E124: AutoGPT's massive potential and risk, AI regulation, Bob Lee/SF update

26:20The only thing that's not there yet, as far as I know, is the ability to take static images and string them together into a motion picture. But that seems like it's coming really soon. So yeah, in theory, you should be able to train the model where you just give it a screenplay and it outputs essentially an animated movie. And then you should be able to fine tune it by choosing the voices that you want and the characters that you want and that kind of stuff. So yeah, I think we're close to it. Now, I think that the question though is, you know, every nine, let's call it a reliability, is a big advancement.

26:54So yeah, it might be easy to get to 90 % within two years, but it might take another two years to go from 90 to 99 % And then it might take another two years to get to 99 .9 and so on and so to actually get to the point where you're at this stage where You can release the theatrical quality movie. I'm sure it will take a lot longer than two years Well, but look at this sex. I'm just gonna show you one image This is the input was arrow drone footage of a mountain range And this is what it came up with now. If you were watching TV in the 80s or 90s on a non -HD TV, this would look indistinguishable from anything you've seen.

27:30And so this is at a pace that's kind of crazy. There's also opportunity here, right, Friedberg? I mean, if we were to look at something like the Simpsons, which has gone on for 30 years, if young people watching the Simpsons could create their own scenarios, or with AutoGPT, imagine you told the Simpsons, stable diffusion instance, read what's happening in the news, have Bart Simpson respond to it, have the South Park character's parody, whatever happened in the news today, you could have automated real -time episodes of South Park just being published onto some website. Before you move on, did you see the Wonder Studio demo?

28:11We can pull this one up. It's really cool. Yeah, please. This is a startup that's using this type of technology and the way it works is You film a Live action scene with a regular actor, but then you can just drag and drop an animated character onto it Mm -hmm, and it then converts that scene into a movie with that character like plan of the apes or Lord of the Rings Right, yeah, exactly. So Dechus is the person who kept winning all the Oscars. So there goes after the robot is replaced the human Wow, you can imagine like every piece of this just eventually gets swapped out with AI, right? Like you should be able to tell the AI give me a picture of a human leaving a building like a Victorian era building in New York.

29:00And certainly it can give you a static image of that. So it's not that far, then give you a video of that, right? And so yeah, I think we're pretty close for, or let's call it hobbyist or amateur is built to create pretty nice looking movies using these types of tools. But again, I think there's a jump to get to the point where you're disall together replacing. One of the things I'll say on this is we still keep trying to relate it back to the way media narrative has been explored and written by humans in the past. Very kind of linear storytelling. You know, it's a two hour movie, 30 minute TV segment, an eight minute YouTube clip, 30 -second Instagram clip, whatever.

29:42But one of the enabling capabilities with this set of tools is that the stories, the way that they're rendered and the way that they're explored by individuals, can be fairly dynamic. You could watch a movie with the same story. All four of us could watch a movie with the same story, but from totally different vantage points and some of us could watch it in an 18 -minute version or a two -hour version or a, you know, three -season episode, episodic version, where the way that this opens up the potential for creators and all. So now I'm kind of saying, before I was saying, hey, individuals can make their own movies and videos.

30:22That's going to be incredible. There's a separate, I think, creative output here, which is the leveling up that happens with creators that maybe wasn't possible to than before. So perhaps a creator writes a short book, a short story. And then that short story gets rendered into a system that can allow each one of us to explore it and enjoy it in different ways. And I as the creator can define those different vantage points. I as the creator can say, here's a little bit of this personality, this character trait. And so what I can now do as a creator is stuff that I never imagined I could do before.

30:57Think about old school photographers for doing black and white photography with pinhole cameras. And then they come across a Adobe Photoshop. What they can do with Adobe Photoshop was stuff that they could never conceptualize of in those old days. I think what's gonna happen for creators going forward and this is going back to that point that we had last week or two weeks ago about the guy that was like, hey, I'm out of a job. I actually think that the opportunity for creating new stuff in new ways is so profoundly expanding that individuals can now write entire universes that can then be enjoyed by millions of people from completely different lengths and viewpoints and models, they can be interactive, they can be static, they can be dynamic, and that the tooling that you personalized, but the tooling that you as a creator now have, you could choose which characters you want to define, you could choose which content you want to write, you could choose which content you want the AI to fill in for you, and say, hey, create 50 other characters in the village, and then when the viewer reads the book or watches the movie, let them explore or have a different interaction with a set of those villagers in that village, or you could say, hey, here's the one character everyone has to meet.

32:03Here's what I want them to say, and you can define the dialogue. And so the way that creators can start to harness their creative chops and create new kinds of modalities for content and for exploration, I think is going to be so beautiful and incredible. I mean, Freiburg. Yeah, you can choose the limits of how much you want the individual to enjoy from your content versus how narrowly you want to define it. And my guess is that the creators that are going to win are going to be the ones that are going to create more dynamic range in the creative output. And then individuals are going to kind of be stuck, they're going to be more into that than they will with the static everyone watches the same thing over and over.

32:40So there will be a whole new world of creators that maybe have a different set of tools than just to build on what you're saying, for you, which are things incredibly insightful. Just think about the controversy around two aspects of a franchise like James Bond. Number one, who's your favorite bond? We grew up with Roger Moore, we leaned towards that, then we discovered Sean Connery, and then all of a sudden you see you know, the latest one, he's just extraordinary. And Daniel Craig, you're like, you know what, that's the one that I love most. Well, what if you could take any of the films, you could say, let me get you know, give me the spy who loved me, but put Daniel Craig in it, etc.

33:13And that would be available to you. And then think about the next controversy, which is, oh my god, does Daniel, does James Bond need to be a white guy from the UK? Of course not. You can you release it around the world and each reaching to get their own celebrity, their number one celebrity to play the lead and controversy over. You know the old story, the epic of Gilgamesh, right? So like that story was retold in dozens of different languages and it was told through the oral tradition. It was like, you know, spoken by Bards around a fire pit and whatnot. And all of those stories were told with different characters and different names and different experiences.

33:46Some of them were 10 minutes long. some of our multi -hour sagas explained through the story. But ultimately, the morality of the story, the storyline, the intentionality of the original creator of that story came through. The Bible is another good example of this where much of the underlying morality and ethics in the Bible comes through in different stories read by different people in different languages. And I think that may be where we go. Like, my kids want to have a 10 -minute bedtime story. Well, let me give them Peter Pan a 10 minutes. I want to do, you know, a chapter a night for my older daughter for a week long of Peter Pan, now I can do that.

34:18And so the way that I can kind of consume content becomes different. So I guess what I'm saying is there's two aspects to the way that I think the entire content, the realm of content can be rewritten through AI. The first is like individual personalized creation of content where I as a user can render content of my liking and my interest. The second is that I can engage with content that is being created that is so much more multi -dimensional than anything we conceive of today, where current centralized content creators now have a whole set of tools. Now from a business model perspective, I don't think the platforms publish those are really the play anymore, but I do think the platforms are gonna be the play.

34:54And the platform tooling that enables the individuals to do this stuff and the platform tooling that enables the content creators to do this stuff are definitely entirely new industries and models that can create multi -hundred billion dollar outcomes. Let me hand this off to SACs because there has been the dream for everybody, especially in the Bay Area of a hero coming and saving Gotham City. And this has finally been realized. David Sacks, I did my own little Twitter AI hashtag and I said to Twitter AI, if only please generate a picture of David Sacks' Batman crouch down on the peak of the thing I breached, the amount of creativity sacks that came from this.

35:36And this is something that, you know, If we were talking about just five years ago, this would be like a $10 ,000 image you could create through us. These were not professional, quote unquote, artists. These were individuals that were able to harness a set of platform tools to generate this incredible new content. And I think it speaks to the opportunity ahead. And by the way, we're in ining one, right? So, you know, you see yourself as Batman. Do you ever think you should take your enormous wealth and resources and put it towards building a cave under your mansion that lets you out underneath the Golden Gate Bridge and you could go fight crime.

36:11So good. So good. Do you want to go fight this crime in Gotham? I think it's almost as good as a lot of Gotham -like qualities. I think the villains are more real than the heroes. And, fortunately, we don't have a lot of heroes, but we've got a lot of jokers. Yeah, we have a lot of jokers. Yeah, that's a whole separate topic. I'm sure we'll get to it. A whole separate topic we'll get to at some point today. You guys are talking about all this stupid bullshit. like there are trillions of dollars of software companies that could disrupt and you're talking about making fucking children's books and fat pictures of satis.

36:40It's so dumb. The point is, enter the industry and you are doing a great job. Nobody cares about entertainment anymore because it's so really good. So why don't you teach people where there's going to be actual economic destruction? This is going to be an amazing economic destruction and opportunity. You spent all this time on the most stupidest fucking topics. Listen, it's an illustrative example. No, it's an elitist example that you fucking shirk your self -serve. It's Batman's not nobody can nobody cares about. Let's bring nobody to tweet over everybody. I mean, I think I think US box office is something like 20 billion a year.

37:17I remember when like they got to like a hundred billion a year of payment volume and now it's like hundreds of billions. So add in and strike. We're gonna process two trillion dollars almost. Why don't you talk about that disruption you nitty -nitty? Market size of US media and entertainment industry, $717 billion. Okay, it's not insignificant. Video games are nearly half a trillion a year. Yeah, I mean, this is not insignificant. But let's pull up Chimaltz tweet. Of course, the dictator wants to dictate here. All this incredible innovation is being made and a new hero has been born, Chimaltz Polyhapatia.

37:49A tweet that went viral over 1 .2 million views already, a read your tweet for the audience. If you invent a novel drug, And you need the government to vet and approve it. FDA, before you can commercialize it, if you invent a new mode of air travel, you need the government to vet and approve it. FAA, I'm just going to edit this down a little bit. If you create new security, you need the government to vet and approve it. SEC, more generally, when you create things with broad societal impact, positive and negative. The government creates a layer to review and approve it. AI will need such an oversight body.

38:19The FDA approval process seems the most credible and adaptable into a framework to understand now a model behaves and it's counterfactual. Our political leaders need to get in front of this sooner rather than later and create some oversight before the eventual big avoidable mistakes happen and genius are led out of the bottle. Traumat, you really want the government to come in and then when people build these tools, they have to submit them to the government to approve them. That's what you're saying here and you want that to start now. Here's the alternative. The alternative is going to be the debacle that we know as section 230.

38:54So if you try to write a brittle piece of legislation or try to use old legislation to deal with something new, it's not going to do a good job because technology advances way too quickly. And so if you look at the section 230 example, where have we left ourselves? The politicians have a complete inability to pass a new framework to deal with social But a bunch of 70 and 80 year old Supreme Court justices will do in trying to rewrite technology law when they have to apply in on section 230. So the point of that tweet was to lay the alternatives. There is no world in which this will be unregulated.

39:43And so I think the question to ask ourselves is, do we want a chance for a new body? So the FDA is a perfect example. Why? Even though the FDA commissioner is appointed by the president, this is a quasi organization. It still arms length away. It has subject matter experts that they hire and they have many pathways to approval. Some pathways take days, some pathways are months and years, some pathways are for breakthrough innovations, some pathways are for devices. So they have a broad spectrum of ways of, of arbitrating. What can be commercialized and what cannot? Otherwise, my prediction is we will have a very brittle law that will not work.

40:27It'll be like the Commerce Department and the FTC trying to gerrymandor some old piece of legislation. And then what will happen is it'll get escalated to the Supreme Court. And I think they are the last group of people who should be deciding on this incredibly important topic for society. So what I have been advocating our leaders and I will continue to do so is don't try to ram this into an existing body. It is so important. It is worth creating a new organization like the FDA and having a framework that allows you to look at a model and look at the counterfactual, judge how good, how important, how disruptive it is, and then release it in the wild appropriately.

41:13Otherwise, I think you'll have these chaos GPT things scale infinitely. Because again, as Freiburg said in a sex set, you're talking about one person that can create this chaos. Multiply that by every person that is an anarchist or every person that just wants to sow seeds of chaos. And I think it's going to be all avoidable. I think regulating what software people can write is a near impossible task. Number one, I think you can probably put rules and restrictions around commerce, right? That's certainly feasible in terms of how people can monetize. But in terms of writing and utilizing software, it's going to be as challenged as trying to monitor and demand oversight and regulation around how people write and use tools for genome and biology exploration.

42:02Certainly, if you want to take a product to market and sell a drug to people that can influence their body, you have to go get that approved. But in terms of doing your work in a lab, it's very difficult. I think the other challenge here is software can be written anywhere. It can be executed anywhere. And so if the US does try to regulate or does try to put the brakes on the development of tools where the US can have kind of a great economic benefit and a great economic interest, there will be advances made elsewhere without a doubt. And those markets and those places will benefit in an extraordinarily outpace way.

42:44Okay, as we just mentioned, there's such extraordinary kind of economic gain to be realized here that if we're not, if the United States is not leading the world, we are going to be following and we are going to get disrupted, we are going to lose an incredible amount of value and talent. And so any attempt at regulation or slowing down or telling people that they cannot do things when they can easily hop on a plane and go do it elsewhere, I think is fraught with peril. So you don't agree with regulation. Sacks. Are you on board with the Chimath plan? Are you on board with the free bird? Well, I'll say, I think just like with computer hacking, it's illegal to break into someone else's computer.

43:20It is illegal to steal someone's personal information. There are laws that are absolutely simple and obvious and you know, no nonsense laws. Those laws are illegal to get rid of 100 ,000 jobs by making a piece of software though. That's right. And so I think trying to to intentionalyze how we do things versus intentionalyzing the things that we want to prohibit happening as an outcome. We can certainly try and prohibit the things that we want to happen up as outcome and pass laws and institute governing bodies with authority to oversee those laws with respect to things like stealing data. But you can jump on a plane and go do it in Mexico, Canada, or whatever region you got to.

44:00Sax, where do you stand on this to be? No, I'm saying like there are ways to protect people. is ways to protect society about passing laws that make it illegal to do things as the output as the outcome. What law do you pass on chaos GPD? Explain chaos GPD, giving example, please. Yeah. Do you want to talk about it real quick? It's a recursive agent that basically is trying to destroy itself. Trying to destroy humanity. Yeah. But I guess by first becoming all powerful and destroying humanity and then destroying itself. Yeah. It's a tongue in cheek auto GPT. But it's not a tongue in cheek auto GPT.

44:32I think I either created it, put it out there and said, like he's trying to show everyone to your point what intentionality could arise here, which is negative intentionality. I think it's very naive for anybody to think that this is not equivalent to something that could cause harm to you. So for example, if the prompt is, hey, here is a security leak that we figured out in Windows and so why don't you exploit it? So look, a hacker now has to be very technical. So today with these auto GPT's, a hacker does not need to be technical at all. Exploite the zero day, exploit in Windows, hack into this plane and bring it down.

45:10Okay, the GPT will do it. So who's going to tell you that those things are not allowed? Who's going to actually vet that that wasn't allowed to be released in the wild? So for example, if you worked with Amazon and Google and Microsoft and said, you're going to have to run these things in a sandbox and we're going to have to observe the output before we allow it to run on actual bare metal in the wild. Again, that seems like a reasonable thing. And it's a super naive for people to think it's a free market, so we should just be able to do what we want. This will end badly quickly. And when the first plane goes down and when the first fucking thing gets blown up, all of you guys will be like, oh, sorry.

45:47Sachs, a pretty compelling example here by Jamath, somebody puts out into the wild, KSGPT, you can go to a Google search trade and says, Hey, what are the vulnerabilities to the electrical grid? Compile those and automate a series of attacks and write some code to probe those until we and success in this mission. You get 100 points and stars every time you do this such a beautiful example, but it's even more nefarious. It is, Hey, this is an enemy that's trying to hack our system. So you You need to hack theirs and bring it down. You can easily trick these GPs. Yes, they have no judgment. They have no judgment.

46:26And as you said, they're ruthless in getting to the outcome. Right. So, why do we think all of a sudden this is not going to happen? I mean, it's literally the science fiction example. You say, hey, listen, make sure no humans get cancer. And they're like, okay, well, the logical way to make sure no humans get cancer is to kill all the humans. But, Timoff, can you just address the point? So, what do you think you're regulating? Are you regulating the code that people are allowing to write? If you look at the FDA, no. You are allowed to make any chemical drug you want, but if you want to commercialize it, you need to run a series of trials with highly qualified measurable data and you submit it to like -minded experts that are trained as you are to evaluate the viability of that.

47:06But there are pathways that allow you to get that done in days under emergency use, and then there are pathways that can take years depending on how gargantuan the task is at And all I'm suggesting is having some amount of oversight is not bad in this specific example. I get what you're saying, but I'm asking tactically, what are you overseeing? You're overseeing chat GPT or overseas. You're doing exactly what that chips? Okay, look, I used to run the Facebook platform. We used to create sandboxes. If you submit code to us, we would run it into sandbox, we would observe it, we would figure out what it was trying to do.

47:44and we would tell you this is allowed to run in the wild. There's a version of that that Apple does when you submit an app for review and approval. Google does it as well. In this case, all the bare metal providers, all the people that provide GPUs will be forced by the government, in my opinion, to implement something. And all I'm suggesting is that it should be a new kind of body that essentially observes, that has PhDs, that has people who are trained in this stuff to develop the kind of testing and the output that you need to figure out whether it should even be allowed to run in the wild on bear battle.

48:20Sorry, but you're saying that the model, sorry, I'm just trying to understand to the most points, you're saying that the models need to be reviewed by this body and those models if they're run on a third party set of servers. If they run in the wild. Right, so if they run in the open computer. On the open internet. Freebergue. You cannot run an app on your computer, you know that, right? It needs to be connected to the internet, right? Like if you wanted to run an auto GPT, it actually crawls the internet. It actually touches other APIs. It tries to then basically send a push request, sees what it gets back, parses the JSON, figures out what it needs to do.

48:54All of that is allowed because it's hosted by somebody, right? That code is running not locally, but it's running. So the host becomes sure. If you want to run it locally, you can do whatever you want to do. But evil agents are going to do that, right? So if I'm an evil agent, I'm not going to go use AWS to run my evil agent. I'm gonna set up a bunch of servers and connect to the internet. How? I could use VPNs. The internet is open. There's open packets of data that's... You're talking about people on your own. You're in another row country. They can do it everyone. I think that what you're gonna see is that if you, for example, try to VPN and run it out of like, to Geekistan back to the United States, it's not gonna take years for us to figure out that we need to IP block Rando shit coming in, push and pull requests from all kinds of IPs that we don't trust anymore because we don't now trust the regulatory oversight that they have for code that's running from those IPs at an I .U .S.

49:43domestic case. Just to let me steal, man. Chimalt's position for a second. Jason, hold on. I think the ultimate, if what Chimalt is saying is the point of view of Congress, and if Chimalt has this point of view, then there will certainly be people in Congress that will adopt this point of view. The only way to ultimately do that degree of regulation and restriction is going to be to restrict the open internet. It is going to be to have monitoring and firewalls and safety protocols across the open internet because you can have a set of models running on any set of server, sitting in any physical location, and as long as they can move data packets around, they're going to be able to get up to their nefarious activities.

50:17Oh, let me still man that for you, Freiburg. I think, yes, you're correct. The internet has existed in a very open way, but there are organizations and there are places like the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. If I were to still mention Montes position, if you want to manufacture a car and you want to make one in your backyard and put it on your track and on your land, up in Napa somewhere and you don't want to have breaks on the car and you don't want to have speed limiter or airbags or seatbelts and you want to drive on the hood of the car. You can do that but once you want it to go on the open road, the open internet, you need to get, you need to submit it for some safety standards like NHTSA, like Tesla has to or Ford has to.

50:59Susax, where do you sit on this? Let's assume that people are going to do very bad things with very powerful models that are becoming available. Amazon today said they'll be switched to them. They're going to put a bunch of LLMs and other models available on AWS, Bloomberg's LLM, Facebook's, Google BARD, and of course, Gen. GPT Open AI and Bing, all this stuff's available. To have access to that, do you need to have some regulation of who has access to those at scale powerful tools? Should there be some FDA or NHTSA? I don't think we know how to regulate it yet. I think it's too early. Clearly.

51:34And I think the harms that we're speculating about, we're making the AI more powerful than it is. And I believe it will be that powerful. But I think that it's premature to be talking about regulating something that doesn't really exist yet. Tick to the chaos GPT scenario. The way that would play out would be you've got some future incarnation of auto GPT. And somebody says, OK, auto GPT, I want you to be WMD AI. and figure out how to cause like a mass destruction event, you know, and then it creates like a planning checklist and that kind of stuff. So that's basically the type of scenario we're talking about.

52:12We're not anywhere close to that yet. I mean, the Chaos GPT is kind of a joke. It doesn't produce a checklist. I can give an example. That would actually be completely plausible. One of the first things on the Chaos GPT's checklist was to stay within the boundaries of the law because I didn't want to get prosecuted. Got it. So the person who did that had some sort of good intent, but I can give you an example right now that could be done by chat GPT and auto GPT that could take down large walks of society and cause massive destruction. I'm almost reticent to say it here. Say it. Well, I'll say it and then maybe we'll have to delete this.

52:46But if somebody created this and they said figure out a way to compromise as many powerful peoples and as many systems passwords then go in there and delete all their files and turn off as many systems as you can. ChatchyPT and AutoGPT could very easily create phishing accounts, create billions of websites to create billions of logins, have people log into them, get their passwords, log into whatever they do, and then delete everything in their accounts, which would cause chaos. And it could be done today. I don't think we've done today. Simpler than this. How about you phishing website? Yeah, pieces of it can be created today, but you're you're accelerating the progress.

53:25Yeah, but you can auto I want to be efficient at one or eight days. Yeah, exactly and by the way, I'm accelerating it in weeks Why don't you just spoof the bank accounts and just steal the money like that's even simpler like people will do the stuff because they're trying to do it today Holy cow. They just have a more efficient way to solve the problem about bank accounts So number one, this is a tool and if people use a tool in the various ways you prosecute them Number two, the platforms that are commercializing these tools do have trust and safety teams. Now, in the past, trust and safety has been a euphemism for censorship, which it shouldn't be.

53:59But, you know, OpenAI has a safety team and they try to detect when people are using their tech in a nefarious way and they try to prevent it. Do you trust that key? Well, not on censorship, but I think that they're probably... People are using traffic. They're incentivizing. I think they're policing it. Are you willing to abdicate your or societal responsibility to to open AI to do the trust and safety? Well, what I'm saying is I'd like to see how far we get in terms of the system. Yeah, so you're yeah, do you say you want to see the mistakes? You want to see where the mistakes are and how bad the mistakes are.

54:32I'm saying it's still very early to be imposing regulation. We don't even know what to regulate. So I think we have to keep tracking this to develop some understanding of how it might be misused. is how the industry is going to develop safety guardrails. Okay. And then you can talk about regulation. Look, you create some new FDA right now. Okay. First of all, we know what would happen. Look at the drug process. As soon as the FDA got involved, it slowed down massively. Now it takes years. Many years to get a drug approved. Appropriately so. Yes, but at least with a drug, we know what the gold standard is.

55:05You run a double blind study to see whether it causes harm or whether it's beneficial. We don't know what that standard is for AI yet. We have no idea. So what's going to happen in AI? What? No, we don't have somebody review the code. You have two instances in a sentence. So we use the code to do what? No, no, no, no. Listen, let me just try. On a GPT, it's benign. I mean, my friend used it to book a wine tasting. So who's going to review that code and then speculate and say, Oh, well, 99 .9 % of cases, it's perfectly benevolent and fine and innocuous. But I can fantasize about some cases someone might do.

55:46Hold on, how do you stress to resolve that? Very simple. There are two types of regulation that I concur in any industry. You can do what the movie industry did, which is they self -regulate and they came up with their own rating system, or you can do what happens with the FDA and what happens with cars, which is an external government -based body. I think now is the time for self -regulation so that we avoid the massive heavy hand of government having to come in here But these tools can be used today to create massive farm They're moving at a pace We just said in the first half of the show that none of us have ever seen every 48 hours something drops That is mind -blowing.

56:19That's never happened before and you can Take these tools and in the one example that but Tremoth and I came up with a top of our head in 30 seconds. You could create phishing sites, compromise people's bank accounts, take all the money out, delete all the files and cause chaos on a scale that has never been possible by a series of Russian hackers or Chinese hackers working in a boiler room. This can scale, and that is the defundamental difference here. And I didn't think I would be sitting here still manning Tremoth's argument. I think humans have a cerebral ability to compound. I think people do not understand compound interest.

56:53and this is a perfect example where when you start to compound technology at the rate of 24 hours, or 48 hours, which we've never really had to acknowledge, most people's brains break and they don't understand what six months from now looks like. And six months from now, when you're compounding at 48 or 72 hours, is like 10 to 12 years in other technology solutions. This is compounding. This is different because of the compounding I agree with that. The pace of evolution is very fast. We are on a bullet train to something, and we don't know exactly I don't know exactly what it is and that's disconcerting.

57:25However, let me tell you what would happen if we create a new regulatory body like the FDA to regulate this. They would have no idea how to arbitrate whether a technology should be approved or not. Development will basically slow to a crawl, dislike drug development. There is no double blind standard. I agree. What software regulation can we do? What software regulation can we do? There is no double blind standard in AI that everyone can agree on right now to know whether somebody should be approved. And what's going to happen is the thing that's made software development so magical and allowed all this innovation over the last 25 years is permissionless innovation.

57:58Any developer, any dropout from a university can go create their own project, which turns into a company. And that is what has driven all the innovation and progress in our economy over the last 25 years. So you're going to replace permissionless innovation with going to Washington to go through some approval process. And it will be the politically connected, it'll be the big donors who get their projects approved. And the next Marcus Zuckerberg who's trying to do his little project in a dormant somewhere will not know how to do that, will not know how to compete in that highly political process.

58:30Tremoff, I think you're mixing a bunch of things together. So first of all, permissionless innovation happens today in biotech as well. It's just that it's what Jason said. When you want to put it on the rails of society and make it available to everybody, you actually have to go and do something substantive. In the negotiation of these drug approvals, it's not some standardized thing. You actually sit with the FDA and you have to decide, what are our endpoints, what is the mechanism of action, and how will we measure the efficacy of this thing? The idea that you can't do this today in AI is laughable.

59:01Yes, you can. And I think that smart people, so for example, if you pit deep minds team versus open AI's team to both agree that a model is good and correct, I bet you they would find a Systematic way to test that it's fine. I just want to point down. Okay, so basically in order to do what you're saying Okay, this entrepreneur Who just dropped out of college to do their project? They're gonna have to learn how to go sit with regulators have a Conversation with them go through some complicated approval process and you're trying to say that that won't turn into a game of Political connections of course it will of course it will of course Yeah, well, let's get to that.

59:41Hold on a second. And let's look at the drug approval process. If you want to create a drug company, you need to raise hundreds of millions of dollars. It's incredibly expensive. It's incredibly capital intensive. There is no drug company that is two guys in their garage, like many of the biggest companies, like many of the biggest companies in Silicon Valley started. That is because you're talking about taking a chemical or biological compound and injecting into some hundreds or thousands of people who are both racially gender -based, age -based, highly stratified all around the world or at a minimum all around the country.

1:00:18You're not talking about that here, David. I think that you could have a much simpler and cheaper way where you have a version of the internet that's running in a huge sandbox someplace that's closed off from the rest of the internet and another version of the internet that's closed off from everything else as well. and you can run on a parallel path as it is with this agent and you can easily, in my opinion, actually, figure out whether this agent is good or bad and you can probably do it in weeks. So I actually think the approvals are actually not that complicated and the reason to do it here is because I get that it may cause a little bit more friction for some of these mom and pops.

1:00:56But if you think about what's the societal and consequences of letting the worst case outcomes happens, the AGI type outcomes happen, I think those are so bad. They're worth slowing some folks down. And I think like just because you want to, you know, buy groceries for $100, you should be able to do it. I get it. But if people don't realize and connect the dots between that and bringing airplanes down, then that's because they don't understand what this is capable of. I'm not saying we're never going to need regulation. What I'm saying is it's way too early. We don't even know what we're regulating.

1:01:30We don't know what the standard would be. And And what we will do by racing to create a new FDA is destroying American innovation in the sector. And other countries will not slow down. They will beat us to the punch here. Got it. I think there's a middle ground here of self -regulation and thoughtfulness on the part of the people who are providing these tools at scale to give just one example here. And this tweet is from five minutes ago. So to look at the pace of this, five minutes ago, this tweet came out. A developer who is an AI developer says, AI agents continue to amaze. My GPT -4 coding assistant learned how to build apps with authenticated users.

1:02:06It can build and design a web app, create a backend, handle auth logins, upload code to GitHub and deploy. He literally, while we were talking, is deploying websites. Now, if this website was a phishing app or the one that Chimap is talking about, he could make a gazillion different versions of Banking of America, Wells Fargo, etc. Then find everybody on the internet's email, then start sending different spoofing emails, determine which spoofing emails work, iterate on those, and create a global financial collapse. Now, this sounds insane, but it's happening right now. People get hacked every day at 1, 2, 3 percent.

1:02:44Sacks. Fraud is occurring right now in the low single digit percentages, identity theft is happening in the low single identity percentages. This technology is moving so fast that bad actors can 10x that relatively easy. And so if 10 % of us want to be hacked and have our credit card hacked, this could create chaos. I think self regulation is the solution. I'm the one who brought up self regulation where I said I brought up first. I brought up first. I get credit. No, go ahead. No, not so not credit. I'm no. Self regulation. I've got to finish my point about it because you interrupt. We talk for eight minutes.

1:03:16So if you have a point to make, you should have got it in the eight minutes. Oh my God. You guys kept interrupting me. Go ahead. What I said is that there are trusted safety teams at these big AI companies. these big foundation model companies like OpenAI. Like I said, in the past, trust and safety has been a euphemism for censorship, and that's why people don't trust it. But I think it would be appropriate for these platform companies to apply some guardrails on how their tools can be used. And based on everything I know, they're doing that. So you guys just released websites on the Open Web with ChatGP4 and he's going to have it do it automated.

1:03:51You're basically postulating capabilities that don't yet exist. I just tweeted the guy is doing it. He's got a video of himself doing it on the web. What do you think freeber? That's a far cry from basically running like some fishing Expedition that's gonna bring down the entire banking system. A literally a fishing a fishing site and a site with Oath are the same thing Go ahead freeberg. I think that that guy is doing something illegal if he's hacking into computers Into people's emails and bank accounts. That's illegal. You know a lot to do that and And so that action breaks the law. That person can be prosecuted for doing that.

1:04:29The tooling that one might use to do that can be used in a lot of different ways. Just like you could use Microsoft Word to forge letters, just like you could use Microsoft Excel to create fraudulent financial statements. I think that the application of a platform technology needs to be distinguished from the technology itself. And while we all feel extraordinarily fearful because the unbelievable leverage that these AI tools provide, again, I'll remind you that this chat GPT4 or this GPT4 model, by some estimates, is call it a few terabytes. You could store it on a hard drive or you could store it on your iPhone.

1:05:10And you could then go run it on any set of servers that you could go set up physically anywhere. So, you know, it's a little bit naive to say we can go ahead and, you know, regulate platforms and we can go regulate the tools, certainly we should continue to enforce and protect ourselves against nefarious actors using new tools in inappropriate and illegal ways. You know, I also think that there's a moment here that we should all kind of observe just how quickly we want to shut things down when they take away what feels like the control that we all have from one day to the next. And you know, that the real kind of sense of fear that seems to be quite contagious for a large number of people that have significant assets or significant things to lose is that, you know, tooling that's, you know, creating entirely newly disruptive systems and models for business and economics and opportunity for so many needs to be regulated away to minimize what we claim to be some potential downside when we already have laws that protect us on the other side.

1:06:25So I just want to also consider that this set of tools creates extraordinary opportunity. We gave one sort of simple example about the opportunity for creators, but we talked about how new business models, new businesses can be started with one or two people. You know, entirely new tools can be built with a handful of people. entirely new businesses. This is an incredible economic opportunity. And again, if the US tries to regulate it or the US tries to come in and stop the application of models in general, or regulate models in general, you're certainly going to see those models of continue to evolve and continue to be utilized in very powerful ways.

1:07:01They're going to be advantageous to places outside the US. There's over 180 countries on Earth. They're not all going to regulate together. It's been hard enough to get any sort of coordination around financial systems to get coordination around climate change, to get coordination around anything on a global basis, to try and get coordination around the software models that are being developed, I think is pretty naive. You don't wanna have a global organization. I think you need to have a domestic organization that protects U .S. And I think Europe will have their own. They, again, FDA versus Emma.

1:07:33Canada has its own, Japan has its own, China has its own. And they have a lot of overlap and a lot of commonality in the guard rules they use. And I think that's what's going to happen here. This will be beneficial only for political insiders who will basically be able to get their projects and their apps approved with a huge day weight loss for the system because innovation will completely slow down. But to many build on Freeberg's point, which is that we have to remember that AI won't just be used by nefarious actors. It will be used by positive actors. So there will be new tools that law enforcement will be able to use.

1:08:06And if somebody is creating fishing sites at scale, they're going to be probably pretty easy for law enforcement AIs to detect. So let's not forget that there will be co -pilots written for our law enforcement authorities. They'll be able to use that to basically detect and fight crime. A really good example of this was in the crypto space. We saw this article over the past week that Chain Analysis has figured out how to basically track illicit Bitcoin transactions. There's now a huge number of prosecutions that are happening of illegal use of Bitcoin. And if you go back to him, Bitcoin first took off, there was a lot of conversations around Silk Road, and the only thing that Bitcoin was good for was basically illegal transactions, black mailing, drug trafficking, and therefore we had to stop Bitcoin.

1:08:52Remember that was the main argument. And the counter argument was that, well, no, Bitcoin, like any technology can be used for good or bad, however, there will be technologies that spring up to combat those nefarious or illicit use cases. and sure enough, you had a company like Chain Alas has come along and now it's been used by a law enforcement to basically crack down on the illicit use of Bitcoin. And if anything, it's cleaned up the Bitcoin community tremendously. And I think it's dispelled this idea that the only thing you'd use Bitcoin for is black market transactions. Quite the contrary, I think you'd be really stupid now to use Bitcoin in that way.

1:09:29It's actually turned Bitcoin is something of a honeypot now because if you used it for nefarious transactions, your transactions record in the blockchain forever or just waiting for chain outs just to find it. So again, using Bitcoin to do something illegal, we really stoop it. I think in a similar way, you're gonna see self -regulation by these major AI platform companies combined with new tools that are used, new AI tools, that's spring up to help combat the nefarious uses. And until we let those forces play out, I'm not saying regulate never, I'm just saying we need to let those forces play out But before we leap to creating some new regulatory body, that doesn't even understand what its mandate and mission's supposed to be.

1:10:10The Bitcoin story is hilarious, by the way. Oh my gosh. The mystery journal story. It's unbelievable. Pretty epic. It took years, but basically this guy was buying blow on Silk Road and he deposited his Bitcoin and then when he withdrew it, there was a bug that gave him twice as many Bitcoin. So he kept creating more accounts, putting more money into Silk Road and getting more pick point out and then years later the authorities figured this out again with you know chain analysis type things look at James Zong over there look at James Zong accused had a Lamborghini a Tesla a late house and was living his best life apparently when the feds knocked on his door and found the digital keys to his crypto fortune in a popcorn chain in his bathroom and in a safe in his basement floor So there you have it.

1:11:03Well, the reason the reason I posted this was I was like, what if this claim that you can have all these anonymous transactions actually fooled an entire market because it looks like that this anonymity has effectively been reverse engineered and there's no anonymity at all. And so what Bitcoin is quickly becoming is like the most singular honey pot of transactional information that's complete and available in public. And I think what this article talks about is how companies like Chain Analysis and others have worked now for years, almost a decade with law enforcement to be able to map all of it.

1:11:45And so now every time money goes from one Bitcoin wall to another, they effectively know the sender and the recipient. And I just want to make one quick correction here. it wasn't actually exactly popcorn. It was Cheetos spicy flavored popcorn. And there's the tin where he had a motherboard of a computer that held the keys. Is there a chance that that this project was actually introduced by the government? I mean, there's been reports of tour of anonymous or network that the CIA had their hands all over tour. TOR, if you don't know it, which is an anonymous like multi -relay, peer -to -peer, web browsing system, and people believe it's a CIA honeypot, an intentional trap for criminals to get themselves caught up in.

1:12:35All right, as we wrap here, what an amazing discussion, my lord, I never thought I would be. I want to say one thing. Yes. We saw that someone was arrested for the murder of Bob Lee. That's what it was about this morning. Yeah, which turns out that the report of the SFPD's arrest is that it's someone that he knew that also works in the tech industry. Someone that I know, right? So I'm still breaking news. Yeah, yes, possibly. But I want to say two things. One, obviously based on this arrest and the storyline, it's quite different than what we all assumed it to be, which was some sort of homeless robbery type moment that has become all too commonplace in SF.

1:13:15It's a commentary for me on two things. One is how quick we all were to kind of judge and assume that, you know, a homeless, robber type person would do this in SF, which I think speaks to the condition in SF right now. Also speaks to our conditioning that we all kind of lacked or didn't even want to engage in a conversation that maybe this person was murdered by someone that they knew because because we wanted to kind of very quickly fill our own narrative about how bad SF is. And that's just something that I really felt when I read this this morning. I was like, man, like I didn't even consider the possibility that this guy was murdered by someone that he knew because I am so enthralled right now by this narrative that SF is so bad.

1:13:57And it must be another data point that validates my point of view on SF. So you know, I kind of want to just acknowledge that and acknowledge it. We all kind of do that right now. But I do think it also does, in fact, unfortunately, speak to how bad things are in SF because because we all have these experiences of feeling like we're in danger and under threat all the time we're walking around on SF in so many parts of San Francisco I should say, where things feel like they've gotten really bad. I think both things can be true that we can kind of feel biased and fill our own narrative by kind of latching on to our assumption about what something tells us, but it also tells us quite a lot about what is going on in the sense.

1:14:35So I just want to make that point. In fairness, and I think it's time for you to make that point. I am extremely vigilant on this program to always say when something is breaking news with whole judgment, whether it's the Trump case or Jesse Smolett or anything in between January 6th, let's wait until we get all the facts. And in fact, quote from SACs, we don't know exactly what happened yet. Correct. Literally SACs started with that. We do that every fucking time on this program. We know when there's breaking news to withhold judgment, but you can also know Two things can be true a tolerance for ambiguity is necessary, but I'm saying I didn't even do that I as soon as I heard this I was like I was like oh Find assumption to budget, but David that is a fine assumption to make That's a fine Listen, you make that assumption for your own protection We got all these reporters who are basically propagandists trying to claim that crime is down in San Francisco go, they're all basically seeking comment for me this morning, sending emails or trying to dump on us because we basically talked about the bubbly case in that way.

1:15:39Listen, we said that we didn't know what happened, but if we were in a bet, at least what I said, is I bet this case, it looks like a lot like the Brianna Cuffer case. That was logical. That's not conditioning or bias. That's logic. And you need to look at what else happened that week. Okay. So just the same week that Bob Lee was killed. Let me give you three other examples of things that happened in Gotham City, AK, San Francisco. So number one, former fire commissioner, Don Carmaniani was beaten with an insurface life by a group of homeless addicts in the Marina. And one of them was interviewed in terms of why it happened.

1:16:17And basically Don came down from his mother's house and told them to move off his mothers from porch because they were obstructing her ability to get in and out of her apartment, they interpreted that as disrespect and they beat him with a tire iron or a metal pipe. And one of the hoodlums who was involved in this apparently admitted this. Yeah, play the video. Somebody over the head like that and attack him. He was disrespectful. Who was disrespectful? That was a vagal, kind of, bald -haired old man out of the dog. done. So he was being disrespectful and then but is that enough to beat him off?

1:16:55Yeah, sometimes. Oh my lord. I mean. So this is case number one. And apparently in the reporting on that person who was just interviewed, he's been in the Marina kind of terrorizing people, maybe not physically but verbally. So you have bands of homeless people in camped in front of people's houses. Don Carmanjani gets beaten with an inch of his life. You then had the case of the Whole Foods store on Market Street shut down in San Francisco. And this was not a case of shoplifting, like some of the other store closings we've seen, they said they were closing the store because they could not protect their employees.

1:17:32The bathrooms were filled with needles and pipes that were a drug paraphernalia. You had drug addicts going in there using it. They were engaging in altercations with store employees. And Whole Foods felt like they had to close the store because again, they could not protect their employees. third example, board of supervisors had to expand their own meeting because their internet connection got vandalized. The fiber for the cable connection to provide their internet got vandalized so that to basically to span their meeting, Aaron Preskin was the one who announced this and you saw in the response to this, yeah, my retweeting him when viral.

1:18:08There were lots of people who said, yeah, I've got a small business and the fiber, the copper wire whatever was vandalized and in a lot of case, I think is basically drug addict stealing whatever they can. They steal $10 of copper wire, sell that to get a hit, and it causes $40 ,000 of property damage. Here's the insincereity, Sachs. Literally, the proper response when there's violence in San Francisco is, hey, we need to make this place less violent. Is there a chance that it could be people who know each other? Of course, that's inherent in any crime that occurs that there'll be time to investigate it.

1:18:40But literally, the press is now using this as a moment to say there is no crime in San Francisco where that could be interacting. And like, I just have the New York Times email me during the podcast, had their night from the Chronicle, San Francisco Chronicle, in light of the Bob Lee killing appearing to be an interpersonal dispute, she still doesn't know, right? We don't have all the facts. With another tech leader, do you think the tech community jumped to conclusions? Why are so many tech leaders painting San Francisco as a dystopian hellscape with the reality, with the reality is more nuanced.

1:19:10I think it's a little type of that. But yeah, yes, of course the reality is nuanced of course. It's a hellscape Walk down the street Heather can I give you a theory please? I think it was most evident in the way that Elon Dismanaled and manhandled the BBC reporter. Oh my god. That was brutal. This is a small microcosm of what I think media is so I used to think that media had an agenda, I actually now think that they don't particularly have an agenda other than to be relevant because they see waning relevance. And so I think what happens is whenever there are a bunch of articles that tilt the pendulum into a narrative, they all of a sudden become very focused on refuting that narrative.

1:20:05And even if it means they have to lie, they'll do it. Right? So, you know, I think for months and months, I think people have seen that the quality of the discourse on Twitter became better and better. Elon was doing a lot with bots and all of this stuff, cleaning it up. And this guy had to try to establish the counter -narrative and was willing to lie in order to do it, then he was dismantled. Here, you guys, I don't have a bone to pick so much with San Francisco. I think I've been relatively silent on this topic, but But you guys as residents and former residents, I think have invested interest in the quality of that city, and you guys have been very vocal.

1:20:41But I think that you're not the only ones, Michelle Tandler, you know, Shellenberger. There's a bunch of smart, thoughtful people who've been beating this drum, Gary Tann. And so now I think reporters don't want to write the N -plus -first article saying that San Francisco is a hellscape. So they have to take the other side. And so now they're going to go and kick up the counter -narrative and they'll probably dismantle the truth and redirect it in order to do it. So I think that what you're seeing is they'll initially tell a story, but then there's too much of the truth. They'll go to the other side because that's the only way to get clicks and be seen.

1:21:18So I think that that's what you guys are a part of right now. They are in the business of protecting the narrative, but I do think there's a huge ideological component to the narrative, both in the Elon case where they're trying to claim that there was a huge rise in hate speech on Twitter. The reason they're saying that is because they want Twitter to engage in more censorship. That's the ideological agenda here. The agenda is this radical agenda of decarceration. They actually believe that more and more people should be led out of prison. So therefore, they have an incentive to deny the existence of crime in San Francisco.

1:21:52The rise in crime in San Francisco. If you poll most people in San Francisco, large majority of San Francisco believe that crime is on the rise because they can see it, they hear it. And what I would say is, look, I think there is a pyramid of activity, a pyramid of criminal or anti -social behavior in San Francisco that we can all see. The base level is you've got a level of chaos on the streets where you have open -air drug markets, people doing drugs. Sometimes you'll see a person doing something disgusting, like people defecating on the streets or even worse. Then there's a level up where they're chasing after you or harassing you.

1:22:28People have experienced that. I've experienced that. Then there's a level up where there's petty crime, your car gets broken into or something like that. Then there's the level where you get mugged. And then finally, the top of the pyramid is that there's a murder. And it's true that most of the time, the issues don't go all the way to the top of the pyramid where someone is murdered, okay? But that doesn't mean there's not a vast pyramid underneath that of basically quality of life issues. And I think this term quality of life was originally used as some sort of way to minimize the behavior that was going on, saying that they weren't really crimes.

1:23:06We shouldn't worry about them. But if anything, what we've seen in San Francisco is that when you ignore quality of life crimes, you will actually see a huge diminishment in what it's like to live in these cities, like quality of life is real. And that's the issue. And I think what they're trying to do now is that, say that because Bob Lee wasn't the case that we thought it was, that that whole pyramid doesn't exist. That pyramid exists. We can all experience it. Oh my God. I mean, and that's the insincereity of this. It is insincere. And the existence of that pyramid that we can see, and hear, and feel, and experience every day is why, we're willing to make a bet.

1:23:42We called it a bet that the Bob Lee case was like the Brianna Cuffer case. And in that case - With a disclaimer. Yes. And we always do a disclaimer here. And just to George Hammond from the Financial Times who emailed me, here's what he asked me. There's a lot of public attention lately on whether San Francisco status has one of the top business and technology hubs in the US is at risk in the aftermath of the pandemic. Da. Obviously it is. I wondered if you had a moment to chat about that and whether there is a danger that negative perceptions about the city will damage its reputation for founders and capital of case in the future.

1:24:12So essentially, and it says the obviously a lot of potential for hysteria in this conversation, which I'm keen to avoid and it's like Have you walked down the street and I asked them have you walked down the street in San Francisco? Jason the best response is send him the thing that saccent which is the amount of available office Space in San Francisco Company companies are voting with their feet So it's already if the quality of life wasn't so poor they stay this is the essence of gaslighting is what they do is the people who've actually created the situation San Francisco with their policies, their policies of defunding the police, making it harder for the police to do their job, decriminalizing theft under $950, allowing open -air drug markets.

1:24:55The people who have now created that matrix of policies have created the situation. What they then turn around and do is say, no, the people who create the problem are the ones who are observing this. That's all we're doing is observing and complaining about it. And what they try to do is say, well, no, you're you're running down San Francisco. We're not the ones creating the problem. We're observing it. And just this week, another data point is that the mayor's office said that they were short more than 500 police officers in San Francisco. Again, nobody who's going to become a police officer here?

1:25:22Are you crazy? Well, and there was another article just this week about how there's a lot of speculation. Rumors are swirling of an unofficial strike, an informal strike by police officers who are normally on the forest who are tired of risking life and limb, and then they basically risk getting out of physical altercation with a homeless person, they bring them in, and then they're just released again. So there's a lot of quiet quitting that's going on in the job. It's like this learned helplessness because why take a risk? And then the police commission doesn't have your back. It seems like the only time you have prosecutorial zeal by a lot of these prosecutors is when they can go after a cop, not one of these repeat offenders.

1:26:01And you just saw that by the way in LA. Oh, look, Motherboard and New York Times just emailed and DMed me. And then, and then did you guys say that instead of solving these issues, the Board of Supervisors was dealing with a wild parrot? What was it? What was the meeting that was suspended? They had, yeah, they had scheduled a meeting to vote on whether the wild parrots are the official animal of the city of San Francisco. So that was the scheduled meeting that got disbanded. Also, can I may I just clarify what you must talk about with the Elon interview a BBC reporter interviewed Elon and said there is much more race and hate and Hate speech in the feeds on Twitter and he said can you give me an example?

1:26:45And he said well, I don't have an example, but people are saying this is it which people are saying it and the BBC reporter said Well, just different groups of people are saying it and you know, I've certainly seen you said okay You saw it and for you he goes no, I stopped looking at for you. He said so give me one example of hate speech that you've seen in your feed. Now without speaking about any inside information, which I do not have much of, they've been pretty deliberate of removing hate speech from places like for you. And it's a very complicated issue when you have an open platform, but the people may say a word, but it doesn't reach a lot of people.

1:27:19So if you were to say something really nasty, it doesn't take a genius to block that and not have it reach a bunch of people. So this reporter kept insisting to Elon that this was on the rise with no factual basis for it, that other people said it. And then he said, but I don't look at the feed. He said, so you're telling me that there's more hate speech that you've seen, but you just admitted to me that you haven't looked at the four you feed in three months. And it was just like this completely weird thing. I just had mother. He called him in a lie. He called him in a lie. He called him in a lie.

1:27:45And this is thing. If you're a journalist, just cut it down the middle. Come with prepared with facts. I look. I'm looking at a position either way. I want to connect one dot, which is that he filled in his own narrative, even though the data wasn't necessarily there. In the same way that we kind of filled in our narrative about San Francisco with the Bob Lee murder being another example. No, no, no. We put a disclaimer on it. We said we didn't put a disclaimer. We didn't, hold on a second. We so we knew we didn't know. and furthermore, we're taking great pains this week to correct the record and explain what we now know.

1:28:25Yeah. He was called to be intellectually honest. This is just intellectual honesty. Honestly, you're going soft to your freeberg. You're getting gasslet by all these people. Oh my god, gasslet by anyone. I think the guy totally had zero data. By the way, when you're journalist, you're supposed to report on data and evidence, so he's certainly, you know, I think completely. You're placing in a bodily with Don Carmaniani. It's the same story. Yeah. Is this that Don happened to survive? Guys, I love you, but I gotta go. Here's what Maxwell from Motherfile asks. That's fun. There's been a lot of discussion about the future of San Francisco and the death has quickly become politicized.

1:29:05Has that caused any division or disagreement from what you've seen or has that not been the case? The press is gleeful right now. They're gleeful. Like, oh my god. Just like the right was Gleafle with Jesse Smolette having gotten himself beaten up or you know setting up his own All right everybody for the Sultan of science currently conducting Experiments on a beach to see exactly how burned he can get with his SPF 200 under an umbrella wearing a sun shirt and pants Freeberg on the beach versus the same outfit astronauts wear with the two spacewalks. Hey, stable diffusion. Make me an image of David Freberg wearing a full body bathing suit covered in SPF 200 under three umbrellas.

1:29:54All of a sudden beach. Thank you. Oh my god. For the dictator, Chama, Pauli Haapatia creating regulations. And the regular, oh, the regulator, you can call me the regular. the regulator. See it tonight when we'll eat our orchalons, what's left of them? The final four or five orchalons in existence are on the way. Otherwise, I'm putting you on the be list today, if you're late. I will be there. I promise. I promise. I promise I can't wait to be there. And the rainman himself, Namaste, didn't even get to putting Ron. Oh, we'll talk about it in the next four or putting me on. Oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, I think you should ask auto GPT how you can eat more endangered animals.

1:30:35Yes, we've have a plan for you. Yes, and then have it go kill those animals, give it a brain in a world, put something on the dark web to go kill the remaining rhinos and bring them to Jamat's house for Pokemon. I don't think rhinos are tasty. Wasn't that the plava movie? Oh, did you guys see his cocaine bear out yet? It was a Matthew Broderick Marlon Brando movie, right? We're there doing the takeoff on the godfather was the fresh butter. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. It's like a conspiracy to eat endangered animals. He has the freshman. The project came out in 1990. Yeah, Marvin Marlon Brando did it with Matthew Broderick and like Bruno Kirby.

1:31:15They actually, that was the whole thing. Oh, no Kirby. That's a deep poll. They're actually, they were eating endangered animals. What do you think? Heat too? Is that going to be good? Sacks? I know, heat's one of your favorite films, me too. My good. It's awesome. Is there a sequel coming? They're going to do heat too. And the novel's already come out Adam. Adam, so I saw the novel. Yeah. He's amazing. He is amazing. He's one of those movies where when it comes on, you just can't stop watching. Yeah. So let's do a heat to screener. Best bank robbery slash shootout in movie history, you know? That is literally the best highest film ever.

1:31:46Like it's up there with like the Joker, with reservoir dogs, the Joker in that Batman movie where he robs the bank. Like, I mean, what have you guys? All right, love you besties. And for blah, blah, blah, blah. This is gonna be all in pockets 124 if you want to go to the fan meetups and hang out with other Stay

1:32:26Bye bye Besties are gone, don't drink. That's my dog taking a wish and you're driving. Sit next. Wait, I know. Oh, man. My ham is the actual meat. We should all just get a room and just have one big hug. Because they're all just like this like sexual tension that we just need to release that out. What, you're the beef. What, you're the beer of beef. What? We need to get买 cheese aren't we? I'm going, darling.

1:33:01I'm doing all it.