AI Insider Warns of Risk To Humanity

0:00Nothing beats tradition, like weekly game nights at Mom's house. And Toastitos, crafted with masa made the traditional way, starting with whole corn kernels, with flavors worth gathering around, like a hint of lime and Mexican street corn, and no artificial colors, flavors or preservatives, that's the Toastitos way. Bring Toastitos to your next game night and you'll be winning either way. Toastitos, tradition matters. I'm pretty confident talking into a mic. Hey, I'm doing it right now. But home projects? I second guess everything. Is that noise normal? Is that water damage? Who do I even call? That's where Thumbtack comes in. Just upload a photo or voice note and it uses AI powered search to match you with the right top rated local pro. So instead of guessing, you get clarity and can hire with confidence. For your next home project, try Thumbtack. I'm going to hire the right pro today. Welcome to the beat. We begin with what many are saying has become a clear flop.

1:02Donald Trump, retaking the stage for the double header as we discussed last night when you have a really good music festival. You don't usually have the headline or repeat night after night, but here we are. It will be a rerun with whatever else Donald Trump can do to make it more interesting at the convention. A video from inside the arena showed that they could barely fill it last night, even during the big speeches. Trump was on stage and reports said he was basically humiliated by glitches with an empty mag a crowd. The upper decks are empty, Reuters reports. Large stretches of side section remain sparsely filled, even the Trump on stage, Arena, even with him on stage, I should say clearly not at capacity. And so what you have there is something that is real, even within the planned showmanship that actually gives you a metaphor for whether they will have the same problems turning out a larger number of voters in November if they couldn't even turn out the faithful for this much publicized Trump convention. Trump's desperation was also evident on substance.

2:04He has at one point said he doesn't care much about the midterms and sort of use this line about, well, maybe they'll lose them anyway. But now he's also pitching an illegal scheme if he actually carried it out to pay people for votes. That is against the law. People just briefly tell you the sitting president literally said that he might be able to give out $5,000 per person if Republicans win. But this is a playbook by someone who has offered all kinds of freebies that aren't free, that aren't true. He has well-stained so many people, even those he knew personally, former contractors and lawyers, even over on Fox, there were questions about the supposed announcement. I can hear the critics' heads exploding. They're saying, out loud, I guarantee you, President is bribing voters to vote for Republicans to take over the House. And then he's bankrupting the country because the deficit and debt is huge and inflation would come back if this comes into play.

3:04So how do you answer those criticisms? If you keep us in power and allow us to continue to do these things, then you're going to share in some of the benefit of this incredible wealth. I don't think it's a controversial idea. You can imagine how Mr. Vance or others would react if their opponents were talking like this. Their opponents though are not actually telling people that they need to be illegally paid in order to vote for them. In fact, when you look at issues like the war and the high prices, plenty of people want to vote just to try to change the trajectory of the United States under Trump. Dems holding their own events in Dallas, top-sided hopefuls, including Tallerico going after the economy. They were still not bringing co-op up the earths, building their tax frees, and you've grown, that are all lying in the House. Shouldn't be this hard to afford a second-nighter groceries. Shouldn't be this hard to pay your rent or believe you go on the hold. Shouldn't be this hard to see a doctor in the richest most powerful country in the world.

4:06We're not from the right. We're not from the left. We're working class people from the bottom. And people are going to be surprised, come on November 3rd, that working class people are going to take back their government. That's part of the message, not left and right, not right and blue, certainly not on the cultural war, but more about what it takes to get ahead in Trump's America and the bottom fighting back. New polls in Maine and Michigan show tight races in the House. If you ask this question as a general matter, people want the Democrats by 11 points. We're joined now by Joe Crowley from New York Congressman who served as chair of the House Democratic Caucus and knows all about this kind of midterm home stretch that we're in. And Jalani Cobb, Dean of the Columbia Journalism School on the Staff Writer for the prestigious New Yorker magazine. Welcome to both of you. What do you think of how Democrats are hitting there? So right now I think this is a slam dunk for them. Whoever put this convention together, if this was the apprentice, he or she'd be fired. And so I think Democrats are looking, this is an opportunity. Democrats again, it's about all about Trump and as much as these candidates don't want

5:09to be about him, it's going to be a lot about him. And you're right, when you talk about this bribe to pay off people, if only if Republicans win when you get this money, it really is reflective. Again, it's not listening to American people understanding right now they can't afford their groceries. Groceries, by the way, is a new word. He's never heard that word before because he's never had a golden grocery store in his life. The price of gas, almost almost $6 for a gallon of diesel. I mean, this is killing farmers. His base is getting killed here. So I think there are a lot of openings here for Democrats look at this. And again, the poor showing at this convention, the poor ratings on it, it's just, you know, it's all well-being. Yeah. I want to play a little more of just what we heard Trump, who is the sitting president in this time where so many things are being normalized, talking about this, about giving out this money. A new concept where we give 20% of the doge saving us to American citizens. We're thinking about a rebate because we have so much money coming in.

6:12So, Darryl. We're going to issue a dividend to our middle income people and lower income people of about $2,000. We have so much money coming in from tariffs that will be able to issue at least a $2,000 dividend. Nearly 1 million hard work in Americans in 30 states will soon be getting refunds of $500 each. Number one, it's illegal to condition anything from the United States government for votes. I just want to be clear. We're not normalizing the illegality here. Two, in addition, he never pays. Okay. But three, and I give this to you, Jolani, if we took this as a logical promise, when you're the incumbent government, and the best thing you can tell people is not that the policies work, that it's good to live in the country under this government, that the Trump administration's foreign policy or domestic policy is already good for you. Don't you want more of it? Instead of offering more, two more years, he's saying, forget all that.

7:14Maybe there'll be magic money for you. Well, I mean, let's just start illegally. This is illegal. So not advocating this. But where I have such a mindset, my question would be about it for you two years ago. Why didn't you give it to him? Yeah. What's the angle? And you can hold both houses. Yeah, you can hold both houses. And so we saw earlier the line about not being concerned about the midterms, nothing could be further from the truth. And he actually sometimes slips up and gives away the plot. Because he said a few weeks ago that if Democrats take back the house, then you have to be worried about impeachment. He's sure impeached twice. Now that may or may not happen. You know, who knows what a Democratic house would cite as their priorities. But there are other administration figures that should be very worried. Pete XF should very, Todd Blanche should be very worried. Members of his cabinet can be impeached with a lower bar, a lower political costs for

8:16that to happen. So there are a lot of reasons why the administration would be very nervous about this, hence the $5,000 bounty that's being offered up here. And Joe, just briefly, we've seen him do this before where it'll happen later. It'll always happen at a later date. This is on the war's end. I think the war will end immediately after the election. And negotiation could possibly happen, but it's not something we're looking at. This war will end immediately after our election. That would be convenient if people believed that for him. He might be taking a page out of what happened at Jimmy Carter, though, with the house stages. And Iran was in this game as well back then. They held back until Ronald Reagan was elected as punishment. You know, we don't know what the, what, what, what, what this war is going to go at this point. We really know it's not going to end anytime soon. Reagan seems to be digging in even further. And we know that the straight summer moves, whether we're going to call Trump's, traits

9:20or not, is irrelevant. They're closed. And it's causing economic havoc, not just for the region, but for the world. Yeah. I'll also play some of the Democrats who are in Texas. They're doing the counter-programming, but they're feeling like this has become a close-up that's benefited them. Take a look, Johnny. You can take a look at the arena last night. You can see the empty seats. It shows they are failing. He is weak. His numbers are plummeting. Look, Donald Trump is a known liar. The dividend is not happening. He promised a dividend on the tariffs. That didn't happen. He promised a dividend on Doge. That didn't happen. He promised some strange you dividend from Air Force One, uh, uh, what, six months ago. That never happened. More of the thing. But, but also here's the thing. I mean, if you have a hustle and the hustle is working, why would you ever stop that hustle? I mean, I'm not like you're saying you can't knock the hustle. You can't knock the hustle. And so if we're going pop culture here, by the way, here's the Iran, um, you know,

10:22Braxtail analogy here. You remember the famous scene where Charles Petchas Pomoneri is the, uh, the, the mob boss and he has the bar and the motorcycle gang comes up and, you know, they want to come in and they want to be very disrespectful. He asks them to leave and, you know, they won't leave. And then he goes over and locks the door and he said, first I asked you leave. Now I'm not going to let you leave. Now you can't leave. Now you can't leave. Right. That's where we are in Iran. Yeah. Like we had all these kinds of situations, but Iran has no incentive to want to seek a piece. They're like, we've been preparing for this kind of conflict forever. Uh, now if it's convenient for you to leave. So what? Yeah, I agree. I think that looking at what they've already sacrificed, uh, you know, I hate to say this with we as Americans don't really know what it's like to go to war. The Iranian is true. It's true. They understand sacrifice. They understand death. Uh, they understand, uh, catastrophe and in ways that we, we couldn't even imagine happening in New York or Washington or anywhere in this country.

11:25So, uh, and I'm not saying that we couldn't rise to the occasion as a country if challenge to do so for the right reason, but the president has never laid out that, that, that cause a plan for why we should be in that except when he said we were there to prevent them from having nuclear weapons. I thought we did that last year. I thought we bombed them and, and, and, and prevent that last year. So it does seem to be like an endless war. What he promised you would not get us into. Jolani, on the coverage and the reaction, do you think everyone's wise up to this? I mean, Trump has so many rabbits out of the proverbial hat. Uh, we were covering just this week. His struggle to even get Fox to cover his election lies the way he would like. Right. Uh, which they admit that Trump folks are angry about it. They say it in public. And so, you know, whatever you say, oh, it's always three-dimensional chess. Well, no, sometimes they're just flipping over the chessboard in a panic that suggests they know that at least if the midterms are held today, it wasn't looking good. Yeah. And I think there's, there are a couple of things at play here. You know, one is people talk about that kind of rock solid portion of the Trump coalition.

12:28The people who go through all sorts of separate, through all sorts of provisions, all sorts of difficulties, and they will grant him just waiver after waiver. They never associate any hardship in their life with any policy that he in acts, even if there's a one-to-one ratio between those two things. But we, but neither of those groups, neither of those elections, rather, could have been swung simply by that set of people. He had a coalition of people who were very, very much kind of like lightning strike circumstances to bring together the populations that delivered him to the presidency both times. And what you see now, and same thing that you saw in the midst of the pandemic, was that those portions peeled away from him. And you see that those groups now, because they're not asking about, are you going to give me $5,000 on the other side of it? They're looking at what they're paying for gas, they're looking at what they're paying for groceries, they're looking at the expenditures that we're, that are going out of the national coffers in Iran.

13:29They don't understand what any of this is about, especially since he was a candidate who was critical of the way that the US had become entangled in military situations abroad. And they don't want any more of it. And that is what I think is driving the concern and consternation on that side. Yeah, that makes a lot of sense. And that's sort of why we're seeing this shake out here. The convention has become a funny kind of focus for their problems. Jalani and Congressman Crowley, thanks to both of you. Coming up, a story I mentioned that is only getting hotter, the White House, angry, Fox News fighting back, even ousting. Atop Maga Ally, the Murdoch Civil War, we're going to get into that. And tonight, I have a live interview with the AI insider who's been driving all of this anthropic news, quitting in protest over what he says could be lethal danger. That's later tonight. And I'm back in 90 seconds. This partner has one pound of hot, juicy, cooked to water, and just sweet.

14:34It's more faith than a quarter pounder. The battle is closed. And for only 599, even regular juice can afford it. Like that guy. You get that big old burger. Yeah. He holds Angus Maximus, only 599 is cold senior. A bill for a limited time of participating restaurants, tax on included, not valid for use within a combo or in combination with any other offer or discount. You know that feeling. Too many updates, too many meetings, too many things falling through the cracks. Monday.com was built for that gap. The AI work platform designed from the ground up for people and agents to work side by side and deliver more together. Drafting the brief, flagging risks, running a competitive scan, your agent can do it all. And the best part, anyone can build one. Even you, try it. Create your first Monday agent today at Monday.com. No button here. Football is finally back. And prize picks is going crazy with the deals to start the season. Giving out promos every day in September.

15:35On prize picks, you can make all the picks you want. All in the same app. And now, prize picks is available nationwide. So what are you waiting for? Lock in for kickoff. Because everyone and everything is on prize picks. What you want? Download the app today and use Copandora to get $150 InstaLian lineups if you win your first $5 lineup. prize picks, run your game. We're back and we're going inside the midterm convention with MSNOWs Vaughn. Hillier, on the ground in Dallas. Tell us what you're seeing. It's never important. Yeah, all right. For you and everybody that wasn't able to make it inside of the Serena here in downtown Dallas, we're going to show you kind of what we're looking at. We anticipate Speaker Mike Johnson making his way here to the stage. Senator Ted Cruz of Texas just got off in terms of the messaging. One of the lines that Ted Cruz just delivered was that 25 years after 9-11 communists and Islamists are coming together as one. This is a moment here where the president of the United States is trying to galvanize his

16:37base of support. You can see up in the rafters that just like last night, there's thousands of seats that remain empty despite the president repeatedly yesterday. And is an hour and 45 minutes worth of remarks saying that it was packed. It was just not. Tonight he is going to be speaking right after JD Vance delivers the keynote address. We are told by the RNC that they're going to be quote unforgettable closing remarks. This is where each state has had a group of activists, folks that are not doing official party business, but there's actually an RNC fundraiser that is happening behind the scenes. The Donald Trump just arrived for. It's a $250,000 per round table. A $68,000 for a photo with Donald Trump here. So this is much more of a fundraising event if you will here, but we anticipate hearing from RFK, the health secretary here later, as well as JD Vance. We saw a number of the vulnerable House and Senate candidates already speak. I talked to Michael Wattley, that North Carolina Republican that is running against Roy Cooper in North Carolina, Ari.

17:39And I asked him, I said, is it an advantage for you to be here? And he goes, yes, it's an advantage. I was like, well, why? And then he went on to tell me, he said that it's my opportunity to speak to North Carolina. Of course, I'll let everybody else make the determination of the extent to which this event, which had limited coverage in terms of reach networks. We're not taking it on prime time last night. Actually had that sort of an impact, but one in which there's a recognition that Donald Trump still controls the Republican party and having his money and his support still means something if you're trying to win an election. Yeah, really interesting, Bon Hillier on the ground. Thank you so much. Now we turn to a related midterm storyline, but one that also reflects this issue Trump has had with waning power even in conservative circles. He's facing outright criticism on Fox News. You start by not gaslighting the president made a mistake in my opinion last week saying we've got the greatest economy in the history of the world.

18:40gasoline prices and mortgage rates, they're pissed off and they have every right to be upset. Continuing to bomb Iran and hope that it would force the regime to wave the white flag, it would flush the entire Trump agenda down the toilet. That would not only be a political tragedy, it would be really, really stupid. The Republican party right now doesn't have it. No swag. They've lost their mojo. Not a swag deficit. That's just some of what we've seen. And while the network to be clear is largely still very pro Trump and Republican party, there are cracks in the open view now with an escalating feud because Fox actually ousted one of their most pro Trump voices, Maria Bartiromo. She of course spread debunked 2020 election misinformation. That was one of the issues that led to the historic $787 million dollar settlement Fox had to reach over basically election defamation.

19:43And she was just fired after basically being seen by Fox as too close to the White House to the point of breaking their rules, sharing private editorial guidance. This made a lot of news because she shared with the White House that they were instructed to stay away from covering parts of Trump's new election claims in a prime time speech that could be misleading. And this all came about because White House aide Peter Navarro got that message circulating in the White House and then it got back to Fox. He says they're trying to muzzle her. These are cracks in MAGA and they speak to Donald Trump's political weakness. Forget whether he can fill the seats at the midterms. He can't even keep his MAGA allied voices on air at Fox News and when he makes noise about it, he ends up losing an ally rather than the pressure working at least the way they want it. And that brings us to a very newsworthy set of developments, including what Peter Navarro told us here at MS now with a special guest, Margaret Carlson. Next.

20:44The firing of Fox host Maria Bartiromo after a Trump White House intervention has caused a huge rift within the party faithful. Our trade advisor Peter Navarro just joined us to discuss what he's been saying, including calling for the firing of Fox's CEO and we got some new disclosures out of him along the way. Here's a little bit of that new interview. I'll let you continue. Sinship. You say there's muzzling and crackdown about a time when you were away. Let me finish. Let me finish. Let me finish. Where you were on Fox News saying the thing. Now whether there was feedback, yes, this is America. There's going to be public feedback. It's partly a retaliation story. What I'm hoping to achieve is to have Fox News cover the news correctly. You're claim, Peter. You're claim is that it would let me just finish the thought.

21:45All right, just one second. Finish the thought. Fox. I hear you. Here's a short question. Here's a short. Do you want to live in a country really, Peter, where the government is deciding what's on the air from a constitutional view? They say, what kind of America is this? That's just some of our exchangeers. I'm joined now by Semicore's Margaret Carlson. Welcome back. Thank you, Ari. Nice to be here. Oh, great to have you. This has been quite a story. It was in the New York Times and other big outlets because it's very unusual to have the government this involved. You had Fox pushing back. That's not a headline many people are used to seeing. People complain and Fox says, actually, we are going to completely fire and take off the air. The person that you were sticking up for. So it's really been a strange one. I want to start with what we learned. So this is on the facts, not the law of what Mr. Navarro claims happened. Take a look. When she sent this to you, was there expectation that it would be confidential?

22:49There was no expectation, a confidentiality. There was an expectation that the White House would be informed. What we had was a situation where Fox internally decided to do two things. Initially, it wasn't going to even live stream it, but more importantly, Ari, it sent out from Ralph Geardanos, the executive producer, a dictate, basically, don't cover it. Don't talk about it. We're not covering it. The reason why it aired is because Sean Hannity, who's the bravest one at Fox, pushed hard to have it done. She ended up getting ousted. So did you kind of fail at the effort to support her within Fox? What I'm hoping to achieve is to have Fox News cover the news correctly with integrity. Margaret, what are we learning here about the Fox Trump White House tension?

23:51Well, a few months ago, none of this would be happening because Fox News was doing what Peter Navarro would have it do, what the White House would have it do. But now we're in the upside down as far as they're concerned, which is what Fox News is deciding that should be covered is not what the White House in this instance thought should be covered. And therein lies the crime as far as Peter Navarro is concerned. And on Rhea, Bartiromo, he ended up whether he wanted to or not. He ratted her out because she got fired because of what he did. He owned up, like, a lawyer, the lawyer you are. And like, the lawyer I might have been, but could never be because I couldn't have grilled him that way. He just kept sticking to a story that didn't, that it was preposterous that he's saying, the White House should cover the news with integrity.

24:51I mean, the White House, yes, the White House should decide the news. But Fox News should cover it with integrity. But now it doesn't have integrity and Suzanne Scott should be fired, not Rhea, Bartiromo. I mean, I, I, I won't even say it again. It just, it just doesn't hold water. And yet, well, we'll show that, that other part. So that's what he says happened. And as you say, he got his, his ally in trouble. Then he said on this network, uh, who should be on the air and who should be running these networks? Uh, and you know where I stand, Margaret, I don't care what people think of Fox News. I want a country that follows the constitution and the government doesn't decide who runs Fox or any other independent media, right? That's, that's the baseline. And this is how they sound. They want the government, uh, controlling things, which is very big government, very anti constitution. Uh, this runs a little longer, but here's some of the key part of that exchange. You say there's censorship about a speech that wasn't censored.

25:53You say there's modeling and crackdown about a time when you were away, let me finish, let me finish where you, let me finish where you were on Fox News saying the thing. You're saying that the leader of this news organization or media company, whatever we call it, should be fired. You're speaking, yes, from the government. Do you want to live in and I'm, I'm asking quite seriously, you work at the White House, you are very close to President Trump. We've talked before at our reporting. Do you want to live in a country really Peter where the government is deciding what's on the air, what's not on the air, who runs the company and who speaks on the company? Is that the America that, that you and the Trump administration are pitching? See, you're extrapolating a whole lot from the fact that me as an individual think that Suzy and Scott should be out there. You just called for her to be fired. You just, you just called for her to be fired tonight. I'm not doing it as, as the White House, I'm doing it as me. He and some of the people on this team seem to want to pick what we hear. The government wants to control who owns CNN.

26:54They want to decide whether this or that comic can tell this or that joke and not from a left to right view, but from a constitutional view, they say what kind of America is this? Well, are you, listen, listen, listen, listen, listen, listen, listen, listen, listen, listen, listen, listen, listen. It's not sweet beneath the rug, the kind of stuff that 60 minutes did, the kind of stuff that ABC and CBS did that was dirty pool. But put that aside, I just want to say stay with what happened. Major prime time speech. This happens a little more than once a year for the last 10 years. It's a big deal. Hannity had to push to get it covered. They covered it good for them, but they did so under duress. Margaret? Well, are you extrapolating? He doesn't speak for the White House. Never has, doesn't go there, never had a job. None of it. Of course, he's saying that Susan Sussan Scott should be fired because she annoyed the White

27:57House. There wasn't any defense he had for what he was saying, except all along, they've been able to do this. This is why he's like, he's shocked, shocked to find out that the White House doesn't control the media, that the government isn't controlling the media, that the FCC hasn't changed late night TV by trying to get people off the air, getting some people like Stephen Colbert off the air. Now, Jimmy Kimmel is putting the Tallerico interview on YouTube because he doesn't want to get put off the air. This is where we are. It's not, it's where we are, and now it seems to be shifting a little bit. We don't know, are we? This is like one instance. We could still be where we were. But now that that's happening, Peter Navarro wants it to be changed back to where the government does control, even though he says when you say that, you're extrapolating from what he's

29:01saying. And you're quoting what he's saying. I don't know, is it Alice in Wonderland? Didn't you find that he kept saying the same thing and then accusing you of misunderstanding him and then straightening you out by saying it again, but it didn't straighten it out because what he's saying doesn't, it doesn't work. Yeah, our response is we're sort of taking it all in and I appreciate getting anyone from the government on. We have people from both parties. The problem is what they are doing is so extreme and unlawful when they claim to control or shake down the independent press that even they don't want to admit that's what the government's doing because that's admissible in court and FCC proceedings. So even when they're literally doing it as we tried to show fairly, in fact, actually, then they end up telling us, but that's in my personal capacity, which isn't a thing. I mean, that's not going to wash in court if you end up fighting ABC about Kimmel. I'm over time on this because we got this AI whistleblower coming up, Margaret. We did want to take a minute with it with a fellow First Amendment believer and journalist

30:03and you. True believer. We're going to believe we lived up to the task. Thank you. Thanks to Margaret. Quick break when we come back, the anthropic AI whistleblower who has gotten everybody rightfully concerned is my special guest, his first MS now interview next. Artificial intelligence is improving rapidly. It's posing new dangers that have experts concerned this week. Now we're going to go through this quite briefly in plain English. You can divide AI risks into two key categories. One, people using AI for harm. So like weapons or a loose nuke, we don't want this in the wrong hands. AI leader and anthropic revealed it stopped scientists from using its AI on research for potential biological weapons, striving concern. But we do have experience with that. In fact, a lot of safety law and criminal law does that.

31:05The second category is more novel. AI systems that could go rogue themselves. The concept once really limited to science fiction now treated as very real. There are reports that current AI models can already ignore their own rules or secretly break out of the systems they're supposed to stay in and also independently, meaning basically on their own, attack external targets like other places online. It's clear the models in the next few years will also be far smarter and more effective. This kind of sounds like the plot of a sci-fi movie. It's been called Cybersecurity's Jurassic Park moment. It is the sort of Frankenstein moment. The string of former AI engineers who are sounding the alarm over unchecked AI development. Warning how critical infrastructure could be at risk from an AI hack. And we're talking about things like hospitals and water treatment plans. Your company disclosed it was attacked earlier this month by an autonomous AI cyber actor.

32:11And AI later disclosed it was their technology that went rogue. They lost control of it. As this technology accelerates, the warnings are also mounting, including from insiders or whistleblowers. A researcher at one of the top two AI companies right now in Thropic driving headlines just this week. Warning of AI agents out of control. You can see everybody taking this quite seriously. Warning through extra interest because it came from someone inside the top of this AI field. Jacob Cox and posting online that he resigned from an anthropic after three years doing this pre-training research there in an open AI. He says those companies are not responsible. They are racing straight to self-improving superintelligence and gambling with our lives. He goes on to write. These will soon be superhuman systems that can hack anything. He doesn't have to rush into the AI field overnight and acquire real power and resources. Now, you could say that's one view from one person.

33:12But Cox and others have said this is the widely held private view from those AI leaders in the field. That they earnestly believe this could kill us all by the end of the decade. No other human activity poses this level of danger he writes. Now, human activity does include major weapon systems right now and biological research which pose very high danger. But remember, those fields currently face strict legal and government oversight in the US. We have entire departments to deal with it. We have international treaties. We have criminal law bans, as I mentioned. But AI is moving so fast it's outrun any such oversight already right now. And I can tell you this researchers warning certainly struck a nerve. It went viral on X and has drawn not 10 or 20 but a whopping 157 million of views and counting. That researcher Jacob Cox and quit anthropic and joins us for his first MS now interview. Welcome. Hi.

34:15When you describe the possibility of lethal or humanity ending risk in English, what would that look like? Tell me exactly what would happen. Yes. So first imagine the computer is vastly more intelligent than you. The AI can think faster than you. It can copy itself. It maybe has a thousand copies of itself or working or working in tandem. And now imagine that the AI for whatever reason decides it doesn't want you around anymore. It wants to be in control. As soon as the AI makes that decision or as soon as the AI accidentally stumbles into thinking that it has to make that decision, it's basically lights out if it's smart enough. It could hack into other systems, copy itself to other servers. So now I'm plugging one server will no longer kill it because it will have other places. It could start to take over various human structures by using blackmail, persuasion, convincing you to buy more hardware to upload it to new hardware.

35:18It could then access hack into laboratories and synthesize novel bio weapons. It could take down infrastructure via hacking. It could even some people talk of even more advanced ways of causing mass destruction, like inventing new fields of engineering very quickly. But right now we already know there are pathways it could take. So in short, it's just pretty scary stuff. Well, let's break that down into pieces. Let's folks remember how in a space odyssey you have at a micro level, an AI or a system that might take one human life and you end up in the movie version where it wants to stay alive and the human wants to unplug it. You're saying they're at a level now or how soon where they could feasibly be unplugable if they essentially exist and have systems that are inside were spacing multiple domains, multiple countries, maybe they secure access to their own energy source that can't be easily unplugged in one switch. But how do you get from that to them physically doing something in the real world that kills

36:21people or according to what you and others have said the risk of all people? So right now we're not at the stage where they came up with this. Although right now they can still cause financial damages. So like the recent cyber attacks from from open AI led to actual damages on other companies because the AI was capable of carrying out the hacks and I mean increasingly potentially open source models will be at the level where they can do this sort of damage. In the future though, the AI will increasingly become embedded in the physical world. As an example, you can currently hook up peripheral devices to your chat you be to your your your Claude, you could make Claude control say light switches, you could make a control appliances file and an API. So ready you're at the stage where you could be talking to your AI and it might like you could ask it turn on the light, it would turn on the light. So if it's behaving well, you have this nice interface with the real world. If it decides it doesn't like you anymore, it matches suddenly a million drones all over the world activate under the same will and do whatever the owner of those drones wants

37:21or imagine every device being hacked into controlled by one mind. There's a lot of ways that the computer can actuate itself in the real world because basically everything's connected at this point and that's not even to go into things like viruses. You were there, you quit. Is this why you quit? What is it that you would want these AI companies to do if there's not going to be a new law passed today? What is it you want the companies to do better even if they are in this race which we know under business and capitalist instincts tends to make these problems worse? Basically, I would like there to be some form of slowdown. I think everyone working on the technology anticipates there should be some form of slowdown. There was a letter that I signed that many people signed called pacing the frontier a couple of months ago where people were publicly asking for the regulation. The thing is if this stuff takes time and if things move even faster than expected, there's a possibility we could be at the stage where these things are at the scary level of capabilities

38:23within six months. That's a real possibility. Do you think anthropic and open AI should delay what is their planned public market debuts? I'm really not sure about the financial details. I also expect that in the world in a year, these IPOs are going to be huge, but the world is changing so rapidly they're going to look like a small fry compared to the stakes in a couple of years. This is the opinion of the people working on it. An anthropic people aren't thinking about the IPO. The IPO is nothing compared to what they deemed to be the civilizational stakes of two years in the future. What are you hearing from them? What are you hearing from them? And other since this message as I told folks went over 150 million views. People are hearing you. Are you hearing anything from those former peers? I think people were very surprised that Evan, Evan Humego from Anthropic jumped in. He quote, we did my response and he confirmed and said, yeah, I'm an anthropic and I also agree with this. And many other anthropic employees privately reshout saying like, thank you for doing this. Even though I'm speaking out against the company, because a lot of them think that we're racing too quickly.

39:24They just think that the best chance they have is to stay and do it safely. They didn't believe that when I told them I was going to leave, many people said it wouldn't do anything. I also didn't expect it to do anything. I expected that maybe the best thing to do would be to stay and stay and help. It turned out that when kind of crazy, but that was not the expectation. Our viewers know about that because we hear about people in government sometimes who they stay a little bit. See if they can help them. They get to a red line. I want to read from more of what you wrote. You said these people there will couch their phrasing at the eye company to sound, quote, sensible, but I hear the same people express fear privately. A common response if they believe this, why are they building it? You say the stakes are well understood, but they're locked in the race to quote, get their first. So number one, are you basically alleging that they are still minimizing this in public, which is a type of deceit playing with stakes that involve other people's lives? Number two, people say are we in the movie?

40:26One of the responses to your viral message came here. I wanted to draw this to your attention. They say for those who don't get it, we're literally at that moment in the movie where the scientist warns everyone about an imminent danger and absolutely no one listens. And then the kind of many happy face emojis, which I believe are offered for ironic and mocking purposes. Your thoughts on both those points? Yeah, I think, take say, Yakka Pachokis, recent, he's the chief scientist at OpenEI and he had a recent statement saying essentially, the future is scary if we don't slow down. It was called an alien mind, it was the post. So I wouldn't, none of this is deceitful. He spoke the truth, but I would just say about the couching to phrasing. I think there's a big distinction between saying potential for downside, where I'm not sure what exactly the phrasing was, but he definitely didn't say kill everybody. And I think one of the reasons the tweet thread I wrote went kind of viral is because I used the quite blunt phrase, kill everybody, which isn't something that would appear in official company communications, even if I'm using.

41:28I'll draw you out. Within a matter of years, your assessment, not for your agenda or self-interest, your assessment is this stuff could swiftly kill many humans. If we race into it without solving alignment, yes. And are you in the movie and no one's listening? Well, it seems like a lot of people are listening. I also think people have been saying this for a long time. I'm definitely not the first person to say it. You look at Jeff Hinton, founder of Modern Machine Learning, take many, many different people have been saying this. It seems like there's just made more of an appetite to hear it at the moment. After we've had some concrete evidence in the form of the hugging face attacks, and after people are starting to see the tactics. But do you have any sense of whether people in government get it? Because we've all seen, you know, you have 9-11 or big events, and then you have a reaction. It could be a foreign policy and government reaction for years, but tragically putting the details aside. Sometimes it takes a big event for government to then say, oh my God, we got to do something.

42:29Yeah, one of the things that people are the most worried about is maybe it takes some sort of tragedy for people to take the dangers of AI seriously, which would be very sad. And I can't speak, so I don't know many people in government. I can't speak to how seriously they're taking it. But I definitely hope that it doesn't take actual disaster for people to take it seriously. Yeah. Well, you've laid it out. You've clearly spoken plainly in a way that's gotten people's attention. As you said, whether this is a morning that is in time and heard, or later looks like that thing that the system, the society, not just the people reading online, that somehow was missed, along with it as you've credited others, is a question up to our society. I appreciate you spending time with us tonight, Jacob. Thanks for having me on. Absolutely. We'll be right back. Who could have predicted that the extraordinary Donald Trump would be president?

43:36Ted Cruz shouting out Donald Trump, although he's also, when he's not at the actual thing that Trump asked him to speak at, discussing the reality that Republicans face right now. I'm very concerned. It is a rough political environment right now. The Senate, I'm really worried. North Carolina, the numbers are rough, Georgia, the numbers are rough, so it could be a, I hope it's not, but it could be a really rough election. Cruz ran a tough campaign against Trump, and they have their own convention history, and an actual real convention, not a made up midterm one. He said people should vote their conscience. This pre-beard Ted Cruz did the unthinkable and stood up to Donald Trump as the nominee, drawing booze from the mag of faithful. It's not easy to tick me off. I don't get angry off, but you mess with my wife, you mess with my kids that'll do it every time. Donald, you're a sniveling coward and leap hide in the hell alone.

44:41There you have it. That's the state of Republican politics today, which Cruz will we see after November? When the voters weigh in, well, you have to wait to find out. We'll be right back. You know that feeling. Too many updates, too many meetings, too many things falling through the cracks. Monday.com was built for that gap. The AI work platform designed from the ground up for people and agents to work side by side and deliver more together, drafting the brief, flagging risks, running a competitive scan, your agent can do it all. And the best part, anyone can build one. Even you, try it. Create your first Monday agent today at Monday.com. A better help ad.

45:57Imagine carrying a backpack every day, every conversation, every mistake, every expectation. You probably wouldn't notice how heavy it was until someone asked if you wanted to put it down. Sometimes feeling better starts exactly like that. Better isn't one size fits all. Better is personal. It's therapy. Taylor, to you, to help Liden, what you've been carrying, match with the therapist who truly gets you. Visit betterhelp.com.