How Worried Should We Be About AI? — with Alex Stamos

23:53Scott Galloway:You get 5 % cash back on the Chime card in a category of choice, like gas or groceries, all while building credit through regular, everyday spending with no credit check. You can also grow your money faster with a savings rate that's nine times the national average. Join the millions who are already banking fee-free with America's number one choice for banking. Head to Chime.com slash PropG. That's Chime.com slash PropG. Sign up now. It takes only a few minutes. Chime is a fintech, not a bank. Banking services and Chime card provided by Chime's bank partners. Qualifying direct deposits required.

24:28Terms and limits apply. Go to chime.com slash disclosures for details.

24:35Scott Galloway:Support for the show comes from Quince. Fall can be the perfect time to break out some of your favorite clothes. Maybe the sweater that's perfect for cooler weather, your favorite jacket, or a pair of jeans that fits just right. These are the kinds of durable pieces Quince specializes in. Quince makes elevated everyday essentials using premium materials, including Mongolian cashmere, organic cotton, and washable silk. The designs are timeless, thoughtfully crafted, and made to be worn again and again. Their 100 % Mongolian cashmere sweater start at just$50, giving you the softness and quality you'd expect from a luxury brand without the luxury price tag.

25:09Scott Galloway:Plus, everything at Quince is priced 50 % to 80 % less than similar brands. They work directly with top factories and cut out the middleman, so you're paying for high quality, not brand markup. Claire's gotten some items from Quince. Claire, what'd you think? I love everything I've received from Quince. I have great bedding from them. I have so many closet staples that I always go back to. I reach for them every time I go to get dressed, so I have my eye on some of their sweaters. They've got good stuff. Really love Quince. Find the fall pieces you'll reach for most at Quince. Download the Quince app for app-exclusive offers or go to quince.com slash profg.

25:46Scott Galloway:Get free shipping on your order and 365-day returns. Now available in Canada and the UK, too. That's quince.com slash profg.

26:04Scott Galloway:Let's talk a little bit about James Cox. and he's the mathematician and former employee of Anthropic. So a mathematician, you know, mathematical genius, went to one of these kids, this Doogie Howser-like kids, and most recently has said he's worried about the potential of a mass extinction event. And he put it at 10%. I'm not sure where he got that number. but in just sounding very doomer or boomer here, a 27-year-old putting the entire industry and media landscape into panic seems sort of, I don't know, I kind of, I wince a little bit, but it seems like a lot of people are very, it's just interesting that a 27-year-old is kind of, and maybe it was all building that we were all just filling up a room of kerosene and he struck the match.

27:02But I'm curious about your response to his comments and whether or not you think

27:10Scott Galloway:that he's accurately assessing the risk here. And a 10 % extinction event is an expected death of 800 million people. I mean, this isn't a, you know, this isn't a warning. This isn't even the warning of the engineers of Boeing saying I would be careful getting in a 737 MAX. You know, if one of those planes crashed, it wasn't going to take out 800 million people. Your thoughts on James Cox and or Jacob Cox and excuse me. Yeah.

27:39I, I don't know him. And the problem here is that people throw out these, when they throw out these big predictions, it is rarely with a scenario, like a step-by-step scenario that they can back up. Right. Like you pointed out, it is good for people to take this seriously. It is not helpful when it seems like people are just throwing things out without some kind of rigor because that then does make it feel like it's a political or almost religious project. And that, I think, actually detracts from the ability to address these issues. and I think that his actions have actually bordered on that, especially considering his short time at Anthropic.

28:31Also, Anthropic is, of the companies, the one that has the largest number of executives who would agree with him. And so if there's a company you're going to work at to work on this problem, to leave Anthropic seems a little odd. Look, I don't want to talk bad about any individual I don't know, but to do that and then jump straight on a speaking circuit, it's just it's just tough right um and also look so my first appointment at stanford was at csec the uh center for international security and cooperation which was formed around arms control and specifically was there to reduce nuclear risk and the scientists there are all about like kind of quantifying and reducing existential risk and when you talk to phds who work on that like they try to be extremely specific about those kinds of existential risks and actually quantify them.

29:24So there are people who have done this in a rigorous way for 70 years, you know. And I think if you are a person who worries about this at that level, then we should not think that this is a new thing and go back to the 1950s and 1960s and the people who started thinking about this during the Cold War and try to adopt some of that thinking and language because it was the same thing, right? Like you had scientists who were on the edge of this who were being told by politicians, oh, you're crazy. You're a doomer. There's no possible way. And then you had to slowly build the idea of, yes, we are on an escalation ladder with the Soviets.

30:04We are building a world which is possible. And then they had to build the intellectual framework to then bring us the START treaties and the non-proliferation treaties and all that work. And that is what's going to have to happen here, but we're going to have to do it much more quickly than we did around nuclear. The benefit with nuclear weapons is, you know, you need two real things for nuclear weapons. You need knowledge and you need the material. Now, the knowledge, it's just like with AI, the knowledge is actually widely dispersed, right? Like anybody with a PhD in nuclear physics could probably build a nuclear bomb.

30:39And that's just like with AI. We teach at Stanford a undergraduate class that people, students build a toy LLM. You could figure out everything you need to build an LLM from YouTube videos and, you know, download the open source online. The inputs, though, for a nuclear weapon are, you know, uranium-238 is extremely rare. It takes huge industrial processes to take yellow cake and take it all the way to highly enriched uranium. but the inputs in and plutonium doesn't exist at all naturally. The inputs to AI are video cards. One of the organizations that wants to have an international treaty, they propose this international treaty where you'd have to control clusters of compute and the number of NVIDIA cards that they'd want to control, the DEF CON video LAN party for video gaming is larger than that.

31:30Right? Like, it's just totally improbable that you could control the size of cluster necessary to prevent any kind of research in AI. So, like, it's going to take a lot for us to try to have a worldwide consensus on trying to be incredibly careful here. And so if we're going to do that, we have to be really careful in convincing people that this is that there's real risks. And that means being extremely, extremely specific about what they are. So what I prefer to, like, these crazy Doomer stuff is the people who are doing really careful. So I don't know if you've seen it, but MIT has an AI risk project.

32:05So you go airisk.mit.edu. And I think it's much more important to talk about you've got your catastrophic risks. You've got your kind of really big risks that are not 10 % of people dying, but are real, like the cyber risks and such. And then you have your prosaic day-to-day risks that people are facing every day. You've got every middle school in the country has had a scandal about teenage boys undressing the girls in their class with nudifier apps, right? That happens every single day and we're not dealing with it. You've got, you know, kids committing suicide, you know, and adults with, you know, falling in love with chatbots.

32:42You've got all kinds of day-to-day risks. And I think if we talk about these things in a much more measured and intelligent way and don't sound nuts to normal people, it is much more likely that we're actually going to get movement to address them. And then we don't have to solve it all at once. We should start slicing these off in regulatory pieces piece by piece and start to build that muscle to get there instead of making people think that we're all going to die because I think that creates a nihilism that people want to address through things like laying down firm bulldozers and firm data centers, which honestly is not going to solve anything.

33:18It's better, like you talked about the liability stuff, it is better to start to deal with the much more normal risks and then to start the track two discussions and voluntary stuff between the labs and start those discussions with the Chinese labs instead of going out there and just say, we're all going to die. I don't see that as helpful.

33:38Scott Galloway:So let's come back to and talk more about solutions in a second. But first, I'm going to ask you more of a market space question. My sense of these companies is that they have never been, from a shareholder standpoint, more vulnerable. The labs, you mean? The big labs? Well, Anthropic, OpenAI, I'd even go upstream or downstream to NVIDIA. And that is, these are multi-trillion dollar companies. I feel as if today I'm in Beverly Hills today, looking at the intersection at my hotel window of Santa Monica and Wilshire, that if the lights were purposely, if the lights were commandeered by some bot, AI bot, that resulted in a bunch of traffic deaths or accidents, that the entire world would go into a state of panic.

34:26Scott Galloway:It'd feel like one or two more instances or incidences of rogue bots is just going to absolutely set the media world. It's a really interesting story, right? It captures the imagination of the media. And it feels to me like these companies are one or two missteps away from losing more shareholder value than any company's ever lost in a media cycle. They just feel very fragile to me right now. Your thoughts? Yes. So I think they know that. And I think on the bots escaping from eval containment, my expectation is that they are doing a humongous amount of work on that. It is not an impossible task.

35:06I think the internal challenge that you're seeing here is that the inside of these companies, the researchers who do new model development are the gods and the security team were the plumbers. And the eval people were allowed to get away with a lot of stuff. And now the security team is like, OK, here we are. And there are ways that you can do this. And you cannot just have like some containers with a couple of network controls and then have artifactory and everything. So they have already announced that they're doing much more. They're going to solve that. The upcoming security problem is not going to be from open AI and philanthropic.

35:42It is going to be from open weight models. The real challenge we're going to be facing is GLM 5.3, Kimi K3. Those things are within percentage points of the best American models. And so we are entering a valley of pain from a cyber perspective. And it is going to be because every 19-year-old in St. Petersburg who has made millions of dollars doing ransomware but had to do it all manually, is now going to be running, you know, they're going to be in the club. You know that Bourne movie where he steps out of the club and it's actually 10 a.m.? Well, he's going to be in the club in his tracksuit on his phone, and he's going to be managing, instead of having to have a conspiracy of a bunch of his friends who have, you know, the possibility of getting turned or getting picked up by Interpol on vacation or something, the conspiracy is going to be a team of agents running on these brand new M5 Studio Maxes.

36:34He's going to have 10 of them in his apartment, daisy-chained with Thunderbolt 5 cables. And they're going to be running a bunch of GLM-5.3 models, quantized, finely tuned to do cyber work. And that is how he's going to be hacking a dozen companies at once. And so there's going to be a bunch of hugging face attacks, except they're not going to be super high-end French AI companies. they're going to be mid-sized, you know, medical supply firms, small insurance companies, school districts, the kind of people who get ransomware all the time. And he won't have to do any of the manual work he used to have to do.

37:11He won't even have to do negotiations because these things will speak English for him. He won't have to speak English anymore. He won't have to have the dude who can do the translation. It will all be AI. That's what's coming. It won't be the bots anymore. And so it won't be the open AI or the anthropic models anymore because they know this. If they have more and more and more escapes, they're going to be in huge trouble. So OpenAI shut down all their evals for a couple of weeks while they redid all their evaluation infrastructure. And they've announced that they're rebuilding all that stuff. The company that had all the meta and anthropic escapes, I'm sure, got massively slapped down.

37:45And that's a solvable problem. The non-solvable problem is the Chinese models are incredibly good. And they also tune up extremely well. Here at Gordor, we've done a bunch of work. and with a relatively small amount of money and not a ton of data, you can take the Chinese models and extremely increase their offensive capability. And so that is going to be what we're entering for the next couple of years until defensive capabilities catch up, which they are on the high end because high-end defenders can afford the really good models. But it's a unit economics problem. JPMC can afford mythos. You know, Lockheed Martin can afford mythos.

38:22But that community hospital cannot. And they also don't have a technically sophisticated defense team that knows how to defend against this level of attack. So that is actually a significant problem that we're going to be facing. And so, yes, I mean, I think there's a bunch of risk to the labs. And I think a lot of it is going to be competition on token prices because the Chinese models have gone quite good. And so you will see a bunch of price pressure on them on a per token basis. But I don't think their models escaping is going to be the big thing because they know that is a huge problem and they're cracking down.

39:03Scott Galloway:We'll be right back.

39:10Scott Galloway:Support for the show comes from PipeDrive. Sales teams spend up to 50 % of their time on admin work rather than selling, building relationships, and closing deals. You know, the work that's actually doing sales. Well, what if there was a tool that gave them that time back? That's where PipeDrive comes in. It's an intelligent, AI-powered sales CRM loved by growing sales teams. PipeDrive automatically pulls deal history, emails records, and previous conversations. You can walk into a call already briefed. During the meeting, PipeDrive's AI note-taker records and takes notes so you can stay in the conversation.

39:41Scott Galloway:Then it turns those notes into accurate, auto-drafted CRM updates ready for you to review and approve. The end result? Less admin, more selling. Switch to a CRM built by salespeople for salespeople and join the over 100 ,000 companies already using PipeDrive. Our link gets you an exclusive 30 days instead of the usual 14-day trial. No credit card or payment needed. Just head to pipedrive.com slash prop g to get started. That's pipedrive.com slash prop g, and you can be up and running in minutes.

40:16Scott Galloway:Push your limits, train with precision, see the results. At Equinox, that's high performance loving. Everything you need to lock in and unlock your potential at Equinox. Start today at equinox.com.

40:32Scott Galloway:This episode is brought to you by Google Chrome. You think you know a browser, but Gemini and Chrome, that's new. It can help you with practically anything on the web, like restoring a vintage motorcycle from a 50-page restoration block, or finally break down that long article you've had open for weeks. Gemini and Chrome is here for it. Ready to make anything online make sense? There's no place like Chrome. Check responses set up required. Compatibility and availability varies 18+.

41:02Scott Galloway:We're back with more from Alex Damos. It feels as if, I would argue, the kind of the two legs of the stool here, the two problems that need to be addressed are, one, incentives, and we talked a little bit about that, and punishment and accountability, but two, also a failure of leadership at a government level. And that is, and I might be oversimplifying this, but we have managed to mostly control nuclear weapons. We coordinate across border with adversaries and even enemies around trying. We've all decided we have a mutually vested interest in not making it easy to develop a bioweapon. And we cooperate with each other.

41:40Scott Galloway:There's Interpol. Do you see any reason why we wouldn't or shouldn't be able to develop some sort of international regulatory body that it begins to address and attempt to minimize these threats? Yeah, I think we should. I think bio is the appropriate—again, like, nuclear is not as good a metaphor for the reasons I talked about in that the input into nuclear weapons being yellow cake, which has to be turned into uranium, uranium has to be enriched up to a certain level, or perhaps turned into plutonium. All of that being massive industrial processes that can really only be afforded by states and then can be seen from space gives us a hook for nuclear non-proliferation that does not exist for AI.

42:27But bio is not that, right? Like in chemical, like any university lab can create chemical weapons. People create chemical weapons all the time on their own. This was the Japanese subway attack was, you know, chemical weapons created by a cult. And, you know, it has now been several decades that you could have viruses, you know, tuned up and enhanced in by individual researchers. Although now the fear is that the capability there to effectively 3D print viruses with the help of a LLM is much, much greater. I think we absolutely should have that capability. The People's Republic of China is absolutely the biggest long-term adversary of the United States.

43:19I truly believe that. I am no China apologist. I have spent my entire professional career fighting the PRC. I will, you know, nobody should call me a big fan of the PRC. I cannot travel to China. I worked on the Aurora tax. I've worked over and over again. I've stopped the Ministry of State Security in a number of cases. I kicked them out of Facebook in a bunch of situations. I've worked on PRC intrusions. So I do not underestimate the risk of the People's Republic of China. But they are not crazy. And they are not Russia, right? Russia just wants to burn the world down. If Russia cannot be a superpower, they want nobody to be a superpower.

43:59The PRC wants to be on top. They do not want to burn the world down because they want to have, they want to supplant the United States. They do not want the world to be in chaos. They do not want the world economy to collapse. They do not want to see AI agents running crazy and the internet to be destroyed. So we are incredibly lucky that out of our two major adversaries, it is China that is the one that is leading AI and not Russia. And that, you know, almost all the bad things Russia does with AI, they do with Chinese models. And so I think it is absolutely possible for us to have cooperation with our Chinese adversaries.

44:41And they are adversaries and they are competitors. But there's an absolute possibility here. And I think that first starts with track two conversations between the labs. Chinese labs do not want their products to be used to kill people. They don't want that. It does not help them. They want to be seen as good. They want to compete with the American labs. They want to be seen as legitimate companies, right? They want their models to be used. And if people see GLM-53 as something that is used to kill people, as something that is used to break into networks, as something that is used only for illegitimate purposes, it is not going to be available anymore.

45:18And Amazon Bedrock is not going to be available on fireworks in base 10, right? As it is today. And so that, it is not in Moonshots or ZAIs or Alibaba's or any of these labs' best interest for their models to be abused. So I believe the track two conversations are happening and they should continue to happen. And I do believe there's an opportunity here. If you look at Xi's speech in Shanghai, have you read his Shanghai AI conference speech? each?

45:45Scott Galloway:No, I saw articles summarizing it, though. Yeah, I mean, I don't expect you to watch it in Chinese. I can't read Chinese. But, like, it's not that long. It's worth, yeah, reading the analysis. And, like, the Stanford China, there's a Stanford China AI project that did a good summary, too, that has the analysis number of people. Yes, he talks about AI should be available to everybody. He's trying to position China as the friend to everybody. He also explicitly talks about AI should be in the control of humans. And the Chinese Communist Party is afraid of the power of AI to threaten their power, but they also are making overtures here.

46:21And China regulates AI much more heavily than the United States does, right? Like, this is this weird, again, culture war thing that, like, the Chinese just don't regulate AI at all. That is not true, right? Like, they significantly regulate it from a consumer perspective. Like, they really are afraid of its impact on their teenagers, for example, in a way that we are not.

46:43Scott Galloway:So - Limited use of hours, limited time with bots. What else do they do? And they have a bunch of censorship stuff that we would never have. But yes, I think the legitimate stuff they do is they will not allow it. I think this is a totally reasonable thing. You can't have AI that will pretend to be somebody it's not for more than a certain amount of time, right? So, like, you can talk to, you know, I think that is from a psychosis perspective, an AI psychosis perspective and all the suicides and stuff. I think that's actually a totally reasonable guideline that the AI industry should adopt, which is much less of an issue for, like, the open AIs and such.

47:21It's much more of an issue for, like, the character AIs and the industry of people who are building bots that are sometimes powered by the foundation labs much more likely these days to be using open models that they're retraining. where they're like, I will take over a character and I will build a relationship with you and you can talk to me for 16 hours straight. And that is what is leading to a lot of the really tragic outcomes are those second, third tier companies where it will straight up pretend to be somebody and build a relationship with you and have this long memory. And they are very sycophatic in a way that the leading companies, chatbots will not be, that perhaps were a couple generations ago, but will not be today because it's known to cause so many long-term psychological problems.

48:08So those are the kinds of things the Chinese will do. So yes, I absolutely believe, I don't know about like an IAEA for, you know, William Gibson talked about this, the Turing police, right, in his novels, you know, which we'll get to see. It's a great time for Apple TV to now have an adaptation of Neuromancer coming out. You know, I don't know about having an actual international thing, But I think realistically, we don't need that yet. You really only need an agreement between the United States and the PRC. So I think we start with track two. If you can get the three or four major Chinese labs and the three major American companies to agree to some basic, basic stuff, then you get Xi and Trump to agree.

48:51And then, you know, Sam Altman, I think, said you get Xi and Trump to agree to a one or two page agreement. The two of them won Nobel Peace Prize. Trump gets that peace prize he's been going for. Everybody wins.

49:01Scott Galloway:so much in there first of all i i i love the uh you can't pretend to be a bot can't pretend to be someone it isn't for longer than a certain amount of time at some point it has to say i am actually not sir say i am a i am a fictional avatar being run by a hopper chip that's makes money by johnny 15 year old you talking to me late at night but i am not a real person i think that's I hadn't thought of that. I think that's absolutely genius. And the thing that's scary that you mentioned is that the bigger frontier models have an economic incentive and the tools and the resources for, I think you called it evals, which as far as I can tell is safety testing.

49:43Scott Galloway:but it's some of these maybe open weight mid-sized models and the middle market are the rogue actors and potentially the more sweet spot victim or targets if you will that big companies governments the big hacks the scary shit isn't where the problem's going to be it's i'm at the you know i'm at a i'm at a small hotel chain and they're just so susceptible don't have the money to protect and you're going to see a thousand flowers, and in this case, flowers are these mid-market open-weight LLMs get into the business of cyber attack. And also, I just found a genius here notion that the weak part in the soft tissue in crime is humans, that eventually you catch somebody and have them turn and work up the food chain to go after the big boss, right?

50:35Scott Galloway:And there's less porous human error here. I mean, one of the most successful ransomware groups over the last couple of years has been a group called Scattered Spider. And they've been successful because they convinced, you know, almost all the ransomware activity has been out of Russia and Ukraine. Although the Ukrainian stuff has been, was massively disrupted by the Russian invasion of Ukraine. And then most of the Ukrainian hackers have become now nationalized and are now hacking, paid by the Ukrainian government to hack Russian infrastructure. But so most of it's Russian. And Scattered Spider was successful because you had Russian bosses who were able to recruit U.S., Canadian, and U.K.

51:14teenagers with their native accents to do social engineering. So, for example, like the MGM hack was somebody calling the IT help desk with their accent and saying, hey, man, you know, I've lost my badge. Every major American company has a help desk line that you can pretty easily find if you know where to look that you can call and you can say, dude, I lost my phone. Can you help me reset my password? And if you can figure out from somebody's LinkedIn, from their Facebook, whatever, it's things like mother's main name, sometimes social security, sometimes phone number. And it's just like with the consumer, you can reset all that.

51:52So the hack of MGM, which is people were – they brought out the physical credit card thing at the Bellagio to check people in was all because of that. Well, you don't need to do that anymore. That turned out to be bad because Canada has the Royal Canadian Mounted Police. They have the cool red coats. They also have a SWAT team. and when I was at Sentinel-1, our team helped with some other great people at Unit 221B and some other folks kick in some doors and find these folks, the UK, the United States, Canada, arrest all these guys. Well, you don't need that anymore. You don't have to have this conspiracy.

52:28You can just have your LLMs speak in a perfect accent for you in real time, right? You can type in Cyrillic. It will translate it into English and then that will go into a speech, a text-to-speech translator that has a perfect accent for you. Um, so that's the kind of stuff that, yes, uh, uh, and those ransomware groups exist. So these aren't new people. It's just, instead of having a group of 10 guys in a conspiracy, Russians travel outside of Russia because Russia is a shitty place to be in the winter. Right. Uh, and so they'll keep their money in Cyprus because also you have to keep your money outside of Russia.

53:00You keep it either in Bitcoin or you keep it outside of Russia so it doesn't get like stolen and you can, you know, hide it for bribes. And so guys will go to Cyprus to visit their money. They'll go to the beach. They get picked up on an Interpol red notice. they get turned by Western intelligence. They get sent back to then turn on their friends. That's the kind of thing that you can avoid if you're conspiracy as agents. I said this to somebody who's like a big open weight advocate who's like, oh, open weight models will never be used to this stuff because they're too expensive. Like Kimi K3, you need about a million dollars in hardware to run Kimi K3 unquantized.

53:32One, you can quantize these models and they're still really good. But also some of these ransomware groups make 30, 40, 50 million dollars a year. they can afford a million dollars in NVIDIA hardware, right? Like they make more money than a lot of startups here in San Francisco from a revenue perspective. So like it is not a problem for them to run professional grade AI hardware. They might not be able to buy it directly, but they'll just have a front company in the UAE or, you know, Thailand or something buy it and then they'll drop ship it or Cyprus, you know, then drop ship it back to St. Petersburg.

54:03So yeah, anyway, yes, absolutely. We're going to see the use of open weight models. and I'm not against open weight models. I think open weight models are great. I think they're going to lower the cost of a bunch of stuff. I think they're going to be a key part of defense for lots of companies because like I said, it's a per, you cannot be paying 20, 30 bucks per million tokens or whatever to do defense against people who have zero marginal cost for their tokens because they're running it on commodity hardware. But like we have to be with open eyes. The open weight models are going to be used to hack a ton of stuff by these guys.

54:36So, like, there's nothing we can do about it. And, like, we should not control Americans' access to open-weight models because the bad guys are going to have them. So, like, there's nothing we can really do here except get ready.

54:47Scott Galloway:As we wrap up, I want to try and summarize at least what I've taken away. And I want you to edit where I have it wrong or add nuance to it. But in terms of what is actually going on, that the misperception of the Delta between the risk and what is probably the bigger risk is that the risk of a human extinction event, while grabbing a lot of headlines and a 28-year-old talking about it, that may have been overblown. blown, but what's underreported is these kind of border skirmishes with open-weight models and very talented, innovative, rogue actors who are harder to find because there's less human element using cheap and cheerful but powerful open-weight models, that that is where the real risk is.

55:29Scott Galloway:And I'm putting words in your mouth, but feel free to spit them out and edit them. Yeah, from where I sit, AI is an incredible, gives individuals incredible powers, right? We're going to see incredible innovation from individuals. We're going to see all kinds of new startups that you can start with two or three people that can do the power, have the power of big companies, right? We're going to see all kinds of one-person companies. We're going to see all kinds of entrepreneurship. But that also goes for bad guys. You're going to see one, two, three-person companies that now have the power of state actors.

56:04from a hacking perspective. You're going to see people able to stand up with capabilities that used to only be kind of in intelligence agencies. And what you're going to see are small countries now have the power of big countries. Everybody knows this because of Ted Lasso, right? But, you know, in the Premier League, if you do poorly, you get relegated down. If you do really well, you get promoted up. What's happening is all of the hacking teams are getting promoted up to the next level. So it used to be at the top, It was the United States and our allies, the five eyes, United States, Canada, UK, Australia, New Zealand.

56:38We are at the top. And then you've got, like, Israel, China, Russia. These are the big boys. And then maybe a couple other Western countries are up there, too. And then the next year down was, like, you know, Saudi Arabia, North Korea, some other folks who were, like, active but weren't in the top tier. Well, they're, you know, Iran, they're now going to the top tier. The Iranians used to not be able to do super good, hardcore exploit development in the same way the Russians or the Chinese could, but now they can. Right? Now they can do things like attack the water grid. Now they can do things that used to have to be the Russian SVR or the Chinese MSS.

57:21and so and now countries like india and pakistan who have an extremely active cyber capabilities against each other are now able to use ai to do that and so uh and individual little either activist or more likely financially motivated hacking groups are going to have the capability of small state actors and so that's that's what really frightens me as somebody who does cyber. And yes, I think there are bigger long-term risks, but I think those are being overstated. And if people are going to state there's an extinction risk, I would like them to say, this is the specific sequence of events I'm afraid of, and here's how I'd like to deal with those risks.

58:01Because from my perspective, the extinction risks are all things for which, one, I do think we need to be careful about what we build from an AI perspective, but they're also things that generally we can deal with through other means outside of just the labs.

58:16Scott Galloway:And then finally, you think the first step towards solving this problem at a minimum would just be a bilateral agreement between the Chinese and the Americans? Yeah. So I would like, I think it's great that we've got the CEOs of the major American companies agreeing. So I'd like to see the American companies work on self-regulatory rules of the road. But Kent Walker of Google actually proposed this FINRA for AI idea. I see that as probably the best option in the United States. You know, I just don't see the U.S. government as competent enough to do detailed rules. So the idea of the U.S. government sets, here's the level of risk we're willing to take in each of these areas.

58:56And then you have a self-regulatory group that says, OK, great, here's a technical interpretation of that. How does this look? And that's the back and forth is probably the best we can do. And so there's no reason to wait on that. I think that the U.S. labs need to be coming up and saying, these are the rules we're going to follow. And then they should go take those at a track two level to the Chinese labs and say, why don't you guys do this too? I think this is, you know, you guys don't want bioweapons. You guys don't want your models to be used for hacking. And see if you can get the Chinese labs to agree to some of that.

59:26And then you get Xi and Trump to agree to make that and to put an international premature on that.

59:34Scott Galloway:Alex Damos is a cybersecurity expert, former chief security officer of Meta and Yahoo, and the current chief product officer at the AI Security Startup Corridor. He joins us from his office in San Francisco. Alex, I can't think of a better person to have on the pod during these very interesting times. Very much appreciate your time. Thanks, Scott. Thanks for having me.

59:57Scott Galloway:This episode was produced by Jennifer Sanchez, Laura Janir, and Asher Schwartz. Our video editor is Bianca Rosario Ramirez. Cami Reek is our social producer. Drew Burrows is our technical director. And Catherine Dillon is our executive producer. Thanks for listening to the PropG pod from PropG Media.

1:00:31Scott Galloway:at equinox.com.

1:01:01Scott Galloway:by selecting work mode, available on Plus and Pro Plans. I'm not giving up. I am selling the building. The final season of FX is the Bear. The restaurant is flooded. Everything's either going to be okay. No, stop. Or not. We are outgunned and we are outmanned. We have each other. FX is the Bear. The final season. All episodes now streaming on Disney+.