond to their post by saying, to do something with your something or that they're stupid.

I understand the temptation, but you want to keep a level head here. Keep your head on the swivel.
They thrive on this victimization. I'm sorry if you're an AI booster and this makes you feel bad.

Please reflect on your work and how many times you've referred to somebody who didn't understand AI in a manner that suggested that they were ignorant or tried to gaslight them by saying AI was powerful while providing no actionable ways of proving this or...

proof or just being able to point in it being powerful. You cannot and should not allow these people to act as if they're being victimized or othered.

Throughout this series, I'm going to address a very specific thing. I'm going to use a term, booster quip.
This refers to the things that they say and how often you hear them.

These are lines that you'll hear them say again and again and again and again. They're common arguments, common clichés that demand a response.
And let's start with our first booster quip.

You're just being a hater for attention. Contrarians just do it for clicks and headlines.

First and foremost, there are boosters at pretty much every major think tank, government agency, and media out there.

It's extremely lucrative being an AI booster you're showered with panel invites access to executives and you're able to get headlines by saying how scared you are of the computer and it's really easy to do so being a booster is easy and i must be clear when i say booster it doesn't always have to mean overt it could just mean the things you choose not to do it could mean the things you choose not to criticize them for or the things you just write down that they say But really, we're talking about the worst of them.

But if you hear that sentence and you don't think you're a booster, you can be a booster, by the way, if you just choose not to criticize them. But we're talking about the real arseholes.

Being a critic requires you to constantly have to explain yourself in a way that boosters never have to.

Now, if a booster says this to you, if they say you're just being a hater for attention, you're just doing this for clicks, Ask them to explain, first of all, what they mean by clicks or attention and how they think you are monetizing it, how this differs in its success from, say, anybody who interviews and quotes Sam Altman or Dario Wario Amadei or whomever from Anthropic on Hard Fork, ask them what the difference is and ask them why do they believe your intentions as a critic are somehow malevolent as opposed to those literally reporting what the rich and powerful want them to.

There's no answer here because this is not a coherent point of view.

Boosters are more successful, get more perks and are in general treated better than any critic at pretty much every major out there.

Fundamentally, these people exist in the land of the vague and they don't like it when you force them to get specific.

They will drag you toward what's just on the horizon but never quite define what the thing that dazzles you so much will be or when it will arrive. Really, their argument comes down to one thought.

You must get on board now because at some point it will be so good you'll feel so stupid for not believing something that kind of sucks wouldn't be really good.

And if this line sounds familiar it's because you've heard it a million times before, most notably with cryptocurrency, NFTs, metaverse, clubhouse.

Tons of movements actually.

They will make you define what would impress you which is not your job in the same way finding the use case for them isn't your job in fact You're the customer.

You're the consumer You are the person that AI needs to prove itself to not the other way around But let's go to another booster quip when they go

you just don't get it

Here's a great place to start say that's a really weird thing to say.

It is peculiar to suggest that somebody that doesn't get how to use a product is weird and that we as the consumer as the customer must justify ourselves to our own purchases no no no no if i don't get it it's the booster's job to tell me why make them justify their attitude just like any product we buy software to serve a need this is meant to be artificial intelligence why is it so fucking stupid that i have to work out why it's useful the answer is of course that it has no intellect it is not intelligent and large language models are being pushed up a mountain by a cadre of people who are either easily impressed or invested either emotionally or financially in its success due to the company they keep or their intentions for the world.

And if a booster suggests you just don't get it, ask them to explain the following: What am I missing?

What specifically is it that is so life-changing about this product based on your own experience, not on any anecdotes from other people?

Because they will say, Well, I heard of a guy who wrote 10 billion lines of code, and then the baby looked at me and I cried.

They don't have real things themselves, so cut off the exits, bought up the doors. And then also ask them them what use cases are truly transformative about AI.

Don't let them say, well, I heard in an industry. Actually, make them prove themselves.

Their use cases will likely be that AI has replaced search for them, that they use it for brainstorming or journaling, proofreading an article, or looking through a big pile of their notes or some other corpus of information and summarizing it or pulling out insights.

Who gives a shit?

Sorry, not to be too acerbic, but really who fucking cares? That shit's so boring. Hundreds of billions of dollars of wasted investment on this.
And this is what we've got three years in?

Fucking Humpty Dumpty could never have it this good. Anyway, our next booster quip is one of my faves.

AI is powerful and getting exponentially more powerful. Now, if a booster ever refers to AI being powerful and getting more powerful, ask them the following.
What does powerful mean?

In the event that they mention benchmarks, ask them how those benchmarks apply to real-world scenarios.

If they bring up SWE Bench, the standard benchmark for coding, ask them if they can code and if they cannot, ask them for another example. I mean, they will tell you that they've spoken with coders.

I've talked with a lot of coders. I have a great one with Colt Vogie coming up, another software engineer talking about LLMs.

It's so funny. It's so funny when you actually lay this stuff out.
how weak their arguments are. But in the event they mention reasoning, ask them to define it.

Once they've defined reasoning, ask them to explain in plain English what reasoning allows you to do on a use case level not just how it works they will likely bring up the gold medal performance that OpenAI's model got on the Math Olympiad ask them why open AI hasn't released that model then ask them what the actual practical use cases that this success has opened up they will say it's an innovation you've got to be patient and then pepper spray them nope don't don't pepper spray anyone anyway

You should also then ask them what use cases have arrived as a result of models becoming more powerful. If they say vague things like, oh, in coding and, oh, in medicine, ask them to get specific.

And then ask them what new products have arrived as a result. If they say coding LLMs, they will likely add that this is replacing coders.

Ask them where that has happened and ask them to show you proof, links. And it will not be sufficient to say that a CEO mentioned that they did something with AI inefficiency.
Get numbers.

They just won't. They won't do this.
They will turn into a pillar of salt. And we've got two more fucking parts of this.
I mean, you're going to have a ball with this.

Look, the core of the AI boosters argument is that they need to make you feel bad. They like the gaslight and you should

refuse to let them. You need to push back heavily.
If there's ever a point where you feel like they are trying to make you feel stupid, ask them why they're doing so.

And to be clear, anyone with a compelling argument doesn't have to make you feel bad to convince you. The iPhone didn't need a spurious hype cycle of proof, of people saying, you must look at this.

It is so important.

When it didn't really work, it worked immediately. Now, I said in my news that it didn't need a fucking marketing campaign.
Yes, there was marketing dollars behind the iPhone, Eric, newcomer.

Come at me with better work, mate. Respond to the rest of this.
But we all kind of got it with the iPhone. In fact, the moment Steve Jobs announced it, piece of shit that he was,

he said, here's the phone. Here's an iPod.

Here's Ema. You could do all these on one device.
And everyone, oh, yeah, that is good.

You that is really obvious that that was good. It was impressive because it was impressive.

And boosters boosters will suggest you are intentional in not liking AI because you're a hater or a cynic or a Luddite. They'll suggest that you're ignorant for not being amazed by ChatGPT.

Let me tell you something. You don't have to be impressed by anything by default.
And any product, especially software, designed to make you feel stupid for not getting it, is poorly designed.

Chat GPT is the ultimate form of silicon value sociopathy. You must do the work to find the use cases and thank them for giving you the chance to do so.
AI is not even good, reliable software.

It resembles the death of the art of technology.

Inconsistent and unreliable by definition, inefficient by design, financially ruinous and adds to the cognitive load of the user by requiring them to be ever-vigilant of the shit-assed outputs that can come out of them.

So here's a really easy way to deal with this. If a booster ever suggests you are stupid or ignorant, ask them why it's necessary to demean you to get their point across.

Even if you are unable to argue on a technical level, make them explain why the software itself can't convince you. And be vigilant.

Boosters seldom live in reality and will do everything they can to pull you off course.

And I should add that there is a fair criticism here. I do insult people.
I do demean them. I call them babies and I do funny voices.
And I do that because I don't respect them. I'm not...

I am here to tell you how I feel. I'm...
will convince you through the large amounts of work I do and the research I have. I don't, if you disagree with me, you disagree with me.

It's fine. And yeah, these people do sound kind of silly.
I'll get you a Casey Newton thing in a couple of episodes, I think, but really, it's impossible to call them otherwise.

Running a business is hard enough. So why make it harder? With a dozen different apps that don't talk to each other.
One for sales, another for inventory, a separate one for accounting.

Before you know it, you are drowning in software instead of growing your business. This is where Odoo comes in.
ODU is the only business software you'll ever need.

It's an all-in-one, fully integrated platform that handles everything. CRM, accounting, inventory, e-commerce, HR, and more.
No more app overload. No more juggling logins.

Just one seamless system that makes work easier. And the best part, Odo replaces multiple expensive platforms for a fraction of the cost.

It's built to grow with your business, whether you are just starting out or already scaling up. Plus, it's easy to use, customizable, and designed to streamline every process.

So you can focus on what really matters, running your business. Thousands of businesses have made the switch.
So why not you? Try Odu for free at odo.com. That's odoo.com.

Hey, I'm Frank, and I have hydrodonitis superativa, HS. Before starting Cosintics, I was so uncomfortable with my symptoms, like not being able to sleep on white sheets or wear white clothes.

Now I can appreciate the little things.

Cosentic secukinumab is prescribed for adults with moderate to severe hydridinitis supra tiva, HS. Don't use if allergic to Cosentics.
Get checked for TB before starting.

Increased risk of infections and lowered ability to fight them may occur, like TB or other serious bacterial, fungal, or viral infections. Some are fatal.

Tell your doctor if you have an infection or symptoms, like fevers, sweats, chills, muscle aches, or cough, had a vaccine or planned to, or if IBD symptoms develop or worsen.

Serious allergic reactions and severe eczema-like skin reactions may occur. Learn more at 1-844-COSENTIX or COSENTIX.com.
You're stronger than H is. Ask your dermatologist about COSENTIX.

When you invest with Fidelity Go, it does all the work for you.

So while Fidelity Go monitors the markets, rebalances your portfolio, and tracks your progress to keep your investments aligned with your goal, you can invest your time however you want, all while paying no advisory fees under 25k.

Invest your money, not your time. With Fidelity Go, get started at fidelity.com/slash go.
Advisory services offered by Strategic Advisors LLC, a registered investment advisor.

Brokerage services provided by Fidelity Brokerage Services LLC, member NYSC and SIPC.

There's a shimmer in the air, and it's coming from Shreve and Company. Diamond stud earrings, tiny stars you can wear.
They don't just catch the light, they whisper stories.

For the woman who lights up your world, give her something that mirrors her brilliance. From little black dresses to blue jeans and bare feet, diamond studs always say the right thing.

In Stanford Shopping Center, Palo Alto, Shreve and Company, extraordinary jewelry and timepieces.

Look.

If you say that none of these companies make money, they'll say it's in the early days. If you say AI companies burn billions, they'll say the cost of inference is coming down.

If you say the industry is massively overbuilding, they'll say that this is actually just like the dot-com boom and that the infrastructure will be picked up at used in the future.

If you say there are no real use cases, they'll say ChatGPT has 700 million weekly users. Every single time, there's the same goddamn arguments.

Which is why, from here on out, I'm going to give you the responses to all of them.

And there's an article version you could print up and stuff it in there. No, no, no.

No violence, everyone. Be nice.
but you're going to be able to use these arguments going forward and let's start with my face favorite booster quip AI will

anytime an AI booster says AI will tell them to stop tell them to stop and explain what AI can do now and if you if they insist ask them both when they expect things to happen in the way they're talking about and if they say very soon ask them to be more specific Get them to agree to a date and then call them on that day or show up at their house.

Hell, you could be waiting inside when they get there, assuming you have a key legally. Now here's another one, another booster grip.

They will say agents will automate large parts of our economy and I will say fucking stop.

There's that will bullshit again.

There's that will. Will will will.

Agents don't work. They don't work at all.

The term agent means, to quote Max Wolff, a workflow where the LLM can make its own decisions, such as in the case of web search, where the LLM is told you can search the web if you need to, then can output I should search the web and search the web.

Yet agent has now become a mythical creature that means totally autonomous AI that can do an entire job. If anyone tells you agents are dot dot dot, you should ask them to point to one.

If they say coding, please demand that they explain how autonomous these things are.

And if they say they can refactor entire code bases, ask them what that means and also laugh at them because they will not know.

Ask them to explain how Salesforce's own research shows that agents only have a 58% success rate on single-step tasks, that's you ask it to do one thing, and 35% on multi-step tasks.

And what's crazy as well, and I won't have this in the episode notes, you're just going to have to look it up.

There is a story that just came out about OpenAI's projections. They reduced the amount of money they're making over the next few years in agents down $26 billion less.
They just removed that part.

Do you think agents exist now? Agents are not autonomous. They do not replace jobs.
They cannot replace coders. They are not going to do so

because probabilistic models are a horrible means of taking precise actions and almost anyone who brings up agents as a booster is either misinformed or in the business of misinformation.

Now here's another booster grip for you. What I mean is that AI is like the early days of the internet.
Now in many cases I think they're referring to AI

as being early as a reference to those early days and they never really refer to what that means because the early days of the internet can refer to just about anything.

Are we talking about dial-up, DSL? Are we talking about the pre-platform days when people accessed accessed it? The internet via copy server AOL? Yes, yes, I remember the article from Newsweek.

I already explained it in my newsletter reality check. I'm going to quote myself about this fucking article where the guy said the internet wouldn't take off.

In any case, one guy said saying that the internet won't be big doesn't mean a fucking thing about generative AI, and you're a simpleton if you think it does.

One guy being wrong in some way is not a response to my work and I will crush you like a bug. Again, I'm using ad hominin attacks.
Who cares? These fucking people are rude as hell.

Now, if your argument is that the early internet required expensive sun microsystem servers to run, Jim Covello of Goldman Sachs addressed that in June 2024 by saying that the costs were that the costs paled in comparison, adding that we also didn't need to expand our fucking power grid to build the early web.

Well sir, there's another booster grip. Sir, actually people said smartphones wouldn't be big.
This is a straight up lie by the way. I've heard this a good amount.

I've heard at least five people say, yeah, well, people didn't didn't think the iPhone would be big. The iPhone wasn't going to be big, actually.

This is a lie. It's a lie.
It's a lie. You're lying.

Also, as Jim Covello from Godman Snex noted, there were hundreds of presentations in the early 2000s that included roadmaps that accurately fit how smartphones rolled out, and that no such roadmap exists for generative AI.

The iPhone was also an immediate success as a thing that people paid for, with Apple selling 4 million units in the space of six months, and this was on an exclusive contract for several years, I think, with Singular Wireless, now called AT ⁇ T.

Hell, in 2006, since the year before the iPhone launched, there were smartphones.

And there was an estimated 7.7 million worldwide smartphone shipments, mostly from BlackBerry, Windows Mobile, and Palm.

Though to be generous to the generative AI boosters, I'm going to disregard those because they actually help prove my point more.

And I just want to be clear that the early days of the internet are not a sensible comparison to generative AI.

The original Attentional Is All You Need paper, the one that kicked off the transformer-based large language model era, was published in June 2017. Chat GPT launched in November 2022.

It's not early. We're not early anymore.
We haven't been for a while. But nevertheless, if we're saying early days here, we should actually define what that means.

As I mentioned previously, people paid for the iPhone immediately, despite it being a device that was completely and utterly new on one specific carrier.

While there was a small group of consumers that might have used similar devices, like the Compact iPac, it was kind of a cool device.

The iPhone was a completely new kind of computing, sold at a premium, requiring you to have a contract with that specific carrier.

Conversely, ChatGPT's annualized revenue in December 2023 was $1.6 billion, so about $133 million in that month, for a product that had by that time raised over $10 billion.

And while we don't know what OpenAI lost in 2023, reports suggest it burned over $5 billion in 2024.

Big tech has spent over $500 billion in capital expenditures in the last 18 months, and all told, between investments of cloud credits and infrastructure, will likely sink over $600 billion by the year's end.

The early days of the internet were defined not by its lack of investment or attention, but by its obscurity. Even in 2000, around the time of the dot-com bubble, only 52% of U.S.

adults use the internet, and it would take another 19 years for 90% of U.S. adults to do so.
These early days were also defined by its early functionality.

The internet would become so much more because of the things that hyper-connectivity allowed us to do.

And both faster internet connections and the ability to host software software in the cloud would change everything.

We could define what better would mean and make reasonable predictions about what people could do on a better internet.

Yet even in those early days it was obvious why you were using the internet and how it might grow from there.

One did not have to struggle to explain why buying a book online might be useful or quicker than a shop, or why a website might make a quicker reference than having to go to a library, or why downloading a game or a song might be a good idea.

While habits might have needed adjusting, it was blatantly obvious what the value of the early internet was. It's also unclear when the early days of the internet ended.

Only 44% of US adults had access to broadband internet in 2006. Were those the early days of the internet?

The answer is no, and this point is brought up by people with a poor grasp of history and a flimsy attachment to reality.

The early days of the internet were very, very, very different to any associated tech boom since, and we need to stop making the comparison.

The internet also grew in a vastly different information ecosystem.

Generative AI has had the benefit of mass media driven by the internet along with social media and social pressure to adopt AI for multiple years. And now I'll last bootstrip for the episode.
Um

actually I meant something else. What I mean is that we're in the early days of AI.
All of the other things you said were very misleading. You misread my statements somehow.

We are not in the early days of generative AI and anyone using this argument is either ignorant or intentionally deceptive.

According to Pew, as of mid-2025, 34% of US adults have used ChatGPT, with 79% saying they'd at least heard of it, and a little about it even. Furthermore, ChatGPT has always had a free version.

On top of that, a study from May 2023 found that over 10,900 news headlines mentioned ChatGPT between November 2022 and March 2023.

And a Brandwatch report found that in the first five months of its release, ChatGPT received over 9.2 million mentions on social media.

Nearly 80% of people have heard of ChatGPT and over a quarter of Americans have used it. If we're defining the early days based on consumer exposure, that ship has sailed.

If we're defining the early days by the passage of time, it's been eight years since attention is all you need and three since ChatGPT came out.

While three years might not seem like a lot of time, the whole foundation of an early days argument is that in the early days, things do not receive the venture funding, research, attention, infrastructural support or business interest necessary to make them big.

In 2024, nearly 33% of all global venture funding went to artificial intelligence and according to the information, AI startups have raised over $40 billion in 2025 alone, with Statista adding that AI absorbed 71% of VC funding in the first quarter of 2025.

These numbers also fail to account the massive infrastructure costs that companies like OpenAI and Anthropic don't have to pay for. The limitations of the early internet were twofold.

The fiber optic cable boom that led to the fiber optic bubble bursting when telecommunications companies massively overinvested in infrastructure, which I will get to shortly.

There was also the lack of scalable cloud infrastructure to allow distinct apps to be run online, a problem solved by Amazon Web Services, among others.

In Generative AI's case, Microsoft, Google and Amazon have built the fiber optic cables for large language models. OpenAI and Anthropic have everything they need.

They have, even if they say otherwise, plenty of compute, access to the literal greatest minds in the field, the constant attention of the media and global governments, and effectively no regulations or restrictions stopping them from training their models in the works of millions of people or destroying our environment.

They've already had this support too. OpenAI was allowed to burn half a billion dollars on a single training run for GPT 4.5 and 5, and they did multiple runs.

If anything, the massive amounts of capital have allowed us to massively condense the time in which a bubble goes from possible to bursting and washing out a bunch of people, because the tech industry is such a powerful follower culture that only one or two unique ideas can exist at one time, and I think those ideas are currently open AI and anthropic.

The early days argument hinges on obscurity and limited resources, something that generative AI does not get to whine about.

Companies that make effectively no revenue can raise $500 million to do the same AI coding bullshit that everybody else does.

In simpler terms, these companies are flush with cash, have all the attention and investment they could possibly need, after all, attention is all you need,

and are still unable to create a product with a defined, meaningful, mass market use case, let alone one that doesn't burn money.

In fact, I believe that thanks to effectively infinite resources, we've speedrun the entire large language model era, and we're nearing the end. These companies got what they wanted.

And I think I want to die in Minecraft, obviously, but I must press on. I must.

Just saying all these things out loud, you really get a sense for how illogical these people are and how much bullshit is going around to try and push back against skeptics. But it's not gonna work.

It's not gonna work. I hope you're not tired of me talking about boost equips and doing silly voices as you've got two more of these fucking episodes coming, and I love recording them.
I really do.

Did they say recording? Jesus Christ. My friends, we're in hell, but we're together in hell, and that's fun, and there's a lot more bullshit to break down.
Speak to you tomorrow.

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.

When you invest with Fidelity Go, it does all the work for you.

So while Fidelity Go monitors the markets, rebalances your portfolio, and tracks your progress to keep your investments aligned with your goal, you can invest your time however you want, all while paying no advisory fees under 25K.

Invest your money, not your time, with Fidelity Go. Get started at fidelity.com slash go.
Advisory services offered by Strategic Advisors LLC, a registered investment advisor.

Brokerage services provided by Fidelity Brokerage Services LLC, member NYSC and SIPC.

Hey, Ryan Reynolds here for Mint Mobile. You know, one of the perks about having four kids that you know about is actually getting a direct line to the big man up north.

And this year, he wants you to know the best gift that you can give someone is the gift of Mint Mobile's unlimited wireless for $15 a month. Now you don't even need to wrap it.

Give it a try at mintmobile.com slash switch. Upfront payment of $45 for three-month plan equivalent to $15 per per month required.
New customer offer for first three months only.

Speed slow after 35 gigabytes if networks busy. Taxes and fees extra.
See Mintmobile.com. Enterprise AI is redefining business operations, and voice technology leads this transformation.

While Alexis showcases consumer applications, AWS AI delivers enterprise-scale voice solutions that are reshaping customer engagement across industries.

Leverage Amazon's proven AI innovation to transform your customer experience and drive operational excellence. AWS AI, the voice of innovation.

Discover the Alexis story at aws.com slash AI slash our dash story.

She's been thinking about this sleepover all week, but I think about her food allergies all the time. Fortunately, her doctor prescribed Zolair, Omelizumab.

It's proven to significantly reduce allergic reactions if a food allergy accident happens.

Zolair 150 milligrams is a prescription medication used to treat food allergy in people one year of age and older to reduce allergic reactions due to accidental exposure to to one or more foods.

While taking Zolair, you should continue to avoid all foods to which you are allergic. Don't use if you are allergic to Zolair.

Zolair may cause a severe, life-threatening allergic reaction called anaphylaxis. Tell your doctor if you ever had anaphylaxis.

Get help right away if you have trouble breathing or if you have swelling of your throat or tongue. Zolair should not be used for the emergency treatment of allergic reactions including anaphylaxis.

Zolair is for maintenance use to reduce allergic reactions including anaphylaxis while avoiding food allergens.

Serious side effects such as cancer, fever, muscle aches and rash, parasitic infection, or heart and circulation problems have been reported. Please see Zolair.com for full prescribing information.

Ask an allergist about Zolair. This is an advertisement for Zolair paid for by Genentech and Novartis.
This is an iHeart podcast.

Guaranteed human.