The Sam Altman Expose is Utterly Terrifying

0:00All right. Okay, so we shot an hour of this episode and then the SD card failed, so we had to start over. And here we are, but today we're talking about the Ronan Faroe article, an essay really, on Sam Altman, and I began the last episode by saying that there were some reservations I had with it, nothing serious. Basically, I felt like Faroe did not do enough to go into the accusations by Sam Altman's sister before dismissing them. And then also, I would have liked to have seen a little bit more about the dangers of AI that aren't directly related to Sam Altman, but I understand this is an article about Sam Altman, and so that's kind of where everything is centered. I just would have liked to see this be a series, or maybe I hope he's working on a book where he goes in things in more detail. Yeah, there's definitely much more about like his professional ethics specifically. Yeah, so this is Ronan's Faroe article, Sam Altman, make control our future. Can he be trusted? It's in the New Yorker. It's about 16,000 words, 42 pages.

1:02So it's long. This is a long New Yorker article. That is a magazine. Or if you haven't read the New Yorker or not, one of the physical copies, it is very much a magazine. It is not hefty by any stretch. So this is a tremendous amount of page to go to this issue, which I think it deserves. And Ronan Faroe, who is certainly not the son of who he is supposedly the son of, ah, anyway, anyway, getting in there, he's also looking to him and then look at Sinatra and go, that's not the matter. It's, yeah, let's be, let's be so for real right now. That there's a talent in them. Yeah, anyway, for all, you know, my reservations, I don't like the New Yorker. I've never liked the New Yorker. I think it's pretentious and the exact thing family guy makes fun of it for being. But to his credit and to the New Yorker's credit, this is a fantastic article. It is entirely worth reading. We're thinking we might end up doing a narration of it as well that will be demonetized, not demonetized,

2:03but it just won't be monetized so that we can read it for people without, you know, anybody getting mad at us and that way if you just want to listen to it in the car or something like that or while you're working, you're on your way to school, whatever, you'll be able to do so. But to get into it, I began during the period where Aiden had to run home to pay some people to fix his chimney. I began going through the article and taking notes on certain things like the Sam Altman supposed pattern of lying, you know, stuff that happened at Y Combinator and Looped, which was kind of where he got his start, various recognitions of danger by the people in charge of this software and also Elon Musk's role and why he left. Cause that was something we talked about pretty extensively in the original attempt at recording this. But what I wanna make very clear right now is that I was not able to get through the whole thing. I got to page 14 before it was time to start again. As for the pattern of Sam lying and you'll see as we go through some of this, the paragraphs in this article, there will be several people who say something about Sam

3:04and then in parentheses, Sam saying something like I don't recall that. I, or there's one specific occasion that I just find hilarious where somebody when this provision shouldn't be in this contract and Sam goes, it's not. And he's like, it's right here. And Sam goes, it's not as he's showing him the contract and he has to drag in another employee to be like, yeah, that's there. Clearly the man is a pathological liar who does not care how obvious it is that he's lying or how provable it is that he's lying. So you can't take anything he says seriously, but what I wanted to make the point about is again, I got to page 14 before I had to stop doing this. So 42 for kind of 42. And also page five is a third of a page because there's a cartoon. Page three is the first page. So realistically out of 12 pages,

4:07Sam either tells a lie or is accused of having a pattern of lying on pages three, five, six, seven, 10, 9, 11 and 12. Out of the first realistically, the first 12 pages, Sam lies or is accused of lying on one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight of them. That is two thirds. We also have a pretty explicit recognition of danger on page 11 that I just wanna start off with because I think it's a good starting point. Where we have Sam saying that an artificial superintelligence, a theoretical threshold beyond even AGI or artificial general intelligence at which machines would fully eclipse the capabilities of the human mind would eventually create enough socioeconomic benefits to capture the light cone of all future value in the universe. A statement which you might realize means absolutely nothing. It is yet another thing that Sam has been saying for the purpose of trying to make himself sound smart

5:08and make his company sound valuable. When in reality he's just a dangerously evil human being. And later down that page, sorry, further up that page. For example, we have, oh wait, no, I need to go back to a previous page to make that point. Sorry, this has been a very confusing morning for us. Let me start over a little bit. If there is one thing you should take away from this article or us discussing the article, it is this. Sam Altman is a danger to society. His continued existence is a serious liability to humanity as a whole. And as long as this man is alive, AGI will not be able to be worked upon with any sense of integrity or care for safety. And the irony there is that throughout this article, we are introduced to a number of different people that theoretically based on their interactions with Altman and their track records probably could have been paroled AGI safely.

6:09Yeah, it just so happens that the person who is spearheading all of it with the most authority is the last person that should end up. Well, and as somebody in here notes, again, because I somehow have gotten more off track after beginning to take notes here, sorry, I lost my train of thought there. I thought, AGI, or you essentially were talking about how Sam Altman is the last person that should be heralding it and cannot provide safe AGI. Yeah, no, lost it. Fair enough. I'll jump right in with a couple of paragraphs from the end of the article that really just sell very well why he is such an unsafe person for this. Because he kind of, his pitch when he first started, he's very good salesman was this is gonna be the safe AGI company. That's what open AGI is gonna be. We're gonna do this safely before anyone like Google or whoever can do it unsafe. Do you have you a quote here? I've been thinking about a lot

7:10whether it's possible to stop humanity from developing AGI. This is back in 2015 and he's writing Elon Musk. If it's going to happen anyway, it seems like it would be good for someone other than Google to do it first. And then he outlined the overarching principles such an organization would have. Safety should be a first class requirement and obviously we comply with slash aggressively support all regulation. The polygraph determined that was a lie to quote Murray Povitch. Yeah, so in the present day though, quote, in one way, this is not a quote, direct quote, but this is where the paragraph begins of all the promises made at open AIs founding arguably the most central was its pledge to bring AI into existence safely. But such concerns are now often derided in Silicon Valley and in Washington. Last year JD Vance, the former venture capitalist who was now the vice president, addressed a conference in Paris called the AI Action Summit. It was previously called the AI Safety Summit and then they changed the name. Quote from Vance, the AI future is not going to be one

8:12by hand-wrapping about safety. At Davos this year, David Sacks, a venture capitalist who was serving as the White House's AI and crypto-zar, dismissed safety concerns as a self-inflicted injury that could cost America the AI race. Altman now calls Trump's derogatory approach a very refreshing change. Open AI has closed many of its safety-focused teams around the time the super alignment team was dissolved. Its leaders, Ilis Kuts, Sout, Skiver, and Leiki Resign. Sout Skiver co-founded a company called Safe Super Intelligence. On X, Leiki wrote, quote, safety culture and processes have taken a backseat to shiny products unquote. Soon afterward, the AI AGI readiness team tasked with preparing society for the shock of advanced AI was also dissolved. When the company was asked on its most recent IRS disclosure form to briefly describe its most significant activities, the concept of safety present in its answers to such questions on previous forms was not listed. The Future of Life Institute, a think tank whose principles on safety Altman once endorsed, grades each major AI company

9:16on existential safety. On the most recent report card, Open AI got an F. In fairness, so did every other major company except for Anthropic, which got a D and Google DeepMind, which got a D minus. Quote, my vibes don't match a lot of the traditional AI safety stuff. Yeah, that's the one that really got me. The my vibes don't match a lot of the traditional safety stuff. I'm sorry, Sam, but your vibes don't mean shit to any of us. What matters is safety. And if you're going to be a stumbling block to the safety of the human race, you should not be anywhere near this technology. And frankly, you should be locked in a padded room where you're fed mush all day while you sit in a straight jacket. Also one of the instances in which he did a complete heel turn on his real standpoint where he was heralding AI safety. Yeah. Oh, yeah. Well, as we know, Sam Altman is not an honest man. For example, like I said, we have a pattern of lying displayed on eight of 12 of the first 14 pages, which again, are really the first 12 pages.

10:16But just on the first page, page three, we have Sutskyver, who's the guy he brought into, basically be the Wozniak of the group, said, I don't think Sam is the guy who should have his finger on the button. There's also a memo about Altman from this, this basically super, this dossier compiled by Sutskyver and a bunch of the other colleagues at OpenAI who found what Sam was doing to be a poet, where he says that Sam exhibits a consistent pattern of and then gives a list of things. The first item is lying. We then have that according to Sutskyver, any person working to build this civilization altering technology bears a heavy burden and is taking on unprecedented responsibility. But the people who end up in those kinds of positions are often a certain kind of person, someone who is interested in power, a politician, someone who likes it. And then in one of the memos, he describes Sam as a person who just tells people what they want to hear. So just on the first page alone,

11:17we have Ilya Sutskyver, the basically chief engineer for OpenAI repeatedly saying that Sam Altman can't be trusted. Sam Altman lies all the time. Sam Altman is a dangerous person. Sam Altman should not be the CEO of this company. And I mean, by 2023, we have them trying to remove him only to fail because according to multiple people who were on the board at the time, Sam sent lawyers to their homes to tell them that they were going to be digging up any dirt they could find only for Sam to then turn around and say he didn't recall that, which is a refrain that you see so many times in this argument where this article where somebody's like, or realistically, it's usually multiple people say something along the lines of, you know, Sam said these things and then did these things or Sam lied about doing this or Sam hid this kind of thing from us or Sam said he was going to do this but then did that. And then in parentheses, right after it, we have, Altman, you know, says he doesn't recall this or Altman recalls it differently or Altman says he must have been joking.

12:17For example, on, I think it's page, let me see if I can find it really quickly. I believe it's, yeah, here we go, page nine. Most of Altman's employees looped, which is where his startup that he got started on, a company where he eventually managed to sell it though it seems like it was kind of an insider deal to help him save face because it was failing so badly. Looped, he told investors was making, was being used by, at the very least, thousands of users, turned out to be used by about 500 people and he sold it for I think millions of dollars. So that is fraud, by the way. Cut and dry, that's fraud. Sam Altman should be in prison. But he's not because of his connections. Anyway, when he was at Looped, some said that they were struck by his tendency to exaggerate even about trivial things. One recalled Altman bragging widely that he was a champion ping pong player like Missouri High School ping pong champ and then proving to be one of the worst players in the office. In parentheses, Altman says that he was probably joking.

13:19Yeah, he has this pattern that you see from certain people, especially politicians, where they have their version of reality and anything that they are presented with that contradicts that version of reality is either BS or it is a plot to undermine him. And he really, it's, if Pharaoh compares him to Steve Jobs, I would say Trump is another one where it's, he, his, his MO is just, your reality is fake, the real reality is fake and the world works the way only I think it does. And that's the pattern throughout this whole thing. And that's, there's another pattern in here, which is that every company Sam's ever worked at has tried to fire him. For example, Looped back in the days when he was still there before it was bought out by a Fintech company. We have groups of senior employees concerned with Altman's leadership and lack of transparency, ask Looped's board on two occasions to fire him as CEO. But then an employee who was told,

14:21there was an employee who was told the board member responded, this is Sam's company, get back to fucking work. And then the board member denied that the attempts to remove Altman as CEO are serious. In reality, they were very serious. We also have some more things in here that I think are important that are about Y-combinator, which is the kind of, basically, think tank that brings in a bunch of tech people and gives them seed money and it's venture capital, but made to look like it's something it's not. It's an incubator basically. Yeah, it's an incubator. So it's a lower level thing that often brings people from colleges into this area. It's like the baseline startup of taking young minds and giving them the opportunity to grow whatever that they're trying. Whatever it is they're trying to grow. And that's where Altman got his start was at Y-combinator with Looped, and he was there at the same time as the people who eventually went on to create Reddit and Twitch. So this company really just producing all kinds of great people who have done things that are definitely valid and helpful for society.

15:25You know what, it makes sense that he was chill with a guy who founded Reddit. That seems like the kind of person Sam Altman would get along with, but this is the part I wanted to get to, that eventually Sam Altman actually ends up being, basically in charge of Y-combinator, Paul Graham, who was the guy who brought him in, ended up making the successor. And by 2018, several Y-combinator partners were so frustrated with Sam Altman's behavior that they approached Graham to complain. Graham and Jessica Livingston, his wife and a Y-C founder, apparently had a frank conversation with Altman, and afterward Graham started telling people that although Altman had agreed to leave the company, he was resisting in practice. Altman told some Y-C partners that he would resign as president but become chairman instead. In May 2019, a blog post announcing that Y-C had a new president came with an asterisk. Sam is transitioning to chairman of Y-C. A few months later, the post was added to read Sam Altman stepped away from any formal position at Y-C, and after that the phrase was removed entirely, but nevertheless, as recently as 2021, a securities and exchange commission filing listed also as the chairman of Y-combinator.

16:27Altman says he wasn't aware of this until much later. So Altman, who in 2019, is saying that he's going to move from president to chairman, then says in 2021 that he wasn't aware he had been made chairman. The important thing to note too with Y-Cominator is that that is how he often will say, well, OpenAI is not about making myself rich. I don't have any equity. Y-Cominator does. That's how he owns his whatever part of OpenAI, he owns is through Y-Cominator. So he says, oh, I don't have equity. I'm not getting rich off of this. He's getting rich through Y-Cominator. It's literally like me saying, I don't have equity in redacted media because firebird media does. Yeah, like my personal LLC has the stake in redacted media, which is the company that owns all of this. Therefore, I don't have a stake in redacted media. Aiden doesn't either. Aiden doesn't, because he's in W2 employee. But it's literally the same thing. And if you own a small business and you've done the proper

17:31incorporation stuff that you have to do in order to not get absolutely bruised by the IRS every year and the state taxes as well, it's very obvious that he's lying. You know exactly how he's lying. You know exactly why he's lying. It's two, it's one of those things where it's now that this is a lie by omission. And it's very deliberate. He knows that he owns a stake in OpenAI through his stake in Y-Cominator. Does that mean that other people at Y-Cominator own a stake in OpenAI? Yes, it does. But they're not telling people they don't. That's the difference there. Also, he said that this is to go through the actual way this works here. Altman Housed Ope, this is on page 11. If you have a printed version, Altman Housed OpenAI in Y-Cominator's Nonprofit Arm, framing it as an internal philanthropic project. This is back in 2015, 2016. He gave OpenAI recruits Y-C Stock and moved donations through Y-C accounts. So this shows a clear pattern of him understanding

18:34how this works and using that system. So he's not confused. This is not him not getting how it works. He is deliberately basically using Y-C as a shell company. And evidence of him doing it a decade ago? Yes, this is 2016. So he's been doing, he knows what he's doing. At one point, the lab was supported by a Y-C fund in which he held a personal stake. Altman later described this stake as insignificant and he told us that the Y-C Stock he gave to recruits was his own. But again, Sam Altman is a liar. So how do we know that he's telling the truth there? We don't and frankly, I don't believe him. This page is also insightful in terms of his delusions that he seems to have where it talks about the fact that from day one, he has compared OpenAI to the Manhattan project. Also, he essentially thinks that in the same way that the idea of the Manhattan project was, we have to develop this before the Nazis do. He basically thinks, oh, I need to develop AI

19:37before somebody that could use it for profit or nefarious purposes will. And he basically thinks of himself as the AI up in Heimer, even though he's doing the exact thing. He is comparing what other people in AI are doing to the Nazis in this equation. And he's also doing it. Yep, he sees himself as a combination of Oppenheimer and Steve Jobs, which is why he wears jeans and a gray sweatshirt all the time. Steve Jobs and Heimer. Yeah, literally. Because he sees himself as the hero in his own story. And not, here's the thing. It's not only the hero in his own story. He sees himself as the hero in everyone's story. And if you disagree with him, that means that, if you're not with me, then you're my enemy. And you must be stopped because you can't stop me from saving the world. I will do a timeust. You will try. I will. Like I said, if I had determined a loneliness. Yeah, but just to kind of just really quickly to finish out the YC thing here. So this is right after he's transitioned to Chairman away from President and then lies about

20:39being transitioned to Chairman because he's Sam Altman. Altman has maintained over the years, both in public and in recent depositions, that he was never fired from Y Combinator, and he told us that he did not resist leaving. I'll remind you that Graham, after, Paul Graham, after deciding that Altman would no longer be President of Y Combinator, started telling people that although Altman had agreed to leave the company, he was resisting in practice. So it's Graham's word against Altman's word here. And as we know, Altman can't be trusted. Therefore, Altman is probably the one that's lying. Or they're both lying, but Altman's definitely not telling the truth. In my opinion, fuck you, Altman. In case you were wondering, so many over my opinion, you jackass, see how that goes forward. In case you were wondering what position of the lodge is on Sam Altman. Yeah, but yeah, so in a state, so this is the thing. So Altman has maintained over the years that he was not fired from YC, right? Well, according to Graham, they didn't have the legal power to fire anyone. All they could do is apply moral pressure. So yeah, that's kind of like your boss walking

21:42into your office and saying, hey, you royally screwed up that project, but we don't want to make your life harder. You're going to resign today. Basically. That's being fired in a way that does not reflect as you being fired. That is being given the chance to quit, which anybody who has worked in corporate and been laid off, fired, forced to resign, anybody in those positions knows exactly what that is. And Sam, for some, this is the part that gets me. You have so many people who work in corporate, who work in white collar jobs, where they know precisely what that situation is, who know that you're full shit. And those are the people you're trying to sell the company to. They know what really happened. You're not, the people who are, the people that those words are for are not the blue collar guys. They're not the people who have a much different social contract at work. It's white collar.

22:43It's investors. It's people who have been in that chair before, who have also been in the opposite chair before, and been the one being told you're resigning, and they are the ones who have gone to somebody and said you're resigning. So Altman, I don't even know who he thinks he's lying to here. The really impressive part is that, and this is reflected in the article by several people, he seems to have some sort of just charismatic nature to his personality, which as somebody who maintains proper human instincts immediately makes the hair stand up on the back of my neck, because I'm like, oh, there's a predator in the room with me right now. And I'm not even referring to the things he's supposedly to do with sister. But... Yeah, just to enumerate on what you said about white collar versus blue collar a little bit, because we kind of grew up in both of those worlds. When he says that there are different social structures, white collar is, there's no better term that I can think of than to describe it as theater.

23:43Yeah. The thing that is nice about blue collar individuals are at least from locations in the world in which honesty, respect, and direct communication are important. Those values do not translate to corporate upper middle and upper class America, because a lot of that world is not about what you actually mean, what you actually say, what you actually do, and what you actually believe. It's the theater that you can convey to the public to subvert what you're actually doing, because success in that world is not determined by your integrity. It's actually kind of the opposite. It's determined by how well you can achieve your goals, no matter the cost. Yeah. And usually the cost is your soul. From some perspectives, your soul for some perspectives, it's your ability to put on a show for investors, for the public, for employees, for different people,

24:45throughout the strata of your socio and economic region, so that way you can succeed. People on boards of companies look for CEOs that can achieve this. They can create a persona, not just for themselves, but for their company. They can advance metrics and goals of the company outwardly while potentially doing the exact opposite thing internally to increase their bottom line. That era, that section of the world functions on sociopathy, kind of like Kiryaku's sociopathic tendencies thing. It's the entire way in which you succeed. You cannot be honest in corporate America about everything you do, because the vast majority of the things you do are going to negatively affect large groups of people in different areas that you need support from in order to achieve the financial goals you're looking for, the same thing happens in politics. And that's one of the things that is, again, showing throughout this article, is there's many people who point out that Sam has this uncanny ability

25:47to convince disparate groups of people with different goals and needs that their needs are his needs. I've actually got the direct quote for that, and it leads into some other stuff that we talked about in the original recording too, that we can get into. Altman is not a technical savant, according to many in his orbit, he lacks extensive expertise in coding and machine learning. Multiple engineers recall him misusing or confusing basic technical terms. He built open AI in large part by harnessing other people's money and technical talent. This doesn't make him unique, it makes him a businessman. More remarkable is his ability to convince skittish engineers, investors, and a tech skeptical public that their priorities, even when mutually exclusive, are also his priorities. When such people have tried to hinder his next move, he has often found the words to neutralize them at least temporarily. Usually by the time they lose patience with him, he's got what he needs. Quote, he sets up structures that on paper constrain him in the future, Wayne Wright, the former open AI researcher, said. But then, when the future comes, and it comes time to be constrained, he does away with whatever the structure was. Geez.

26:47I do think it's interesting in relation to a comparison between him and jobs that despite the fact that he is putting on the facade of jobs light and I do find it entertaining that his explanation for why he chooses his costume is to avoid having to make more unnecessary decisions. It's decision fatigue. When in reality, it's because he wants to be the next Steve Jobs, at least in visual consistency. Yeah, also, I don't believe in the whole decision fatigue thing that they talk about because I have a bunch of different shirts, t-shirts, just like this, they're all a good fellow from Target because they're cheap and they fit. The only decision fatigue that goes into it is I look at a shirt, I look at the pants I picked out and I'm like, do these colors clash? No, they don't, cool. Yeah, which is it. What's a little bit more believable is that is what David Lynch described where he would like, oh, I eat the same thing for lunch every day because he just wants that time of where he doesn't have to

27:49think about, what am I going to order for lunch, where am I going to get it from? It's also, it's not the same as like, oh, I'm going to wear the same outfit. I also want to be very clear that that is decision, when I say I don't believe in decision fatigue, what I mean is that I don't believe that's a real thing that happens to people who aren't completely stretched to their limits. Like if you have decisions, if picking out what t-shirt you're going to wear because you have too many colors is stressing you out, that means something else is wrong. That is a symptom, that is not an illness, that is a symptom of something else and you are clearly getting to the edge of sanity. Like that is the point after which if you can't pick out a t-shirt for the day without it stressing you out, consider for yourself. You are this close to breaking. You are that close to a complete full mental break. And maybe that in and of itself is a justification to step down from a position in power that you're withholding. I think it's a justification for the board to forcibly remove you from your position.

28:50Now I will say, but part of the reason I also don't agree that is because I think it is a costume for the character that he is a persona he's trying to get. Oh, especially in Sam's case. Especially in Sam's case as we were describing a lot of people in that area of socio-economic ladder do. However, I think the interesting differentiation between Sam and Steve is Steve was a man of very specific vision often uncompromising, but it was for it was a dual purpose. It was a yes, he wanted to be the best, but at the same time the way to be the best was providing the best user experience and the best product on the market that he could. And his product did not have any chance of bringing catastrophic failures to the entire world. Yeah, he was very eccentric and erratic, and but he was doing that at a, you know, computer and phone company. But he also wasn't doing that at something that has nuclear level ability to. Yeah, and he also consistently proved himself right. His ideas were the best.

29:50Yeah, and he was well Sam. He was a worse successful, not granted, Steve Jobs had his failures, not just personal, but also the best. He also learned from them. He did. And that's the thing is the thing that I struggled to see where Sam is idolizing him and trying to reappropriate the idea of jobs is, ChatGPT is not the iPhone. I can understand your mentality that AI is gonna be revolutionary, but like 405152 are not the iPhone for the iPhone 5. Like these are not overwhelmingly dramatic. It's more like iOS 1, iOS 1.1, iOS 1.2. It's their patch notes, like what we're getting. Highlights, those were not the products, those were not the revolutions. The revolution was the hardware. The revolution was the design and the efficacy. The best you could probably compare it to is when they came out with the iPhone 5, and then they had like the iPhone 5 Pro and the iPhone 5C. Yeah. That were like slightly different with different things they could do,

30:51but they were all the same iOS, the same software, basically the same phone, but marketed differently. Yes. And that's not saying that software can't fulfill the same role that a piece of hardware can, because it can. The point is is that what ChatGPT is, what it is doing and the iterations of it are not as dramatic as I think he would like us to believe, both as he needs us to believe. As he needs us to believe, yes. And I think it's important to recognize that, despite the fact that he wants to be the next Steve Jobs, he is not even close to doing the first step that Steve Jobs took in his career of unveiling Macintosh and even remotely close to the iPhone. Yeah. Also, I just got to point this out too. There's one thing I do use AI4, and I've been open about this since I started, which is transcription. I will use it to transcribe my own work. I'll use it to transcribe other people's podcasts that I can go and pick out quotes more easily. That's been the only reason I've been able to get through this seven-part podcast on the Lost Dutch Girls

31:51in a couple of days while taking notes on it. But there's still, I think people need to understand how basic these models still are. This is a new software. This isn't TurboScribe. This is another one that I tried out, because TurboScribe can't pull from Spotify. This one can. And it took an English language podcast where the title of the episode was in Spanish. And then without me asking it to do so, on the precise setting, one where it's supposed to be as correct as possible, it gave me the entire transcript in Spanish. And I kept asking the AI, why'd you give it to me in Spanish? And it's like, because you didn't provide me in English language transcript, and I'm like, I didn't provide you a transcript at all. That's your job. And it's like, I'm sorry, you have a good point there. If you provide me an English language transcript, I can give it to you in Spanish.

32:52And I'm like, why would I want that? And it's like, I can give you line-by-line translations into English, and I'm like, I don't need translation. I need the transcription. So I emailed them about it. They did get back to me. I haven't responded to them yet. But I eventually had to download the audio through their program. You can't download directly from Spotify, but you can download through their program. And what I mean is that you can't download directly through Spotify to a file on your computer. You can download on Spotify so that it's saved on your computer, but you can't export it. This allows you to export it. So I had to export it, then re-upload it, and then have it do it. And it finally got it right because the title wasn't in Spanish. So AI is nowhere near as far along as they keep trying to convince you it is. The genie is not out of the bottle. Pandora's box is not open, and it can all be stopped now. All before the whole world collapses, although doing so might have some pretty negative effects on the financial markets, which is I'm guessing the next thing that they're going to start threatening when the regulations get more strict.

33:52Is there going to be like, hey guys, if you keep doing this, the company can't move forward. The bubble collapses and the entire world economy goes down the shitter. Well, that's the thing is, I think it's also important to recognize it's just like the internet, just like CGI, just like any new technology. There are appropriate use cases for AI and large language models, like something like a transcription. Yep, something like, because I was never going to pay somebody to sit there transcribing stuff for me. Yes. I was either going to spend more time doing it myself or run it through a program. And frankly, that is not that much different than Google Translate. Like this is one of those super minor AI uses, where I don't see that as functionally different from machine learning. Yep. You know, it's just, it's the kind of thing that we've also had things like Dragon for decades, like dictation software. This is just a different application of dictation software instead of running it through like direct voice to text.

34:55It's taking a audio file to text. It's no different than dictation. And also using it as like a advanced version of a search engine or some form of personal assistant makes sense. Yeah, it sometimes can be good at compiling sources. Yeah, that's the thing is if it's providing you links and then you go back and check to make sure that's the problem. That's the thing is that a lot of the times it's like, you know, citing legal cases that don't exist or citing legal cases that don't actually say what it said it said. Now this is the thing, lawyers are getting caught for that now. Oh, and that's the thing, that's where it is an imperfect technology that still requires human oversight. Yep. You can't, like, just as you, you can't rely on a Chatchy PT or another form of AI as if it was an employee because you have to be able to yourself check the work and make sure that it is correct because if you don't, you are liable for that because you're the one using it. And Tyra, there have been over the last year a number of companies that have had to deal with the fact that Claude hallucinated numbers, like sales numbers and they were operating based off of that. And all it would have taken was one accountant.

35:57And this is going through and be like, wait a minute, that doesn't work. This is what I said three years ago that I was concerned about AI with was that and we are seeing it more and more now. And I'm just going to say it, I've called it, people are going to start using it so frequently that it's going to, you were going to send it, spreadsheets and emails back and forth through each other and no human actually looks at. It's just AI being fed things back and forth to one another and then deals are going to be made, contracts are going to be signed, things are going to happen that have no human oversight but people say that it does. And then when push comes to shove and the time hits and somebody finally looks at something and says, hey, you owe me $86 million because of this thing that you said and then suddenly people have to go back through and realize, wait a second, we promise things that are impossible and then suddenly who's fault is it? Who's liable? Who's getting fired? Who's getting sued? Like that is where the real economic concern is going to be. And that won't get corrected or prevented until people's lives are ruined and it'll be too late for them. Hopefully it'll be regulation after that

36:58but there'll be a cost to not doing that right out of the deal. And also we have the inshitification of intelligence whereas I can't remember if it was Zuckerberg or Altman. I was Zuckerberg that specifically said that they are looking for the future to have intelligence be a commodity. Yeah, so. Altman has said something very similar. Yeah, where essentially the idea is that people being capable of logic and reasoning and skills are going to be less and less common because AI is going to be more and more used so people are just going to rely on that. And the few at the top who can actually do like math or writing are going to have the cream of the crop picks of whatever they want to do in life and just the rest of the mass is beneath them will essentially be serfs to those who are actually intelligent and capable of skill and reasoning. Everything I was worried about, CRISPR doing AI is doing in a way that's worse. Because at least the things with CRISPR you edit somebody's genes. That person is made to be super smart, super athletic, super attractive.

38:01When that person then goes and has kids, those kids are going to have the genes. The genes will eventually disperse through the gene pool and while you will have a period of time and potentially a permanent situation where there's an upper class and an underclass, I over time the genes will diffuse throughout the population and it will probably lead to a situation where that upper class multiplies while the underclass shrinks. That is unless they just stop normal reproduction altogether. That's true. Now here's the thing. The only way that world works is if you do have AI and robots handling all the low down stuff so that people up at the top don't have to do anything. So I think that these things are probably working in tandem but CRISPR alone is nowhere near as scary as AI alone is especially because with CRISPR at least the people who have the better genes would in fact be superior like genetically to other people which getting into dangerous water there. In this situation you've got people who aren't superior to anybody who are just assholes who happen to have the right place the right time

39:02who are controlling everything. Like I'm sorry, I don't need the guy who was getting swarollies in high school to be in charge of my data. I was getting shoved into lockers in middle school. I don't want to be in charge of somebody's data. So I would rather not have the absolute fucking losers like Sam Altman who clearly never had friends in charge of things because they tend to take that out on people. You know that's not supposed to be as insulting to the people in our audience who were also bullied in high school like I was as it probably was but we all were bullied. I just really hate Sam Altman. And I do want to get back really quickly to this thing about him lying because as I was saying earlier the thing about him getting fired from Y-combinator but 10-cleaned and get fired from Y-combinator. Well the thing is on one occasion Graham told Y-combinator colleagues that prior to his removal, Sam had been lying to us all the time. That is the man who recruited him. That is his mentor who pulled him in and said, this guy's the next big thing who goes on to tell his colleagues.

40:04You know what? I picked the wrong guy. That guy's dishonest. Shouldn't have done that, oopsies. And then I do think that it's also important to recognize that Sam Altman knows how dangerous everything is and he's still doing it anyway and he keeps disregarding safety actively on purpose. Where you know back in 2015 he's writing to Elon Musk. He says he warned the technology should not be dominated by a promise he can make seeking medical corporation. It's gonna happen anyway. It seems like it would be good for some other than the Google to do it first. Safety should be a first-last requirement. Obviously we comply with in aggressively support all regulation. And then he proceeds to do none of that. In fact, he proceeds to lie about doing it and dismantle the existing structure repeatedly. And I think that it's also worth mentioning that while Ronan Farrow does do the thing you would expect him to do being as he's a journalist for the New Yorker of refusing to let Elon Musk have anything. He tries to make it out to look like Elon Musk

41:07was also trying to become CEO of OpenAI and turn it into a for-profit. What clearly was happening based on the things he even included here is that the other board members probably led by Sam Altman wanted to turn this into a profit-seeking corporation. And Elon Musk basically said, if you're gonna make it profit-seeking, I wanna be CEO because I'm the one who put up all the money. He's been sinking millions of dollars to this. Largely funding it billions by himself. By largely by himself. And if anybody- He said I'd be the person who should be the CEO in that situation, it's him because he's the one funding it and the one that, at least at this point, has much more- If CEO experienced it, what's that? What he literally said, I don't have the exact quote right in front of me, but it was something along the lines of guys either go to your own thing or OpenAI remains a non-profit. Otherwise, I'm just a fool who's providing free money to a startup because he didn't have a stake in OpenAI. Nobody had a stake in it. It was a non-profit.

42:07I was gonna quote up a pretty much got it. Yeah, so that's, I mean, it's frustrating that we're at a point where even when you're writing an article about a bad person and the people who tried to stop that bad person, your political positions and your distaste for Elon Musk, who I don't like either gets in the way of honesty. I think the problem is that if you read through this document, something becomes very clear, Pharaoh's not being clear about it, but there is something that's very obvious, which is that out of all the AI and tech CEOs, Sam Altman is a uniquely evil person. Like the rest of them, sure, can't be trusted, Sam Altman is a uniquely evil person. And I had said this on the last attempt at recording this, but I genuinely don't think we've seen this combination of somebody with this much evil in their soul and this kind of evil in their soul, where it's genuinely sociopathic.

43:08They don't care about anyone but themselves. And we know this because Sam is talking about this future where he'll be able to upload his consciousness to a robot and be able to live forever. So it's not even about leaving a legacy. It's about what's best for me when I'm in the robot world. Yeah, that's the thing we've had. We've had deeply evil and powerful people. We've never had one that is bent on uploading himself to digitally and making himself immortal, essentially Hitler had to die at some point. That's what I said in the last one is Hitler was a horrifically evil person. I mean, just such a clear lack of conscious or the, and compassion, Sam goes from Al Zedong. Sam goes for a lot of dictators throughout history. Stalin. But at Stalin, I would put up there with Sam Altman, honestly. Yeah, yeah. Because I don't think Stalin had any intention of doing what was right for the Russians. But again, he had to die eventually. And eventually the world was going to be rid of Stalin at some point.

44:08Well, yeah, Stalin. Hitler, Mao, all of these people, at the very least, you can make an argument that they were trying to do what they thought was best for their people. Sam Altman is only trying to do what's best for Sam Altman, no matter how badly it affects the rest of us. And he's said as much. He's gotten up there on podcasts and said things like, you know, we're quickly moving towards a future where somebody will be able to take your likeness and make any kind of image or video they want with it without your consent. And that's just something society is going to have to adjust to. No, Sam, I would rather you be in a shallow grave than have to just adjust to that. I would rather you be drawn in quartered. I would flay you myself, given the opportunity to do it without being punished. Like, in Tetris. No. In Roblox. Oh, like, I have a, here's the thing. There is a darkness within Sam Altman's soul but he is not remotely trying to press down and to, to restrain.

45:09He's just letting it come out and saying it in a cheery voice. I, on the other hand, have a darkness in my soul that I am trying to restrain, but it gives me very creative ideas when I can't sleep. So I guess what I'm saying is, Sam Altman, you would or we don't want to cross paths with me. Yeah, like I said, if I had a terminal illness, man. Oh, you're high in birth personas. Well, I think this is a good time to bring us to. There is a, what was the thing I said in high school that one time, or might have been college, there is a savagery in the heart of the white man on parallel by anything else. Oh, yeah. Yeah, Sam, here's the thing. You may look white, but you're... BEEP. Coming back from the technical difficulties because I said something I shouldn't have, I think this is a good time to jump a little bit forward in the article to, well, it's actually really a little bit backward to the 2023 ousting. Oh, yeah. Because I think there's a lot of interesting information there and there is a theme that occurs that I would like to discuss

46:11that I did on the last attempt to record this that I have not brought up yet. Also, we do need to get to the country strategy. Yes, we do. That's gotta get in there too, but continue. I love the one junior engineer who's like, this is fucking insane. I love the guy who answered Pharaoh's phone call and he was like, yeah, so what's the state of the existential safety measures and the researcher was like, what's existential safety? That's not like a thing. Yeah. Do you wanna go over a little bit about what was happening in 2023 with OpenAI and Sam Altman? Just kinda lead us in there? Yeah, I mean, the basics are that... Since... Oh, Sam Altman has been working in the tech industry since 2008. 2023 rolls around, so this is 15 years into his career. And he is the CEO of OpenAI. He has already sold a company that totally failed for millions of dollars somehow. He has turned OpenAI into a for-profit company after founding it as a nonprofit and taking millions, billions even from Elon Musk,

47:12who, you know, back then was at least still trying to do the right thing. I think a lot of people have a tendency to think about Elon Musk post 2022. You gotta remember, Elon Musk pre-2022 was the darling of the left. They loved him. He was considered like the only billionaire that was like seriously concerned with the environment. He was the only billionaire it was okay to like. And then obviously Trump loses the election. Musk feels like that wasn't legitimate and he gets behind Trump and things go the way they go. But yeah, so back when it starts, it's Musk. It's Altman, it's a few other people. Musk is doing most of the funding. By 2023, it's a for-profit company that is beginning to work on military contracts and really not doing any of the things it said it was going to do. For example, like trying to bring about a post-scarcity utopia, which were Sam's exact words. Unfortunately, AI agent is never going to be able to end scarcity. That just doesn't make sense.

48:12You can't end something that is a, you know, functional requirement, but it had a definitional aspect of Earth. So the data and we'll just tell the AI to make more coal. And then we'll make more coal. That's the thing about all the utopian TV. Star Trek universe only works because they have replicators. But yeah, so in 2023, this is all starting to reach ahead as the people who had been with the company since 2015, who had been, like, you know, some of the people who had come along for the ride since then, they all reach a point where they're all agreeing with what Paul Graham said, which is Sam had been lying to us all the time. Sam cannot be trusted. Sam is a sociopath. He's a pathological liar. This is not somebody who wants, I want to have their finger on the button. And it gets to the point where the board kind of collectively, and I forget which one was it, Suzcecaver, who was kind of leading the charge on that. I believe so, please. Yeah. The board comes together and they fire in. They call him while he's at like a horse race

49:14or something, an F1 race. Yep, F1 race. And they're like, you're no longer the CEO of the open AI effective immediately. And Sam plays this off as it was this horrible shocking moment. Oh my God, I was in a, I was staring into the abyss. I was in a trance. No, you weren't, you jackass. You were all, you were scheming from the moment it happened because you don't have emotions. The only thing that you might have felt was, you know, concerned that the world was crumbling around you, but it probably didn't last long. You didn't feel sad. You didn't feel betrayed. You were betraying everybody the whole way along. This is a really good quote from that to that point. In a tense call after the firing, the board pressed him to acknowledge his pattern of deception. Quote, this is just so fucked up, he said repeatedly. I can't change my personality. Altman says that he does not recall the exchange. A board member offered a different interpretation of his statement. What it meant was, okay, yes. So then Altman says after saying, I can't change my personality, it's possible I meant something like, I try to be a unifying force.

50:17I try to be a conflict, or I can be too much of a conflict avoider. The board member interpreted it as, quote, what it meant was, I have this trait where I lie to people and I'm not gonna stop. And here's the thing, if the personality trait that people are criticizing about you, the one you say I can't change, is that you're a pathological liar. Sorry, if you can't change that, you don't get to be on the board. You don't get to be in charge of this kind of thing. If you're a pathological liar and you wanna go somewhere that's rewarded, go work and use car sales. Run for office. Run for office. But that's the downside is that, as I was mentioning earlier, being a pathological liar is a desirable trait for people in this. Oh no, yes, I fully agree with you on that. But the point is, you know, that, I can't change my personality is not an excuse for why you shouldn't be fired. It's actually yet another reason you should be fired and you should be blacklisted for ever working this ever again. Because this takes are so much higher than another, any other part of corporate America,

51:17or even many other parts of tech. Like, you know, this is one area where his Manhattan project thing actually is kind of true, where this technology has the same, a similar capacity as nuclear energy, for danger if it's not handled the right way. And I would say that you need a much, you need to meet a much higher threshold of integrity to do this than I would expect if somebody who makes laptops or somebody who, you know, does any other technological thing that we rely on in our... So I also think it's important to point this out. I referenced this earlier, but after the firing, as he was in his war room with his little shadow board, at one point, Altman conveyed to Mira Morati, who had given Sutsky for material for his memos and was serving as the interim CEO of OpenAI in that period, that is allies, and again, this is Altman himself saying this to Morati. His allies were going all out and finding bad things to damage her reputation, as well of those of others

52:18who had moved against him, according to someone with knowledge of the conversation. Altman says he does not recall the exchange, because of course he doesn't. But when you have this many people accusing you of the same thing over and over again, when those people's interests do not overlap and they don't all work together, there is only one reasonable conclusion, which is that you are precisely what they say you are. I'm trying to go through some of the other ones here. Yeah, I feel like if everybody in my life, everyone I interact with is telling me, you have this major character flaw that makes us, not only not wanna work with you, but think you are a bad person that cannot be trusted. I'd have to sit there and go, maybe I need to go to the third. Maybe I need to look at this. I do also like that. Altman has this story about being beaten up for being gay in St. Louis when he was 16,

53:18but he didn't report the incident and did not wanna give anyone details because he said that a fuller telling would make me look like I'm manipulative or playing for sympathy. Shocking moment of lucidity, Sam Altman. And like, listen, I understand it's not something that you wanna talk about much, but to bring it up in a context that makes it clear you're bringing it up in order to get sympathy and manipulate people, which is what he did. That is crazy. He will tell people to their face that he's manipulating them and they're like, mm-hmm. Yeah. I mean, where was the other one with him and, am a day? I forget that's one of the few things I did not. It was like halfway through. I'm trying to look for the room. While you're looking for that, I wanna bring up the, oh yeah, also just, he later, this is from when he was starting the company. He later joked, I stalked Ilia. Yes. Joked. Going to the...

54:18Also, on his way to his meeting with Amade, he texted him to say his uber got in a crash, which I don't believe. He was probably just running 10 minutes late because he was running 10 minutes late and he decided to say something that would, you know, make him seem sympathetic. God, it's just... Going to the other point of the Alston 2023 though. While all of that is happening, there are a variety of things that are occurring within the board and also within Sam Alman's home, as he is attempting to get his way back into OpenAI. And one of the most important things I think that's in the article is the recognition of how politics and media are interwoven into tech. And that is displayed through Ryan Conway. We was one of the investors in OpenAI. Learned of Alton's ousting while he was in the middle of having lunch with Nancy Pelosi. And in the middle of this entire time, there was a company called Thrive that was a venture capitalist firm

55:18that was going to be investing into OpenAI. And the person who founded Thrive is Josh Kushner. Who is... Who is the brother of Jared Kushner? Brother of Jared Kushner, who for those who are not aware, is Trump's son-in-law. And he learned of the whole thing that was happening with Sam Alman's ousting. After leaving a meeting with music producer Rick Rubin. And the reason that I bring you the same Rick Rubin is low and behold. And the reason I bring this up is because the fact that an investor with OpenAI is having lunch with Nancy Pelosi and the fact that an investor in OpenAI or a potential investor in OpenAI is having a meeting with music producer Rick Rubin. Just perchance on the at the time in which Sam Alman is ousted from OpenAI in 2023. Is a reminder that there are a lot of interconnected webs and weaves of people that are in the upper echelons

56:20of society that we don't think about that we wouldn't even imagine really even converse other than maybe an award show or something like that. And clearly even just from these little, little, little, little, little things here, like the lunch and like the meeting. It's important to remember that tech, money, politics and media are not separate entities. They are niches that people in the upper echelons of society dip their toes into. They may specialize in one, but that does not mean that they are separate from the others. And it's important to remember that somebody who's prominent in politics, somebody who's prominent in media, somebody who's prominent in tech, somebody who's prominent in finance, often knows a lot of people in the other areas. And that means they often have a lot of common interests and often if things work out right have a lot of alignment about things. Now keep in mind, this is not a conspiracy,

57:21this is not a cabal, this is just people with varying interests with a lot of capacity to do the things they wanna do. Aligning on goals, usually money. And that's why you end up having people like Jeffrey Epstein because there are people out there who figure out what the confluence of those people is and figure out how to exploit it. Yeah, it's not this, yeah, it's not this, QAnon thing, it's just the fact that these are all people that are, they all like money and they're all really fucked up. And so that when their interests salon, if you ever wondered how Nancy Pelosi beats the S&P 500, it's constantly talking with business. Having lunch with billionaires. Yeah, I mean, the fact that Nancy Pelosi has not been put in prison for insider trading is probably the greatest black mark on this country that's ever happened. I mean, people that could prosecute or also inside your trade. I know. And I think I do hope that the media does not let this thing about the Delta Force operator who bet on Madridero being removed on Polly Market,

58:22being arrested for it. I really hope they don't let that go. I really hope that they hold Congress's feet to the fire and say, how dare you prosecute somebody for doing something that you people do. And at least that guy was actually putting his life on the line. He was betting on himself to not get shot. Yeah. Well, hopefully if there's anything good that comes out of him getting convicted, it's that there is now new legal precedent. That's true. I don't think he should be convicted unless they're going to convict Congress people. Well, that's the thing is that without legal precedent, because the biggest thing, it is illegal. Well, but that's the thing is with something like Polly Market, it's not considered insider training because it's gambling. Right. Technically. Yeah. So that's yeah, I guess I do wonder if he'll be convicted then he will likely be convicted so that they can start convicting other people maybe using things like Polly Market and stuff like that. That thing is like will will Congress let that happen? Because then they're screwed too. Good question. Because a lot of people inside of the current administration that are doing things like exactly what this Delta Force member did for things like what's happening in Venezuela. What's happening in Iran?

59:23They are profiting. Usually the crypto off of decisions that they are making in foreign and domestic policy. Yeah, but I do want to get back to something in here too, because I don't I think it's important to understand also how far back the concerns about Altman go, because it's basically from the moment the company starts. The he and Musk agree to start the company in late 2015. Gets organized in 2016. Things are really underway in 2017. And the big break that seems to get them to chat GPT, which is their first actual product, is actually Google. Google coming up with something they call the transformer, which becomes basically the baseline of the technology that's eventually used to create chat GPT. So it's also important to recognize that not only has Sam Altman been lying the whole time, but the only breakthrough his company actually had came from Google doing something. The company they were specifically trying. Specifically we're trying to stop. So I basically say I'm Altman is pathetic in every possible way.

1:00:26I mean, what a complete and utter failure of a person who is skating by on his ability to convince other people to spend their hard earned money. It's kind of like Marx. But I, yeah, he mooched off angles his entire life. Got a degree from the Ploma Mill. But yeah, so what we know is that by 2017, in 2017, this is just two years after this concept comes into existence, about a dozen of OpenAI's top engineers held a series of secret meetings to discuss whether OpenAI's founders, including Brockman and Altman, could be trusted. Two years. They don't even have a product yet. They haven't even, the company is barely doing anything yet. And they are already like, can we trust the guy at the top? I love when Altman was like, this was the best job in the world until we released Chad Gbt. It's like, yeah, I bet you had so much fun spending Musk's money when you didn't have to ship any code for it. It's like, this is the best job in the world up until I had to do something.

1:01:27Yeah, it's at one, an employee was reminded of a sketch by the British comedy to Amitual and Webb, in which a Nazi soldier on the Eastern Front in a moment of clarity asks, are we the baddies? Then in 2018, Amitase starts questioning the founders' mode as more openly and says things like, everything was a rotating set of schemes to raise money. I felt like what OpenAI needed was a clear statement of what it would do, what it would not do and how its existence would make the world better. Now, of course, they did have an issue in statement to ensure that artificial intelligence benefits all of humanity. But these engineers were beginning to wonder what that meant to the people at the top. Because as a statement, a normal person is gonna read that and go, oh, okay, they're trying to make things better for everyone. They're trying to reduce suffering. They're trying to increase resource access. They're trying to make food cheaper. They're trying to make medicine better. Normal people are gonna think those things, but when you've got people who are attending events like the WEF's conventions in Davos, where they're discussing how we need to reduce the number

1:02:28of people who are alive in order to make the world better, you start to understand that make the world better means different things for different people. Yeah, this is exactly what I brought up on the livestream after the penhurt's hearing, where these people are fully aware that their schemes cost human lives and they are okay with that. They're sitting there going, yeah, people are gonna die and what we're doing is just so important. And that's something I plan on saying at the next hearing is I'm just gonna be very straight up to Craig and Mark and be like, look, if you do this, people will die. Like not just from AI overall, but from this specific data center, people are going to die and that blood is going to be on your hands and those people will be your neighbors. Are you okay with that? I want it on record, I want a response. Are you okay with people dying because you wanted this data center here? Yeah, and people that they were on hearing on a first name basis with that they were having a friendly, I guess I can't really call it banter, but with like, not just your neighbors and the abstracts. I will say a part of my goal for that next one

1:03:29is to do anything in my power to reduce their opportunities to play nice. So I'm gonna be talking to people outside during the protests before the hearing being like, they're going to try and make you feel like they're one of you. They're not, don't let them do it. Respond to any kindness with division, respond to any attempt to connect with you by telling them off. These are not your friends, they may be your neighbors, but they are currently your enemies and you need to treat them as such. That's the thing, is it like it's not like, oh, your neighbors in the abstracts since they're gonna die, it's like it's people that you know personally. And they are having the stick where they're disarming and they're friendly to these people and speaking on a first name basis, but they're gonna get these people killed and the research is unambiguous, everybody knows this. Yes. It's not something you can say, oh well, I'm not educated on the risk. It's all out there, it's being documented actively. It is, we speak and we'll continue to do so. It is no longer a question of if these data centers are going to cause harm to people,

1:04:31like measurable physical harm. It is a question of when. And what the data centers and the boards are trying to do is get these things installed and get their payouts before that is proven because once the thing's there, well then you're talking about remediation, then you're talking about improving the system. If you don't get the thing built until after the studies come out showing that this increases cancer, that this causes kids to have birth defects, that it is causing cows to produce less milk, that one's proven, that it's creating these heat islands, that one's proven. If you get it done before then, it's a lot harder to get rid of the data center. Yeah. But what that hearing and what this thing I'm about to read off really illustrate is this is not a partisan thing. This isn't, it's not like left coded or right coded to be pro or anti this. Case in point, I'm gonna be quoting from the article here, Altman has long supported Democrats, quote,

1:05:32I'm very suspicious of powerful autocrats, telling a story of fear to Yang up on the week. In 2016 he endorses Hillary, he calls Trump an unprecedented threat to America, which is ironic considering he's an unprecedented threat to the entire world. Correct. In 2020, he donates the Democratic Party into the Biden Victory Fund. During the Biden administration, he meets with the White House half a dozen times and he helps develop a lengthy executive order laying out the first federal regime of... I was talking about this in the original recording. Oh, other guardrails for AI. When Biden signed it, he called it a good start, right? Then he does this thing about demolishing the structure. He set up that I read out earlier. In 2024, with Biden's poll numbers slipping, Altman's rhetoric began to shift. Quote, I believe that America is going to be fine no matter what happens in this election, he said. Again, he's calling this guy an unprecedented threat to America and eight years later, he's saying, quote, I have really changed my perspective on him. I wish I'd done more of my own thinking. Which is incredible because even for Republicans, they are considerably less supportive of Trump

1:06:33than they were in 2016. Yeah, like his support has been slipping and slipping and slipping and the only thing that ever increases it is when the Democrats do something equally evil or when somebody shoots at him. Yeah. Which by the way, oh my God, I don't think any of our viewers are this stupid, but these are not fake assassination attempts. That is the most conspiratorial bullshit I have ever heard. These are not fake. These are real assassination attempts. They are done by people who have, who match the description of a person who would try to shoot the president, whether that president is Trump or Biden. They are clearly the kinds of people who would do this. This is not something that would be staged and as I explained somewhere else, the margin of error on the shot that hit his ear was solo that you would not hire anybody to take that shot, especially not with a red dot site at 150 yards.

1:07:36I mean, you're barely gonna be able to see the man's head. If you question the, where was the location to have again? What was the name? Butler. Yeah. Butler, if you question the Butler shooting, research what MOA is. Yeah. It's very obvious that what happened there was somebody mist. Yes. In fact, based on the bullet trajectory, he didn't mist Trump turned his head. Yes. And that's why that's that's the thing that I keep trying to remind people is like, look, I know that you want to think this is all some grand conspiracy because you have the exact same thing on the right. But if you were telling people their conspiracy theorists for asking, how did Wisconsin go from here to suddenly right here and suddenly Biden's winning? If you called those people conspiracy theorists, if you called anybody who questioned the integrity of the election in 2020, a conspiracy theorist, you do not get to sit here and act like this whole Trump being shot thing is staged in a conspiracy. That's the thing is that Trump does so many

1:08:39reprehensible things that are so well documented and covered that they don't need additional evidence. You have no shortage of material. We have no shortage of material to criticize him on. You don't need to make up things that he's not doing to make him more evil or more of a bad president. Yeah. He already has a bad president in my opinion. It would also be a lot more believable if there weren't people constantly saying that he's the next Hitler and we need to kill him, which is just constant rhetoric. Why did they shoot that guy that we're all telling people to shoot? Like yes, if you in the media tell the average person repeatedly for eight years straight, we're now coming up on 10 years straight, that Donald Trump is an existential threat to America and the only thing you can possibly do to save us is kill him. People are going to do that. We're talking about approximately a hundred million people who are anti-Trump in this country. At least 75 million who voted against him. You think that there's not three people in there

1:09:40who are crazy enough to do it? They're going to be desperate enough? Yeah, it's so again, it's not a conspiracy, it's not staged, it's not weird that this latest guy managed to get into the hotel with a gun. He was staying at a room in the hotel, he came downstairs, he did not have a ticket to the event, it was not in a secure location, and no, Trump did not stage a shooting just so he could build a ballroom that's going to get built anyway. That's just him like, oh, serious thing happened, I'm going to try to figure out a way to make it into something that I want. Yeah, will he... Trump does that all the time, it's not a conspiracy, he just does that. Will he take advantage? Yes, both sides are very much on the never-let-a-good crisis go to waste train, but to get back to this right here. Last point on that, in terms of conspiracy versus not conspiracy, also for everybody that has their arms in the air about the ballroom, it's not just a ballroom, like every time that they have retrofitted the White House, all of these surface level things are just a visual representation

1:10:43of what's going on in the foundation. It is an increase in security and data collection center underneath the ballroom. The entire point is that the ballroom is a cover. This isn't a conspiracy. This is how architecture works at the White House. Yeah, I mean... Something that's been reported on. This is not like... So stop getting upset about the fact that it's a ballroom. Is it God-y? Yes. Does it seem unnecessary? Yes. Everything about its god-iness and unnecessary is to distract you from what is being built beneath it. Let's be realistic. Because that's more of a Obama that built the ballroom, they all would have been cheering. Like, let's be so honest about this. I think it would have been smaller and probably less guilty. It probably would have had less gold and been slightly smaller, but they still would have been cheering for it. They still would be like, oh my gosh, what a great place to entertain foreign dignitaries. And the reality is, though, is that there have been improvements to the White House over the last 100 years, like this. Oh, the wing it destroyed was less than 100 years old.

1:11:46It was built during the FDR administration. And that's the thing is that that was built during FDR to have a bunker under it. And a bunker under it. And the West Wing has been like changed up. There have been total re-constructions of like the interior security and also the HVAC and stuff like that. Like, it's just usually, it doesn't get covered that much in the media. If you're interested in this, read a book called The Residence. It goes into, it's mostly about the staff, but it goes into a detail on the fact that presidents and first ladies have lots of freedom in what they do to the building. And so this is very big and garish and overt, but it is not technically unique in the history of the ways that any random president or first lady has gone. I know somebody, we're changing this, we're tearing down that wall and we're doing that. I know somebody on the team that exists there to redress the White House for each due administration. Every time my president comes into the White House, they get to do a full redecoration. And I know a member of that team that is there to ensure that a, the redecoration goes correctly and b,

1:12:48they don't undo something overtly historic that can't be changed. There are limitations to what they can and cannot do in the White House. It's the main building you think of when you think of the White House is the only part that's remotely original. Like, everything else was added later. And frankly, that was also technically not original because it was burned down by the British. Yes. And also, yeah, it's... This whole diatribe is not to defend Trump. It's to say, you gotta lay off the conspiracy theories because they're all just a distraction. You have to have, provide yourself the context to understand when you see something in new news, whether or not it is being sensationalized or not, because changes to the interior and the construction of the White House are normal. And ask yourself, what I, no matter what the news is, about a president, ask yourself, or something congresses, ask yourself, if my side did that, would I still be mad? And if the answer is no, you're falling into tribalism. Again, we are having, later this week,

1:13:50the state senator for our area, Katie Mooth, who is a Democrat. We are not Democrats. I'm registered as an independent. I don't know about you guys. I am as well. I attend a registered Republican during a primary season to vote for the most libertarian Republican. We have that stupid law where independence can't. Yeah. So I'm not allowed to vote in either a primary. I have to choose a party if I want to vote and one, and I feel like I have more power. Well, I like voting for Republicans. I like to get a better way that, when I lived in Minnesota, they did it where it was still, you could only vote for one party, but they didn't ask your registration. You just got a ballot that had columns and you just picked one. So I could, I could as somebody who's more independent, identifying, just go to the ballot and be like, all right, which primary do I care about more? I do understand the validity of closed primaries, because otherwise you could have people going in and voting to get the worst candidate from the other side up, which of course, means they can't vote for their own side, but that gets in the new one situations where it's like, well, the Democratic candidate's an incumbent and a clear front runner. Let's make sure they have the weakest Republican

1:14:50to fight against. That's just one of those like, high trust versus low trust society, exactly, and we do not live in a high trust society. So, but yeah, the point of all of this is like, just in general, when it comes to anything political, because this is a quasi-political episode of the show going through all of this stuff, ask yourself that question. Any time the media reports something, if my side did this, would I be upset? And if the answer is no, you are probably having a knee jerk reaction to it being the red guy or the blue guy doing it rather than your guy. Yeah, and to cap this off, this is something, just a last point on Trump and Altman, this is something that's not conspiracy-torial at all. Altman donated a million dollars to Trump's inaugural front after he won. And then on his first day in office, Trump repealed Biden's executive order regulating AI. Yeah, and you don't need to make up a conspiracy to hate Trump and Altman. They're just doing corrupt shit right in front of you. And it's not, and like I said, it's not ideological because he was doing the same stuff with Pelosi and Biden. He's just playing...

1:15:51He's recognizing that what he needs to do is be on the side of whoever is in power. And this isn't something unique to Altman, this is something that everybody with money and corporate America does. Yeah, there's a reason that billionaires, if you look back through their history, often change parties. It's because they're just trying to get the best in with whoever is in power. And this is one situation where, frankly, I'm disgusted with Donald Trump for this. I am impressed with the Biden ad bit. I am grateful to the Biden ad bit for preventing this from happening as soon as it could have. For telling Altman straight to his face, no, you're not building chips in the UAE. No, you're not building data centers in Saudi Arabia. This is all staying here if it's happening. That was the right thing to do. Biden's administration was far better on AI. And to be honest, given how bad that has gotten, I do wonder if I should have voted for the left. Like, I didn't vote. I looked at it and I was like, I don't like either of these people.

1:16:53But now I'm wondering, you know, should I have tried to keep the left in power just so that they wouldn't do this? But then again, I don't think Kamala Harris would have said no. So I think we were all screwed no matter what happened and we'd be in a much better place if you guys didn't care as much about where Aleppo is. It didn't have to be this way. It didn't have to be this way. We could have had the Johnson. Oh, you know, I want the Johnson. I want the Johnson. I want the Johnson in my White House. There's still time. What if Jeb went yellow? Pfft. Pfft. Dude, this will give me back, Bush. What? What W back in? I don't, put W back in, let him vibe. Here's the thing. If all of his decisions need to be made on the golf course, he's serious and wants to amend the Constitution or remove term limits. Trump Obama. No, no, no, I do not want to repeal that amendment. No, neither do I. But if he does it, that opens the door way. I would rather put a janitor in the office. I would rather reduce it to one term.

1:17:55I agree. Then give it three. I think reelection is one of the worst things about our political system. There was a statistic from the late 90s, early 2000s and it's more now that a US congressman basically has to raise 10 grand a week from the moment they're sworn in in order just to fund their reelection campaign. So when someone goes to Congress or to the presidency, they are not thinking about what to do in any given moment until they are term limited or they decide they're gonna retire. They're thinking about, oh shit, I need to be worried about my reelection already. And so that's, it's something that I understand why it was instituted, it should not exist. Realistically, the only way to fix this country is to get rid of term limits for everybody in politics and reduce the power of the president to veto power. Put term limits in practice. Yes, yes, yes. And reduce the executive branch's power to primarily with the president having veto power. Remove, and I know this is gonna be controversial, remove executive orders entirely

1:18:55because then that forces Congress to do its job. Yeah, or just make it so that executive orders that aren't constitutional are immediately challenged. Like every executive order should be subject to an immediate review by a federal court. Um, you know, probably this Supreme Court, but at the very least an appellate court or something like that. That is another, like flaw if you will is that like this report can't just review stuff. It needs to get brought. Yeah, I think Congress should introduce an amendment to the constitution that says, and it, you know, an executive order, any executive order by any president faces an immediate review by a, like, a portion of the judicial branch or something like that, or that both the judicial and the Congress have to sign off on it. Um, if it is outside of the executive's constitutional enumerated powers. Yeah, because that's the big problem. It's a lot of the times it is an executive order is within his enumerated powers. And therefore it's just the president acting as the president, which is why it should be, you know, kind of, yeah, that's like difficult. That's the only downside is that the enumerated powers

1:19:55have expanded drastically in the last 100 years. And a lot of the organizations within the executive branch, yeah, that especially we're started by FDR. And it's a favorite guy. Oh, yeah, and expanded upon since then that granted. Some of those things are good. Some of those things are not good. And all of them have way too much power. And the president has way too much power all of them. It's like, we're not your party. Somebody came up with a way to, you know, just add a layer to our government and maintain everything in a way that works. But no, nobody wanted the grand principality of Long Pennsylvania to exist. So here we are. Realistic, getting back to the AI. So I want to get back to this important part and then to the country's thing. Yes. I have a written down. So back in 2017, we already have members of the board meeting together to say, we don't trust Sam Altman and this Brockman guy, Greg or whatever his name was. We feel like we're the Nazis in this situation and we're making everything worse.

1:20:56And that's in secret during 2017, but by 2018, Amadez starts questioning the mode is more openly. Says the thing about everything being a scheme to raise money. They need a clear statement. Nobody can agree on what actually benefits humanity. But in early 2018, he started drafting a charter for the company and in weeks of conversations with Altman and Brockman, advocated for its most radical clause. If a value align safety conscious project came close to building an AGI before open AI did, the company would stop competing with and start assisting the project. Or in other words, what he calls the merge and assist clause. Now this basically meant that open AI was going to stick to its guns on what its original purpose was, which was being the company that got to AGI first so that they could make sure the right people were in charge and that it wouldn't be used for evil. And again, 2018, and he has to add this that early because it's already clear that this company is not going to be doing what it said it was going to be doing

1:21:56unless it's forced to do so. So he has all these conversations. He insists on this being added in. And then they start in the spring of 2019, negotiating a billion dollar investment from Microsoft. And Amade was the one leading company safety team and he helped pitch a deal to Bill Gates that basically included this provision where Microsoft could not stop them from the merge and assist clause. But other people at the company, Reed Sam Altman, were concerned that if they gave, if they had this clause, Microsoft would pull its investment. So Amade presented Adam with an Alton with an ranked list of safety demands, placing the preservation of the merge and assist clause at the very top, Alton then agreed that he would make sure that was in there. But in June, as the deal was closing, Amade discovered that a provision granting Microsoft the power to block open AI from any mergers had been added, which meant that basically the entire safety plan was invalidated because that was chief among them.

1:22:57That was the thing that was holding it together to make sure that they did not sacrifice safety for any reason, for speed. Basically, we can't sacrifice safety for speed. So if anyone else gets their first, we're gonna come in and we're going to try and make sure that it remains safe. Because the usual thing in this situation for those who aren't business inclined is, we're all gonna race to the new breakthrough in this burgeoning field as fast as we can, and we're gonna patent everything that we do. So that way, we can come out on top once this reaches, once this reaches fruition, essentially. And these people were saying, admirably, no, we're gonna do what's in the best interest of society. And to be clear, Amade is the one who went on to found anthropic. So we're gonna essentially sacrifice some future profits that we know we could probably make in order to cooperate with the rest of the tech community on this, and that went probably. Yeah, and my favorite thing about this entire section, potentially my favorite thing about the entire article comes right after this, because Amade confronts Altman.

1:24:01And Altman denies that the provision Amade just read in the contract that says Microsoft can block any mergers. Sam just says that's not there. So then Amade with the text in hand reads it out loud to him. Altman then denies again, that that's in the contract. So Amade has to go get another colleague to come over and read the contract out loud to Altman. Altman goes on to tell Ronan Farrow, he doesn't remember this exchange. Now, Amade's notes describe escalating tense encounters, including one months later, in which Altman summoned him and his sister, Daniella, who worked in safety and policy at the company to tell them that he had it on good authority from a senior executive that they have been plotting a coup. Daniella apparently lost it and brought in the executive who proceeded to deny having said anything of the sort. And then as one person briefed on the exchange recalled, Altman then denied having made the claim.

1:25:05So he makes this claim directly to two people, who then bring in a third person who supposedly is the one who said there was a coup happening. And all three of them are like, why are you lying? And Sam's like, I'm not lying, I never said it. So Altman apparently said, I didn't even say that. Grant, keep in mind, this is like five minutes after he said it. Altman says, I didn't even say that. And Daniella replied, you just said that. Altman said that this was not quite his recollection and that he only accused the Amade's of political behavior, which like dude, again, when everyone's calling you a pathological liar, I don't care what you say, you're lying. You've got to prove to me that you didn't say that. You now have to prove a negative as far as I'm concerned. So good luck doing it. You better have a recording of the meeting. Otherwise, I'm going to assume that the people you're accusing of lying are in fact the ones telling the truth.

1:26:05But we also have, you know, this continues in late 2022 for computer scientists, published paper, motivated in part by concerns about deep alignment. And that's where we get the part where Sam says, oh, we're going to commit $1 billion to fixing alignment issues and making sure that everything is safe. And then he proceeds to not do that. So basically every time somebody's like, hey, you need to do this, he's like, yeah, we do need to do that. Let me help you come up with the strategy here. All the while planning for how he's not going to do that, like what happened with Biden and the regulations. He goes to Biden, he says, let me help you craft those regulations. Knowing full well that when the election comes up, he's going to throw his support behind Trump. Or he's going to get in the ear of Kamala Harris when she gets in maybe. But it's obvious that he sees the writing on the wall. He thinks Trump is going to win and he's like, all right, I'm going to, I'm going to put these regulations in place. I'm not going to plan to follow them because I know they're never actually going to stick. I, which is also what happened by the way in at the end of the 2020 election,

1:27:06when Trump had filed an executive order to force insurance companies to actually give itemized pricing and allow for competition, or sorry, hospitals to give itemized pricing and allow people to compete for more for different insurance markets to shop around a little bit, things like that. And then he basically gave them until December of 2020 to do it, to put that in place. And they just all bet on Biden winning and they didn't do it. And they never did it and then Biden repealed that executive order. So it's the same thing here where Altman, Beton, Trump winning, went in, did something he knew would hamstring his opponents. And that probably he was like, at the very least, if Trump doesn't win, I have a chance to design these things and do so in a way that is best for my company. And Musk really screwed himself over by torpedoing his relationship with Trump. Yeah, because, you know, yeah, I'm sure in the moment it was very good. I don't think he torpedoed his relationship with Trump.

1:28:07I think this was Altman. I think Altman. So you think Elon has like, Elon has like, overriff between them. Because he, because he only had the whole public crash out over Trump. You think that it was, Altman thinks that it really was happening behind the scenes that Altman was secretly, you know, whispering in Trump's ear to turn him against Musk. And again, I don't like any of these people. Yeah, I have to say to me that what probably happened here is that Musk was in, Musk probably was in because he knew what Sam Altman was going to do. And whether you want to say it's altruistic or it was competitive or it was just, you know, a businessman doing business, I, Musk I think was trying to get in there to be the guy for AI and for data and everything. And Musk I think was, you know, being a much better salesman who's nowhere near as awkward as Elon Musk. And it doesn't have the same like, you know, well, he's, I don't think he's, Musk clearly has autism, you know, like he's diagnosed with it. Yeah. I don't think Altman has autism. I think he has anti-social personality disorder.

1:29:09And I think he was in there whispering in Trump's ear like, you know, you can't trust Musk. Like, no, he's not your guy. I do, I will say, at least Greemal Wormtongue. I think there is a lot of correlation there also between Teal. And the issue with Musk, well, Teal and Altman are, and Teal and Musk started to pay pal together. And Teal is not a fan of Musk. Think he's a quote fraud. And we all know that Vance is in Teal's pocket. Yeah. He looks at him like the father he never had. So wouldn't be shocked if that was part of that deal as well. I definitely do think that not an insignificant part of it was the fact that Trump really had no intention of following through on the doge stuff that Musk was going in there and genuinely did, whether or not he knew what he was doing, he genuinely did want to cut spending, cut spending, cut regulation, cut bureaucracy. And then I think Trump was kind of like, okay, yeah, you go play with your toys. And I'm not actually going to be serious about it. But I also just wanted Musk to, yeah, I was. I just wanted his money for the campaign. He told Musk he was going to have whatever he wanted.

1:30:10Musk thought that he was actually going to have a chance to, well, plus he knew that Musk was popular with a lot of the, all right people. Yeah. So that's the thing is I think that that was all, it's all the above, yeah. But like I said, I don't think Sam Altman ever had any intention of open AI following those regulations. And I think he positioned it such that if Trump lost, at least he was in the room to design the regulations in a way that was favorable to open AI. But this isn't the only time that he's gone and screwed over the other companies who would have thought they had, who did think they had to follow that and started making changes. We also have the fact that when Anthropic was, in talks with the military, and the military said you're going to need to do automated weapons for us. Anthropic said no. They were like, we're not doing that. That goes against everything we believe in. And we would respectfully like to step away from this contract if you're not going to let that go. Pete Hegseth, the asshole that he is, decided that he was going to threaten Anthropic with basically declaring them an enemy of the United States

1:31:14and a supply chain risk, which is the same thing they have Huawei designated as. Meanwhile, they're helping Altman to build data centers in Middle Eastern countries that have given our tech to Huawei. It's genuinely remarkable how stupid these people are. You still have the energy numbers for the data center that was in the Middle East because that was fascinating on the original. I do, yeah, also interesting bit about why Musk may or may not have been, can I finish this point really quick? Oh yeah, sir. So Anthropics, like we're not going to do that, Pete Hegseth is like, you will do it, you'll do it for Israel right now. And so all the other AI companies come out and they're like, hey, you can't do that to them because if you do, we're not going to work with you either. And you can't blacklist all of us, you need us. Like the whole stated purpose of you guys getting behind this is defeating China. We're not going to help you. And so Altman is like, yeah, we're standing against this Anthropic, we're on your side.

1:32:15And then as he's making these statements, he's actually meeting with Pentagon to undercut Anthropic and say, if they won't do it, we will. So he did get Anthropic in a way it was altruistic because Anthropic did not get put on that blacklist. Since OpenAI came in and said, we'll do it. But yeah. So some interesting things about Teal and Musk, they both created PayPal together. Apparently they both spent a lot of their early life in South Africa. I knew Musk did, I didn't know Teal did. Teal and his allies conspired to overthrow Musk as PayPal CEO while Musk was on honeymoon, which is not unsurprising that Musk was concerned much later on in his career about Altman trying to take CEO from him. Yep. That's the thing is the more I read about this, the more I think about it, the more I'm like, you know what? No matter what you think of Musk, he was right from the beginning. When Musk is the right one in the room. Hang on also the interesting things are

1:33:19here it is. Teal kept SpaceX afloat with a $20 million investment after it was about to go bankrupt at one point, despite their complicated and annoying history. So there's a lot of what a float SpaceX. SpaceX. Very early on despite a weird history that they had together and despite them consistently now saying that Musk thinks that Teal is a sociopath and Teal thinks Musk is a fraud. They're probably both right, yeah, to be fair. I mean, Musk is the same kind of thing as Altman to me. Like he's a smart guy who has an interest in this thing but what he really is is a guy with a lot of money. Yep, who got it questionably? Yeah, so. Well, and clearly has like, isn't clearly not a serious person considering as like, he like decided in 2024 that like the most important issue in the world was like like the trend,

1:34:22like the bathroom thing. Like he just took, he just completely went off the rails into the far right over like a social issue that when compared to this, well, it's because one of his children came out as a strands and then he went and then some weird spiral. Just blew a gasket. Yeah, so here's another thing that I want to look at, which is just the straight up two-faced nature of who Sam Altman is as we've been talking about with the way he does dealings with the government. So what we have here is for a decade, social media executives promised they could change the world with little to no downside. They dismissed the lawmakers who wanted to slow them down as mere loadites, eventually earning bipartisan derision correctly because social media has been an absolute scourge on the mental health of Generation Z and Generation A. And the younger millennials like my older cousins. For those who don't know, I was born in 97, but I was raised with much older cousin,

1:35:23not much older, but cousins who were born in the early 90s. So I got a weird mix of millennial and Gen Z culture. Anyway, so yeah, there's the social media and everybody they've been telling lawmakers, don't worry about it, don't worry about it. Altman by contrast came across as refreshingly conscientious. Rather than warning off regulation, he practically begged for it. Testifying before the Senate judiciary community committee in 2023, he proposed a new federal agency to oversee advanced AI models. If this technology goes wrong, he said, it can go quite wrong. Which again, don't use it. Don't build it until you're confident it's not gonna go wrong. Senator John Kennedy, my love of Louisiana, known for his cantanker, his exchanges with Texios, seemed charmed, resting his face on his hand, suggesting that perhaps Altman should enforce the rules himself. Senator John Kennedy, you, I don't even know if that was a rare Kennedy L because I haven't seen the video. I would not be shocked if that was Kennedy.

1:36:23Dose enough. Not dozing off, but basically like being sarcastic. Like I know your game. In fact, I would be willing to bet. Like trying to out-ultman him this. Yeah, basically like, you know, that's such a great idea. Why don't you do it yourself? Isn't that what you want? Boy. Like, you know, that's what I see coming from him. Yeah. But as Altman publicly welcomed regulation, he quietly lobbied against it in 2022 and 2023, according to Times or Times, open AI successfully pressed to dilute a European Union effort that would have subjected large AI companies to a more oversight. In 2024, a bill was introduced in the California State legislature, mandating safety testing for AI models. Its provisions included measures resembling the ones that Altman had advocated for in his congressional testimony. Open AI publicly opposed the bill, but in private began issuing threats. I would say that over the course of the year, we saw increasingly cunning deceptive behavior from open AI, a legislative aid told us. Then we have of course Conway, lobbying Nancy Pelosi, and Gavin Newsom to kill the bill.

1:37:27I'm wondering if he meant to say support of the bill in public, but in private began issuing threats. I think that might have been an editorial mistake because the way he writes this doesn't make any sense. So I'm presuming that what he intended to say was that open AI publicly supported the bill, but in private began issuing threats because that's the only way it makes sense in context. But yeah, so Conway, lobbied state political leaders, including Nancy Pelosi and Gavin Newsom to kill the bill. In the end, it passed the legislature with bipartisan support, but then Newsom, the current darling for 2028, for the Democrats, vetoed it, which means that if it's Newsom versus Vance, we've just got two AI lackeys on the ballot, and there is no more important time to vote for a third party than that. Unfortunately, it can't be the Greens because Jill Stein still thinks that Wi-Fi microwaves your brain. And also fell for an AI video in photo about an American jet crashing. It was one of the like, this is an American stealth jet, and it's like a B117, or an F117 that is clearly not the right size.

1:38:27Yeah, so get your ass to the way. And the way I'm serious is the moral theory. Basically, yeah, if your state's primaries haven't happened yet, I go to them and vote just, don't worry about the party. Go look it up, is this person pro or anti-AI? Vote for the anti-AI person. We can figure the rest of that shit out next time. And more specifically, don't look at what they've said about it, look at what they've voted for. Yes. Yes, very important and important. And if they've ever had lunch with Sam Altman, don't vote for them. Unless that lunch ended with them cursing the guy out. But yeah, so basically, Sam Altman and OpenAI have gotten to the point where they are just saying, they're speaking outside of the mouth. And it's not new, it's not different. That's very normal. But it's the... It's never had the potential consequence. Yeah, it's never had the potential consequences that this has. Also, the fact that we're doing all this and the government's not fighting it, yet we don't have a totally nuclear grid is nuts to me.

1:39:29We could have had free energy, basically, 50 years ago. But the green lobby, when I'm scared of nuclear energy, and then... Well, I was in the fossil fuel lobby as well. Yeah, them too. It's the classic. I know Stone Toss isn't a good person, but it's that classic comic of the tug of war with the capitalist guy on one side with the Marxist and then the working class guy with the corporate infrastructure. It's like, huh? But yeah, so... And then there's the other stuff. OpenAI's campaign is extended beyond traditional lobbying. Last year, a successor bill was introduced in the California Senate. One night, Nathan Calvin, a 29-year-old lawyer who worked at the nonprofit in code and helped craft the bill, was at home having dinner with his wife when a process server arrived to deliver a subpoena from OpenAI. The company claimed to be hunting for evidence that Musk was covertly funding its critics, but it demanded all of Calvin's private communications about the bill in the state Senate.

1:40:30And Calvin said they could have asked us, have you ever talked to or been given money by Elon Musk, which we haven't? And others poured the bill and some critics of OpenAI's for-profit restructuring also received subpoenas, where they determined that they were going after folks to basically scare them into shutting up. OpenAI claims this was part of the standard legal process. No, showing up to a lawyer's house and demanding all of his personal communications about the bill, when what you're looking for is all of his personal communications about the bill mentioning Elon Musk is not standard legal process and it's illegal. I wonder if they've poached lawyers from UnSanto. Yeah, it sounds like it. There's also a weird thing in here that he says in the OpenAsLongSport Democrats thing. He says, I'm very suspicious of powerful autocrats telling a story of fear to gang up on the week. That's a Jewish thing, not a gay thing, which I just don't understand what the context of that was. I think it's one of those like- He's saying like as a Jew, I'm distrust. Yeah. Autocrats trying to get out of it.

1:41:31Because if you- Yeah, I don't know if that's meant to be. It's the gay thing that's weird. It's like, I feel like what you said makes more sense. This is just a weird phrasing of it. I think it's him trying to say, I'm not concerned of- I think it's him trying to make a joke where it's like, I'm not concerned of this because of the oppression of gay people. I'm concerned of this of the oppression of Jewish people. Because he's right. I'm Italian, I'm not a pervert. Exactly. Yeah. So I'm not calling gay's perverts. It just struck me as very similar to what he said. There are perverts who are gay and there are perverts who are not gay. He was quoting Cuomo. Yeah. That was what I was doing. Also, we are approaching two out. Yeah, so I do want to- I think the last really important thing to cover in here- and we can talk about this more with Senator Mooth on Friday. But I wanted to find- We also do before or after that the energy thing. Yes, I'm just a second. But I'm trying to find the country strategy thing. I have lost track of it. Does anybody know what page it's on?

1:42:32Oh, it's right around hang on. I think I can find it. Ah, I found it. I found it. Yeah, so this is kind of continuing. Oh, right. I did forget about one other little thing here really quick. Yeah, over the years, Altman has continued to compare the quest for AGI to the Manhattan project, blah, blah, blah, blah. In a meeting with US intelligence officials in the summer of 2017, he claimed that China had launched an AGI Manhattan project. And that open AI needed billions of dollars of government funding to keep pace. Keep in mind, this is before chat GPT. Altman has not demonstrated anything to this point, other than pissing off Elon Musk. When press- So basically this point is, China is doing this. We ought to do it too. Which remember, this is the main thing that they keep saying about AI. That if we don't have AGI first, China is going to beat us there. Framing is an arms race. Yeah, it's an arms race. We need to beat them to AGI. Otherwise we'll have no chance and they will become the new global hedgemen and the

1:43:33superpower. They don't mention the fact that in order to beat them there, we have to become them, which I don't want. I don't want to live in China. That's why I live here. You know, let China be the AI dystopia and just keep them contained. Whatever it takes. Well, to devil's advocate though, he then China does stuff to us because they have, there's much more powerful than we are. Newther power plants. Yeah, AGI. Yeah, well then we're in a nuclear war. Conventionally bomb their power plants. There you go. Unfortunately, consider to work on. I don't care. If the reason we do it is because they are releasing AI agents with the sole purpose of screwing up our infrastructure and our energy grid and all of that, which is what the threat is supposedly, like supposedly is here. If they're doing that, that is a war crime targeting the energy grid as a war crime. Cyber warfare and espionage are crimes. So if the concern is that if we don't beat China to this, they're going to use it against us.

1:44:33Using it against us would be a war crime. Therefore we're justified in bombing their power plants. Guys, John Hinkley Jr. is commented on the Trump press gala shooting and he said that the fact that it was at the same hole as where he shot Reagan is spooky. I love this reporter, like went to visit him in prison or wherever he is. Yeah, I need your comment, John Hinkley. Yeah, that's funny. All right, so where was I? Wait, isn't John Hinkley the one who shot Reagan? Yeah, that's what I thought. Yeah. So where is he? He's out of prison. He's out of prison. He got out a few years ago. Oh, really? Yeah. I mean, he only attempted to shoot the president. He didn't kill the president. Well, he did successfully shoot the president, but he didn't kill him. So it's only attempted murder, which carries a lighter sentence. We should talk about the, we should do random that that would be a really fun topic for unhinged because of the guy that tried to basically take over the White House. Yeah. Wow, but Bush was on a plane. Yeah, he's really fun. Yeah, so just to get back through this last bit here, this has been the thing.

1:45:39If we don't do it, China is going to do it first and they're going to release it on us. Again, war crime. War crime. It is a war crime. We have the right to respond to respond to war crimes with any force necessary to stop the war crime, which means, which means if China starts using an AI to screw with our power grid, to screw with our supply chains, to spy on us to conduct surveillance, we are within our rights as a nation to bomb whatever it takes to stop them from doing it, which means bombing their power plants, most of which are coal, so you don't even really need to worry about the nuclear fallout. If you take out all the coal plants, you take out the ability. Again, that's a lot of destruction that could be there. I don't care. That could be avoided by the deterrent of mutually assured AI destruction. Yes, but that's the situation is we either have, we become China in order to stop China or we bomb some Chinese power plants and we don't have to become China. So again, this is one of those situations where I very much prefer war.

1:46:39I would rather go to war than live in a surveillance state. I would go myself, if this, I mean that so sincerely, if we found ourselves in the situation where the only choice was deploy ground troops to China, I would enlist. I would do it because I think that that is, it is more important to me that my children, my future children, I don't have any yet, but it is more important to me that my future children grow up in an America where they are free, where they are not constantly being spied on by these disgusting flock cameras that are escalating. Just gonna ask if you'd seen that. I have seen them and I think that everybody who's throwing rocks at them and cutting them down is a patriot. I would rather go to war, I would rather risk my own life in order to create a world for my children that is at the very least as good as the one I grew up and if not better. I think that this whole idea that the only option we have is get ourselves to a point where it's mutually assured destruction. Again, doesn't make sense. I don't think that's the best option. And frankly, I think that the best option is the United States goes to the UN and says,

1:47:42we are now enforcing a global moratorium on data centers, on AI research because it is clear that until we can all come to an agreement on how we're gonna prevent this from being civilization ending, nobody can be trusted to do it. So rather than saying we need to be trusted to do it, we're saying we're gonna stop and so are all of you and any of you who don't will face consequences. For example, even without hitting mainland China, what we can do is send carrier groups into the South China Sea. We can chase off those giant fishing fleets that keep stripping the oceans of all life. Just, you know, maybe, come on. There's fish off the coast of China. They're doing it off the coast of Chile because they don't want to fish their own waters. They want to ruin another country's economy so that that country becomes dependent on them. They are an actively hostile imperialist power and we should be treating them as one. But there are options we have to take care of what China is doing before it gets to the point where the genies out of the bottle and we should be doing that.

1:48:43But we can only do that with any moral high ground if we also stop ourselves. That being said, this whole thing we're arguing about here, well, 2017, Sam Altman goes and says China is doing an AGI Manhattan project and when pressed for evidence by the US government, Sam said, and I quote, I've heard things. There was no evidence. There was no proof. And that's why right now I'm not entirely sure I believe that China is getting ahead of us on this. They, like, yeah, sure, deep seek. It's not better than Sora. It's not better than Gemini. It's not better than DeepMind. It's not better than Claude. You're winning the AGI race right now. It's not close. I mean, half the stuff China releases isn't even real. Like you asked them to demonstrate it and they're like, you know, here's something we put together for you and you're like, yeah, but I need to see it in real time. They're like, oh, we can't do that.

1:49:45Because it's fake. It's like when a video game studio puts out a trailer that they claim has actual gameplay footage, but it's clearly a cinematic. And when you get the game, it looks nowhere near as good. So yeah, but basically the official after looking into the China project is back in 2017. So it's almost a decade ago. They probably do have some stuff now found that there was no evidence that existed. Sam just lied. He just completely lied. It was being used as a sales pitch, they say. And Sam says that he does not recall describing Beijing's efforts in exactly the same way. Chances are if this was a meeting with government officials, then it was probably recorded, which means we can know for sure if Sam Altman lied. But what that brings us down to is when that didn't work, Sam Altman and his cronies decide that you know what, we should do something else. Let's take a different tack on this. If we can't convince everybody that China and Russia are going to beat us to the punch, maybe we convince them all to fight over it, to give us money so that we have funding from all of these different groups.

1:50:45In fact, what they specifically said was, here we go, Jack Clark, OpenAI's policy director, said that Brockman's goal was to set up basically a princeters dilemma where all of the nations need to give us funding and that implicitly makes not giving us funding kind of dangerous. Also in here, we have, as Headley recalled it, Brockman didn't understand how this would help the company beat its competitors. What is the thing they're talking about? Well, in 2017, Amadeh Hire page, Headley, a former public interest lawyer to be OpenAI's policy and ethics advisor in an early PowerPoint presentation to executives, Headley outlined how OpenAI might have hurt a catastrophic arms race. Perhaps by building a coalition of AI labs that would eventually coordinate with an international body at Kintinato to ensure that the technology was deployed safely. In other words, have international cooperation, like I just said, to stop this from going off the rails. Start a bidding war. You know, basically go to the UN or NATO or somebody and say, hey, the best way to ensure

1:51:48that this doesn't help anybody to do anything evil is to make sure that everyone's working on it together. That way it's not specific to anyone nation. Nobody has an advantage. Everybody is incentivized to help because if they help, that means they get access to it, which means that they are not in danger from it because again, everybody's working together on it. Yeah, so this is, this is in fact what Brockman said he didn't understand how it would help the company beat its competitors. No matter what I said, Headley told us Greg kept going back to so how do we raise more money? How do we win? According to several interviews and contemporaneous records, Brockman offered a counter proposal. AI could enrich itself by playing world powers, including China and Russia against one another, perhaps by starting a bidding war among them. According to Headley, the thinking seemed to be it worked for nuclear weapons. Why not AI? He was a gasp. The premise, which they didn't dispute, was we're talking about potentially the most destructive technology ever invented. What if we sold it to Putin? Brockman maintains that he never seriously entertained auctioning a AM all-esteaded

1:52:49governments. He said ideas were better around at a high level about what potential frameworks might look like to encourage cooperation between nations, something akin to an international space station for AI, an open AI representative said, attempting to characterize as anything more than that is utterly ridiculous. Basically, they said that brainstorming sessions off produce outlandish ideas and Headley hope that this one, which came to be known internally as the country's plan, would be dropped. But instead, this idea batted around at a high level that was never seriously entertained and that any attempt to characterize it is completely and utterly ridiculous. Well, according to several people involved in those contemporaneous documents, the executives only grow more excited about it. The whole thing about the prisoners to Lema and the junior researcher were calling thinking as the plan was detailed in company meeting, he said, this is completely fucking insane. And this thing that they never seriously entertained, well, the executives discussed the approach with at least one potential donor. But later that month after several employees talked about quitting, the plan was abandoned.

1:53:51Not because it was a bad idea, but because not because it might cause a war between great powers, but because Sam was worried about losing his employees to the competition. But I mean, like I said, this is a level of legitimate evil that I don't think humanity has encountered before. Yeah, it's important to recognize that even for those of you that are less hawkish on AI than anybody here, you could, you could, you can, believe that there are some good uses of AI or that, you know, certain expansion or what have you is okay. And also recognize, Sam Altman is not anywhere near the type of person with the moral qualifications to be in charge of overseeing this massive project or group of projects. And so that's kind of the, but in terms of AI. Realistically, if you're, if you're double shown AI, then you should be extremely against

1:54:53Baldwin. Yeah. And here's the other thing. In January of 2018, he convened an AGI weekend in Hollywood where he invited a whole bunch of people that included at least seven billionaires. And there Altman, ex-armed with a pitch deck that described a global cryptocurrency redeem bull for the attention of the AGI said that once the AGI was maximal useful and anti evil people everywhere would clamor to buy time on the open AI servers that drove Amade to wonder or to say this idea was absurd on its face would Vladimir Putin end up owning some of the tokens. In retrospect, this was one of the many red flags about Sam that I should have taken more seriously. I all of his ideas are just like writing like really good cyberpunk story ideas. Yeah. But then we're going to do them. Yeah. Global robot daddy and we pay crypto to access his brain is genius in fiction. So the fact that he that the only reason he stepped away from investing or trying to

1:55:54seek the Saudis as investors wasn't because Humman bin Salman had a reporter from the Washington post murdered wasn't that no it was that his PR people came to and said you can't do that. Like it you can't work with the Saudis. He was like is that going to be detrimental to our company's success and he was they were like yeah. And the incredible thing is that you go through this and what you see is over and over again for over a decade. People that work with and under Sam Altman have repeatedly the people he is hired to keep himself in check have repeatedly told him that what he is doing is wrong. It is crazy. It is dangerous. He cannot keep doing it. It is clearly not motivated by any interest in the public good. It is just motivated by power. He even is quoted in this very document as saying that he doesn't care about money. He cares about power. But the best thing is money is power. So if you care about power you care about money too. Stop being such a pathetic little pedantic dick Sam we all know what you're talking about.

1:56:56You're not that much smarter than the average person. Your IQ is probably somewhere in the realm of one 30 to one 45 and I hate to tell you but that doesn't make you special. That makes you just like everybody sitting at this table. You're not super intelligent. I know that you want this so that you can feel like you are but the fact of the matter is you could play solitaire for a few hours a day and improve your IQ but you won't do that because you're a lazy son of a bitch. I just I thought that was a killer segue in mobile game ad by the way. This is the best ad read. I think it's a good beginning to a conclusion. I'm at a point with all of this where I don't want to believe that we've lost. I don't think we have lost but if something doesn't happen soon we're going to. If this election is not overwhelmingly catastrophic for AI it might be the last time we have

1:57:59a real election. It might be the last time that we live in a world where our every move is not being surveilled. Where we can trust that our children are going to be going to school and actually learning things rather than just googling what or going on chat GBT and asking for the answers. I think this may be the most consequential election of our lives. It certainly is the most consequential election of our lives so far. You referring to the midterms as the next presidential? The midterms. It's probably top three most consequential in the history of this country. We don't have any MP here do we? What? We don't have any midterms in this section do we? Well we have governor always. We have governor and we do have congressional representatives and some senators because senators are already six years. Congress is every two years. Governor here is off cycle. That's part of the problem is that with Pennsylvania right now we've got two candidates

1:59:02who are pro AI. We've got Josh Shapiro who is awful and I've been complimentary of Shapiro in the past. His AI stance is awful. He is repeatedly screwing over the citizens of this Commonwealth and he needs to be removed. Stacy Garry can't be elected either because she's also pro AI. Yeah so for I'm almost hoping that Muth runs as an independent because I would vote for tomorrow. We'll find out. Yeah we'll find out this week. Yeah so we have governor US House and then state Senate and state house. Do we not have any senators this time or US senators not? Gotcha. And that's the other thing that pisses me off just to finish this out with one last thought is that not a single one of our currently elected representatives was elected. With any idea of how they were going to go with the AI stuff. Like every single one of them should be saying we're putting a moratorium on this until the next election.

2:00:02Nobody voted for us knowing what our stance was on this. The right thing to do is to wait for the next election before we make any decisions and put everything on hold until then but they refuse to do it because that's not what's profitable and they've been convinced that if we don't do this China is going to win. China is not going to win. We have more missiles than they do and our boats are actually made for war. It's very simple and if China is in a position where they're willing to do things that put the entire population of the United States at risk, then I'm willing to do things that put the entire population of China at risk. If they're going to make it us versus them, then we have to play the game and I would rather that we play the game to win now than hope that we can get to AGI first and that it doesn't make everything awful. But hopefully as you were referring to earlier in the episode, the United States government and the people within it like us can recognize that this is a situation in which we need

2:01:02to be the adults in the room and not pursue something that is dangerous and irresponsible. Yeah. Yeah. I mean, the election this year is probably our only hope to do this without bloodshed. People have been talking about Orwellian this and are willing that for over a decade now, but like nothing's come as close. No, it's not. Yeah. Everything that we're seeing is actually it. I guarantee you it was Meta's AI that reported that one girl for the Bonbon joke because there's no human would read that and go, this is clearly a threat. It's also clearly a violation of the First Amendment. Yeah. Yeah. So, and like I said, what I want, what I want is for the governments of the world to come together and recognize that this is dangerous, that we cannot be doing this, that it needs

2:02:07to stop and stop it because otherwise, otherwise things get bloody. Yeah. We can, there's a lot of people who are going to suffer. We cannot stress enough that this is not like any other issue of corporations versus the government regulation. This is not like, you know, this is a lot more closer to the environment or to nuclear energy or to something that like has tremendous consequences than whatever your mind goes to when you think about the government trying to regulate a company. It is an existential threat. This is humanity versus the, the terminator basically. This is, and here's, that's the thing that drives me nuts. In the 80s, we were making movies about this exact thing and, and what did people do? They started naming their AI companies after the AI company that created the terminator. It's just like, also, I think that there needs to be a moratorium, a total ban on anyone in tech ever using terms from Lord of the Rings for anything ever again because, oh my

2:03:12God, it is so obvious you did not get the story. But that is how Peter Tiltola, who he was because he named his company after the thing Sauroman uses to. Yeah. I thought you were talking about Palmer Lucky with Anderl. That too. Yeah, I am. Yeah, that one is just, he didn't get it. Peter Tiltola's, he didn't get it in the easiest way to get it possible. Yeah. When they tell you who they are, listen. It would not be more on the nose. Yeah, so, anyway, yeah, we got to get wrapping up. Yeah, we do. We all have work that we need to do still and it's already almost four. Yep. So, last thing to say, you know, follow along. If you're not subscribed to the channel already, we are going to be covering this a little bit more in depth. We're probably also going to start covering some of the meetings on lore, lore on location. Right now that has a lot of ghost hunting videos, but soon it will be populated with data center hearing videos. And of course, write your representatives, call them, flood their phone lines, flood their email lines, make sure that they know that you do not support the AI stuff and that you

2:04:14will not vote for them in November if they support the AI stuff. And if they don't care, vote for the other guy. That's the thing. At the end of the day, if you're in a situation where the incumbent is pro AI and the person running against the incumbent is pro AI, vote for the person running against them. Just just to fuck them. Just a giant middle finger. Be like, you're the one in power currently. You're the one who has the option to do this. That person, they're not here yet. They don't know everything you know. You know what? You like, I don't care if I got to pick, but I don't need, I don't need him to win. I need you to lose. Like, but preferably, you know, find some of you to vote for who's not pro AI. And of course, when it comes to the data centers, I remind your local council that they are your neighbors.

2:05:16And that you can make life miserable for them because you can make sure that people boo them and call them names and don't serve them at restaurants and refuse to caddy for them. And you can make sure your local cops are watching them like hawks and pulling them over for every minor traffic violation. You can make their lives a living hell and you should. Don't hurt them physically. But make them reconsider if they feel safe going out at night because they might face harassment. Make it prohibitively socially unacceptable. Exactly. That's what I'm trying to say. To be even open to the idea of data centers getting built up river of people and in places where they can exacerbate all issues. And can you use it all? If the data centers were there, if they want to build, they can fund their own fire department. They can build it out in the middle of nowhere and they can pay whatever it costs to remediate

2:06:17everything. There's a recent Los Alamos was in Los Alamos and not in spring city, Pennsylvania. Yeah. So go to your local council meetings, call them names, let them know how you feel about them. I don't fall for it when they try to pull the, you know, oh, we're all friends. We're trying to do the right thing here. This hearing is really about, you know, letting you guys speak even though we're not going to let you have standing. Yeah, go to those meetings, hackle them, call them names. You know, if they're, if they're not going to do their job, then make sure you know how you feel, make sure they know how you feel about it, basically. Everybody go get kicked out of some hearings. Yeah, go get kicked out of some hearings, get arrested if you got it, it will make the news. And you won't actually go to jail. You'll maybe spend a night in jail. Just make sure you keep everything focused on the actual AI issue. Yes, don't get weird about it. And you know, if you get the chance to speak, don't stick it to just how you're personally affected, talk about the environmental effects, talk about the dishonesty going on in the AI industry. Make sure that you get out there all of the problems because it's the best way to do this is to

2:07:24make sure that as these guys are standing or sitting up there at the council meeting, they've got to, at the end of the day, explain to their neighbors why they're voting for something that's going to kill them. And frankly, I didn't mean, yeah, I won't say the next thing I'm going to say on here. But yeah, so I had a really good in a different video game than mine climbed up, so I'm really supported in that. All right. See you guys. Adios. Delta means change.