WEBVTT - Week in Tech: Does 'Workslop' Affect Your Workplace?

0:00:13.680 --> 0:00:17.400
<v Speaker 1>From Kaleidoscope and iHeart podcasts. This is tech Stuff. I'm

0:00:17.400 --> 0:00:20.119
<v Speaker 1>as Volocian and I'm Cara Price. Today we're going to

0:00:20.120 --> 0:00:23.079
<v Speaker 1>get into the headlines this week, including an anti tech

0:00:23.200 --> 0:00:26.000
<v Speaker 1>rally in New York City and a look at how

0:00:26.120 --> 0:00:30.040
<v Speaker 1>workslop is affecting the workplace. Then, on Chat to Me.

0:00:30.600 --> 0:00:34.640
<v Speaker 2>I had students take personality tests in Spanish and then

0:00:34.840 --> 0:00:39.200
<v Speaker 2>used AI to turn their personality data into unique paintings.

0:00:39.760 --> 0:00:47.080
<v Speaker 1>All of that on the Weekend Tech. It's Friday, October third, Hello, Cara, hi.

0:00:47.280 --> 0:00:47.600
<v Speaker 3>As.

0:00:48.000 --> 0:00:50.920
<v Speaker 1>One of the great pleasures of recording this podcast with

0:00:51.040 --> 0:00:54.120
<v Speaker 1>you is getting to hear you chew ice right next

0:00:54.160 --> 0:00:57.520
<v Speaker 1>to the microphone before we start. I hope your mouth

0:00:57.600 --> 0:00:58.560
<v Speaker 1>is nice and cool.

0:00:58.800 --> 0:01:02.560
<v Speaker 3>I'm actually number I'm like talking like I just got

0:01:02.560 --> 0:01:03.160
<v Speaker 3>a tongue pier.

0:01:03.840 --> 0:01:04.960
<v Speaker 1>My ears are numb as well.

0:01:06.600 --> 0:01:09.399
<v Speaker 3>Well. Speaking of being in the studio together, it's your

0:01:09.400 --> 0:01:13.039
<v Speaker 3>turn in the hot seat now to make fun. Are

0:01:13.080 --> 0:01:14.840
<v Speaker 3>you even wearing shoes today? Oh?

0:01:15.680 --> 0:01:18.560
<v Speaker 1>It's a deep cut. I actually am right now, but

0:01:18.600 --> 0:01:20.839
<v Speaker 1>you obviously noticed that I do have an unconscious habit

0:01:20.920 --> 0:01:22.319
<v Speaker 1>of slipping them off.

0:01:22.600 --> 0:01:24.000
<v Speaker 3>I do, and it's disgusting.

0:01:24.280 --> 0:01:27.120
<v Speaker 1>It is well, I consciously try and keep them on.

0:01:27.800 --> 0:01:30.240
<v Speaker 1>In fact, but I did get in trouble. I think

0:01:30.280 --> 0:01:32.800
<v Speaker 1>I probably told you the story many years ago when

0:01:32.840 --> 0:01:35.920
<v Speaker 1>I was a consultant working on the Google account. I

0:01:35.920 --> 0:01:39.039
<v Speaker 1>once unconsciously slipped them off in the Google office and

0:01:39.200 --> 0:01:44.120
<v Speaker 1>was padding around Google's actually off, and my boss took

0:01:44.120 --> 0:01:45.400
<v Speaker 1>me his side and said, listen, I was, You're a

0:01:45.440 --> 0:01:48.280
<v Speaker 1>great guy, but if you ever take your shoes off

0:01:48.320 --> 0:01:51.720
<v Speaker 1>and a fine meeting again, you're fired, which is totally

0:01:51.800 --> 0:01:52.280
<v Speaker 1>fair enough.

0:01:52.400 --> 0:01:53.720
<v Speaker 3>It's such a power booth.

0:01:53.960 --> 0:01:57.960
<v Speaker 1>It was. I was so I whacked out that I

0:01:58.600 --> 0:01:59.760
<v Speaker 1>was not even aware of it.

0:01:59.800 --> 0:02:01.800
<v Speaker 3>You had six hundred coffees probably.

0:02:01.560 --> 0:02:04.880
<v Speaker 1>By then, exactly. But that's why I was particularly delighted

0:02:05.040 --> 0:02:07.440
<v Speaker 1>to be ahead of the curve on this. It's now

0:02:07.600 --> 0:02:10.840
<v Speaker 1>the norm in Silicon Valley, apparently, according to the Fortune

0:02:10.919 --> 0:02:14.240
<v Speaker 1>article you share to shame me in our full producers

0:02:14.240 --> 0:02:17.800
<v Speaker 1>and host Slack channel with the headline the hottest workplace

0:02:17.840 --> 0:02:21.600
<v Speaker 1>policy at startups right now no shoes So I'm curious,

0:02:21.760 --> 0:02:23.760
<v Speaker 1>kra how would you feel if we had a shoes

0:02:23.760 --> 0:02:25.480
<v Speaker 1>off policy at Cardoscope.

0:02:25.639 --> 0:02:29.399
<v Speaker 3>The thing is is that I am so obsessed with

0:02:29.919 --> 0:02:33.799
<v Speaker 3>dumbing down the workplace to make workaholism.

0:02:34.040 --> 0:02:36.600
<v Speaker 1>Feel comfortable exactly, and that's exactly what this policy is

0:02:36.600 --> 0:02:39.440
<v Speaker 1>all about, exactly. So that's interesting. There was actually a

0:02:39.480 --> 0:02:42.640
<v Speaker 1>picture on the on the Fortune article of a shoe rack.

0:02:43.919 --> 0:02:46.200
<v Speaker 3>You see that It was like a Japanese restaurant.

0:02:46.240 --> 0:02:48.440
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, it looks like somewhere between a Japanese restaurant and

0:02:48.440 --> 0:02:50.560
<v Speaker 1>a high school, right. I mean, it's like the locker

0:02:50.600 --> 0:02:53.240
<v Speaker 1>full of like dirty trainers. I mean, it's really the

0:02:53.280 --> 0:02:55.080
<v Speaker 1>aesthetics of the new Silicon Vallee.

0:02:55.120 --> 0:02:58.600
<v Speaker 3>Weird, but it's a sort of sinister trojan horse in

0:02:58.639 --> 0:03:00.160
<v Speaker 3>the way that you know they used to. I mean,

0:03:00.200 --> 0:03:01.919
<v Speaker 3>I was just reading in the article all of these

0:03:01.960 --> 0:03:05.440
<v Speaker 3>ways that companies make offices more appealing, and I think

0:03:05.560 --> 0:03:08.519
<v Speaker 3>going in and being like, you know what, I'm walking

0:03:08.600 --> 0:03:10.720
<v Speaker 3>right back into my apartment to go to work is like.

0:03:10.880 --> 0:03:14.240
<v Speaker 1>Gotcha free haircuts, but shoes off.

0:03:14.360 --> 0:03:14.799
<v Speaker 3>That's right.

0:03:15.200 --> 0:03:19.160
<v Speaker 1>Well, I'm obviously obsessed by the workplace, sadly, so I

0:03:19.160 --> 0:03:22.679
<v Speaker 1>couldn't resist this story in the Harvard Business Review, which

0:03:22.720 --> 0:03:26.280
<v Speaker 1>went around the internet and had the headline AI generated

0:03:26.560 --> 0:03:29.240
<v Speaker 1>work slop is destroying productivity.

0:03:29.840 --> 0:03:31.560
<v Speaker 3>When was the last time you heard the word slop?

0:03:31.639 --> 0:03:33.880
<v Speaker 1>I hear the word slop all the time now, Yeah.

0:03:33.720 --> 0:03:37.520
<v Speaker 3>It's weird. It's like AI has brought slop back into

0:03:37.520 --> 0:03:40.560
<v Speaker 3>the conversation when it was never that, Like slop was

0:03:40.600 --> 0:03:41.080
<v Speaker 3>not a thing.

0:03:41.200 --> 0:03:43.600
<v Speaker 1>You're so right that the twenty twenty six word of

0:03:43.640 --> 0:03:45.840
<v Speaker 1>the year is slop. I do agree. I think I

0:03:45.920 --> 0:03:48.160
<v Speaker 1>first I first started hearing at the beginning of this

0:03:48.240 --> 0:03:50.400
<v Speaker 1>year AI slop, AI slop a stop, And now it's

0:03:50.440 --> 0:03:53.800
<v Speaker 1>like everywhere so work slop. Well, guess what it is.

0:03:53.960 --> 0:03:57.640
<v Speaker 3>The bottom of the barrel.

0:03:56.600 --> 0:03:59.960
<v Speaker 1>Was AI generated crap that looks a little bit like

0:04:00.080 --> 0:04:04.440
<v Speaker 1>real work. And I was pretty interested in this because

0:04:04.600 --> 0:04:06.480
<v Speaker 1>I am not only the host of text stuff with

0:04:06.600 --> 0:04:09.440
<v Speaker 1>you you are, I'm also the co founder of a

0:04:09.480 --> 0:04:13.200
<v Speaker 1>podcast network called Kaleidoscope, which is the network that produces

0:04:13.240 --> 0:04:17.560
<v Speaker 1>this podcast, and in my CEO hat, obviously in response

0:04:17.600 --> 0:04:20.920
<v Speaker 1>to investors and culture and whatever else, I'm always encouraging

0:04:20.960 --> 0:04:23.520
<v Speaker 1>our team. So how can we use AI? How can

0:04:23.520 --> 0:04:25.000
<v Speaker 1>we be part of the air evolution? How can we

0:04:25.000 --> 0:04:28.320
<v Speaker 1>not be left behind? On the other hand, when people

0:04:28.440 --> 0:04:31.599
<v Speaker 1>send me work there's clearly been made my AI, I'm

0:04:31.640 --> 0:04:35.280
<v Speaker 1>absolutely furious, Which is I think the paradox at the

0:04:35.279 --> 0:04:38.360
<v Speaker 1>heart of this. Harv a business review study which found

0:04:38.400 --> 0:04:42.200
<v Speaker 1>the following quote Approximately half of the people we surveyed

0:04:42.520 --> 0:04:46.400
<v Speaker 1>viewed colleagues who sent WORKSLOP as less creative, less capable,

0:04:46.440 --> 0:04:49.800
<v Speaker 1>and less reliable than they did before receiving the output.

0:04:50.320 --> 0:04:53.159
<v Speaker 1>Forty two percent saw them as less trustworthy, and thirty

0:04:53.240 --> 0:04:56.560
<v Speaker 1>seven percent thought that the colleague was less intelligent afterwards.

0:04:56.720 --> 0:04:59.680
<v Speaker 3>But if you're already sort of not in love with

0:04:59.680 --> 0:05:03.680
<v Speaker 3>your CAR colleagues, now there's a new reason to think

0:05:03.680 --> 0:05:05.000
<v Speaker 3>that your colleagues are slacking off.

0:05:05.120 --> 0:05:09.239
<v Speaker 1>Essentially, Yeah, I mean it's interesting, right. Not all AI

0:05:10.040 --> 0:05:14.640
<v Speaker 1>assisted work is slop. Obviously is work slot, but there's

0:05:14.680 --> 0:05:18.400
<v Speaker 1>also the sort of lazy thing where you say, oh, well,

0:05:18.520 --> 0:05:20.880
<v Speaker 1>let me have AI generated the report and not think.

0:05:21.240 --> 0:05:23.040
<v Speaker 1>And I think that's what this article is really about.

0:05:23.279 --> 0:05:25.440
<v Speaker 3>I looked at this article too. There's this idea of

0:05:25.520 --> 0:05:29.160
<v Speaker 3>like the distinction between a pilot and a passenger. I

0:05:29.560 --> 0:05:31.120
<v Speaker 3>can't exactly wrap my head around that.

0:05:31.279 --> 0:05:33.080
<v Speaker 1>Well, what do you imagine it is?

0:05:33.200 --> 0:05:35.480
<v Speaker 3>Well, a pilot flies the plane.

0:05:35.680 --> 0:05:36.960
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, what does the passenger do?

0:05:37.839 --> 0:05:39.599
<v Speaker 3>Rides the plane?

0:05:39.800 --> 0:05:40.960
<v Speaker 1>The plane sits in the back.

0:05:41.360 --> 0:05:42.760
<v Speaker 3>Are you a pilot or a passenger?

0:05:43.040 --> 0:05:44.880
<v Speaker 1>I'm not as much as a pilot as I would

0:05:44.920 --> 0:05:47.360
<v Speaker 1>like to be with AI, honestly, but the distinction they're

0:05:47.360 --> 0:05:51.320
<v Speaker 1>making is pilots are people who actually take these new

0:05:51.360 --> 0:05:54.520
<v Speaker 1>genera AI tools and harness them to do better work,

0:05:54.800 --> 0:05:57.720
<v Speaker 1>and passengers are people who use them either because their

0:05:57.720 --> 0:05:59.680
<v Speaker 1>boss has told them to or because they're trying to

0:05:59.680 --> 0:06:03.640
<v Speaker 1>short at doing their work. So essentially, you know, passengers

0:06:03.720 --> 0:06:06.840
<v Speaker 1>churn out AI slop, and pilots, at least according to

0:06:06.839 --> 0:06:09.040
<v Speaker 1>this study, use AI to be better workers.

0:06:09.360 --> 0:06:11.760
<v Speaker 3>This actually reminds me of one of my recent favorite

0:06:11.839 --> 0:06:15.839
<v Speaker 3>party term drops, which is cognitive offloading, which you know,

0:06:15.960 --> 0:06:19.160
<v Speaker 3>is when we offload critical thinking to generative AI and

0:06:19.279 --> 0:06:22.159
<v Speaker 3>just how much that puts the person who's using AI

0:06:22.279 --> 0:06:24.880
<v Speaker 3>at a deficit. And I think that slop, I guess,

0:06:25.000 --> 0:06:27.680
<v Speaker 3>is a product of cognitive offloading.

0:06:27.960 --> 0:06:32.599
<v Speaker 1>It is, and interestingly, not just cognitive offloading on behalf

0:06:32.839 --> 0:06:36.159
<v Speaker 1>of the employee, but also in many cases cognitive offloading

0:06:36.240 --> 0:06:38.160
<v Speaker 1>on behalf of the boss. And a lot of these

0:06:38.200 --> 0:06:41.120
<v Speaker 1>mandates whereas you're basically you have to use AI or

0:06:41.320 --> 0:06:47.240
<v Speaker 1>use AI the persons I will, okay, but if you

0:06:47.320 --> 0:06:49.839
<v Speaker 1>don't set a proper playbook for how to use it

0:06:49.920 --> 0:06:53.080
<v Speaker 1>and some training for how to use it smartly, no surprise,

0:06:53.400 --> 0:06:57.960
<v Speaker 1>garbage in, garbage out. I actually thought this story appealed

0:06:58.000 --> 0:06:59.960
<v Speaker 1>to me not just because of the you know, work

0:07:00.080 --> 0:07:03.480
<v Speaker 1>place context, but also the macro context and these swirling

0:07:03.560 --> 0:07:07.440
<v Speaker 1>questions about whether all this investment in AI will actually

0:07:07.520 --> 0:07:10.520
<v Speaker 1>pay off to transform the economy and the financial times

0:07:10.560 --> 0:07:13.440
<v Speaker 1>at a great piece where they actually used AI but

0:07:13.480 --> 0:07:16.239
<v Speaker 1>in an intriguing way to do a kind of meta

0:07:16.320 --> 0:07:20.520
<v Speaker 1>analysis of SEC filings of different companies and how they're

0:07:20.600 --> 0:07:24.840
<v Speaker 1>using AI. The takeaway was quote, the biggest US listed

0:07:24.880 --> 0:07:28.160
<v Speaker 1>companies keep talking about AI, but other than fear of

0:07:28.200 --> 0:07:31.360
<v Speaker 1>missing out, few appear to be able to describe how

0:07:31.400 --> 0:07:34.360
<v Speaker 1>the technology is changing their business for the better. Stick

0:07:34.400 --> 0:07:35.119
<v Speaker 1>with that for a moment.

0:07:35.880 --> 0:07:37.160
<v Speaker 3>That's really crazy.

0:07:37.480 --> 0:07:39.280
<v Speaker 1>On top of that, MIT put out a report in

0:07:39.360 --> 0:07:43.000
<v Speaker 1>July that found that ninety five percent of organizations are

0:07:43.040 --> 0:07:46.520
<v Speaker 1>getting zero return. What do you mean by that, Well,

0:07:46.560 --> 0:07:48.680
<v Speaker 1>I guess the benefits are not being realized in the

0:07:48.720 --> 0:07:52.120
<v Speaker 1>real world by most people. The HBr thing goes on

0:07:52.160 --> 0:07:55.680
<v Speaker 1>to talk about how, based on self reporting, forty one

0:07:55.680 --> 0:07:58.880
<v Speaker 1>percent of employees say they're dealing with AI slop and

0:07:58.960 --> 0:08:02.680
<v Speaker 1>each instance of ailop cost them almost two hours to

0:08:02.800 --> 0:08:06.400
<v Speaker 1>clean up whatever the slop is. So have a business

0:08:06.400 --> 0:08:09.160
<v Speaker 1>review goes on to estimate that each incident of workslop

0:08:09.600 --> 0:08:13.000
<v Speaker 1>creates what they call an invisible tax of one hundred

0:08:13.000 --> 0:08:16.160
<v Speaker 1>and eighty six dollars per month per employee. Now, I'm

0:08:16.160 --> 0:08:18.840
<v Speaker 1>going to do some math here. Please do For a

0:08:18.880 --> 0:08:22.320
<v Speaker 1>company that say ten thousand people, if forty one percent

0:08:22.360 --> 0:08:24.520
<v Speaker 1>of those people are dealing with work slop, and that

0:08:24.560 --> 0:08:26.680
<v Speaker 1>forty one percent is wasting one hundred and eighty six

0:08:26.760 --> 0:08:29.480
<v Speaker 1>dollars per month to fix the slop, that comes out

0:08:29.480 --> 0:08:33.160
<v Speaker 1>to over nine million dollars of loss productivity per year

0:08:33.440 --> 0:08:35.640
<v Speaker 1>for the company if they have ten thousand employees.

0:08:35.800 --> 0:08:37.959
<v Speaker 3>That's a lot of money to fix the slop. Actually,

0:08:38.600 --> 0:08:41.080
<v Speaker 3>do you think it is going to stop people from

0:08:41.120 --> 0:08:43.880
<v Speaker 3>integrating AI tools or stop founders like yourself?

0:08:43.920 --> 0:08:46.000
<v Speaker 1>Now? Definitely not. Because it's exciting and it has a

0:08:46.000 --> 0:08:48.599
<v Speaker 1>tremendous promise and it could change the world. At the

0:08:48.679 --> 0:08:52.160
<v Speaker 1>same time, there is this deep irony here, right, So

0:08:52.600 --> 0:08:55.040
<v Speaker 1>it may not really work right now, but if it

0:08:55.080 --> 0:08:57.480
<v Speaker 1>does work and we don't invest in it, we're dead

0:08:57.480 --> 0:08:58.160
<v Speaker 1>in the water.

0:08:58.720 --> 0:09:01.679
<v Speaker 3>All right. So moving away from the workplace, I want

0:09:01.720 --> 0:09:04.240
<v Speaker 3>to talk about a staggering figure I read in an

0:09:04.320 --> 0:09:08.439
<v Speaker 3>article from Business Insider this week, which is this five

0:09:08.600 --> 0:09:12.520
<v Speaker 3>hours of daily screen time equals fifteen years of life

0:09:12.880 --> 0:09:14.040
<v Speaker 3>by the age of seventy.

0:09:14.360 --> 0:09:17.840
<v Speaker 1>Man, that's depressing. I think I'm closer to ten hours.

0:09:18.040 --> 0:09:19.440
<v Speaker 3>You think you're on ten hours of screen?

0:09:19.600 --> 0:09:21.960
<v Speaker 1>I just phone and computer to phone computer.

0:09:22.520 --> 0:09:24.800
<v Speaker 3>Is Is that your life or is that another life

0:09:24.800 --> 0:09:25.600
<v Speaker 3>that could be lived?

0:09:25.840 --> 0:09:26.800
<v Speaker 1>Definitely the latter.

0:09:26.960 --> 0:09:30.079
<v Speaker 3>It's crazy. H Well, So this was in a Business

0:09:30.080 --> 0:09:35.040
<v Speaker 3>Insider article about a group of people who are kind

0:09:35.040 --> 0:09:38.760
<v Speaker 3>of reclaiming the term Luddite, who gathered at the Highline

0:09:38.800 --> 0:09:42.959
<v Speaker 3>in New York City to protest the use of screens.

0:09:43.200 --> 0:09:47.040
<v Speaker 1>Essentially, yeah, I just you mentioned reclaiming the term luddite.

0:09:47.280 --> 0:09:49.800
<v Speaker 1>Luddite is used as a smear or has been used

0:09:49.840 --> 0:09:53.000
<v Speaker 1>as a smear to describe people who have like a

0:09:53.000 --> 0:09:56.080
<v Speaker 1>aversion to technology. But I think the word has been

0:09:56.440 --> 0:09:59.320
<v Speaker 1>rehistoricized this year and people have done work on the

0:09:59.360 --> 0:10:03.920
<v Speaker 1>origin story the Luddites who were brave, forward looking protesters

0:10:03.960 --> 0:10:06.600
<v Speaker 1>who at the beginning of the Industrial Revolution were willing

0:10:06.679 --> 0:10:10.800
<v Speaker 1>to sacrifice their lives to protest against the mechanization of

0:10:10.840 --> 0:10:13.640
<v Speaker 1>society and how it was making people jobless and in

0:10:13.679 --> 0:10:16.280
<v Speaker 1>some case go hungry and in some case be killed

0:10:16.320 --> 0:10:19.199
<v Speaker 1>by machines. So it is interesting seeing this work come

0:10:19.559 --> 0:10:20.480
<v Speaker 1>back into vogue.

0:10:20.559 --> 0:10:23.440
<v Speaker 3>I think in this case it has a lot for

0:10:23.480 --> 0:10:25.760
<v Speaker 3>these people who were gathering. I don't know how much

0:10:25.760 --> 0:10:27.880
<v Speaker 3>it had to do with the state of work, as

0:10:27.880 --> 0:10:30.520
<v Speaker 3>it had to do with how much time we are

0:10:30.559 --> 0:10:33.760
<v Speaker 3>wasting on our screens and what the human cost of

0:10:33.800 --> 0:10:37.319
<v Speaker 3>wasting that time is. Business Insider sent someone to the

0:10:37.440 --> 0:10:40.720
<v Speaker 3>rally and basically she described what she saw there, so

0:10:40.760 --> 0:10:42.760
<v Speaker 3>in the article she actually said a number of people

0:10:42.760 --> 0:10:46.120
<v Speaker 3>were dressed up, and lots of them more colorful hats

0:10:46.160 --> 0:10:48.920
<v Speaker 3>in the shape of cones, meant to symbolize the down

0:10:48.960 --> 0:10:50.640
<v Speaker 3>to earth, humble garden gnome.

0:10:51.040 --> 0:10:55.160
<v Speaker 1>Interesting lots of critique about the tech industry. Do you

0:10:55.160 --> 0:10:58.800
<v Speaker 1>think that dressing as a gnome will make the lords

0:10:58.800 --> 0:11:00.760
<v Speaker 1>of the universe? Can the boots?

0:11:01.480 --> 0:11:04.840
<v Speaker 3>I don't think quake in their boots necessarily. I think

0:11:04.920 --> 0:11:07.679
<v Speaker 3>there's a sort of tongue in cheek aspect to this rally.

0:11:08.160 --> 0:11:10.319
<v Speaker 3>The hats were one example of that. There's also the

0:11:10.400 --> 0:11:13.680
<v Speaker 3>name of the event, which I loved, scathing hatred of

0:11:13.720 --> 0:11:18.920
<v Speaker 3>information technology and the passionate hemorrhaging of our neoliberal experience, which,

0:11:19.080 --> 0:11:22.640
<v Speaker 3>as you may guess, is an acronym for shit phone.

0:11:23.040 --> 0:11:25.480
<v Speaker 1>I don't think I've used the words neoliberals since I

0:11:25.520 --> 0:11:28.960
<v Speaker 1>was in college. For that, I've never used Neil's the

0:11:29.000 --> 0:11:30.240
<v Speaker 1>core of that message.

0:11:30.160 --> 0:11:32.280
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, you know. According to the Reporter and Business Insider,

0:11:32.400 --> 0:11:36.000
<v Speaker 3>the goal is to actually advocate for healthier relationships with

0:11:36.040 --> 0:11:39.480
<v Speaker 3>technology and quote in the article to take a conscious

0:11:39.520 --> 0:11:42.960
<v Speaker 3>step back from the social media apps, which I agree

0:11:43.000 --> 0:11:45.280
<v Speaker 3>with and need to implement in my own life. I

0:11:45.280 --> 0:11:47.679
<v Speaker 3>was actually telling you this before we started the show,

0:11:47.720 --> 0:11:50.640
<v Speaker 3>that there was this very serendipitous moment where a woman

0:11:50.720 --> 0:11:53.880
<v Speaker 3>came into the coffee shop where I was working, and

0:11:54.240 --> 0:11:56.440
<v Speaker 3>she said, can you please charge his phone? And I

0:11:56.520 --> 0:11:58.800
<v Speaker 3>look at it and it's a flip phone, and so

0:11:58.840 --> 0:12:00.800
<v Speaker 3>I'm thinking to myself, here's an opportunity to have a

0:12:00.800 --> 0:12:03.040
<v Speaker 3>conversation with her. And I said, you know, when did

0:12:03.120 --> 0:12:04.480
<v Speaker 3>you get this flip phone? And she said, I got

0:12:04.520 --> 0:12:06.959
<v Speaker 3>it a few months ago because I was noticing that

0:12:07.040 --> 0:12:10.120
<v Speaker 3>my memory was getting really bad, Like she just had

0:12:10.160 --> 0:12:12.280
<v Speaker 3>a hard time remembering things that she was reading. And

0:12:12.920 --> 0:12:15.400
<v Speaker 3>she said that since she started using this flip phone

0:12:15.679 --> 0:12:17.880
<v Speaker 3>that like her memory has come back within a matter

0:12:17.920 --> 0:12:19.960
<v Speaker 3>of weeks. I don't know exactly what that looks like

0:12:20.000 --> 0:12:22.640
<v Speaker 3>for her, but it was just this amazing moment where

0:12:22.640 --> 0:12:26.480
<v Speaker 3>I'm reading this piece about you know, techno ludditism, and

0:12:26.920 --> 0:12:29.640
<v Speaker 3>basically this woman comes in doing.

0:12:29.559 --> 0:12:32.480
<v Speaker 1>Exactly that's living that life. Yeah, I mean, how old

0:12:32.600 --> 0:12:33.079
<v Speaker 1>was this woman?

0:12:33.360 --> 0:12:34.320
<v Speaker 3>She must have been our age.

0:12:34.400 --> 0:12:37.760
<v Speaker 1>Okay, yeah, but the protests and they're gen z their

0:12:37.760 --> 0:12:40.120
<v Speaker 1>gen z. And I think one of the trends which

0:12:40.160 --> 0:12:42.760
<v Speaker 1>is emerging is that the most anti tech generation is

0:12:42.800 --> 0:12:45.199
<v Speaker 1>the generation who grew up most on tech, which is

0:12:45.280 --> 0:12:45.840
<v Speaker 1>kind of interesting.

0:12:45.920 --> 0:12:48.120
<v Speaker 3>I think that's because they never grew up without it,

0:12:48.160 --> 0:12:49.600
<v Speaker 3>and so I think there is a little bit of

0:12:49.600 --> 0:12:51.760
<v Speaker 3>a nostalgia for a time that they never had. It's

0:12:51.760 --> 0:12:53.920
<v Speaker 3>like me using vinyl, you know what I mean, Like,

0:12:53.960 --> 0:12:55.680
<v Speaker 3>I think it's cool because I didn't have to use it.

0:12:56.360 --> 0:12:59.640
<v Speaker 3>But Oz, this small but mighty rally wasn't the only

0:12:59.800 --> 0:13:02.360
<v Speaker 3>tech rejection I heard about over the weekend. Have you

0:13:02.400 --> 0:13:05.280
<v Speaker 3>actually been in the West fourth subway stop recently?

0:13:05.559 --> 0:13:06.840
<v Speaker 1>I have?

0:13:06.840 --> 0:13:09.280
<v Speaker 3>Have you seen the ads for friend dot com?

0:13:09.760 --> 0:13:11.760
<v Speaker 1>No? Well I have seen them not in West Fourth Street.

0:13:11.760 --> 0:13:13.720
<v Speaker 1>I saw them in another subway stations. At these like

0:13:14.320 --> 0:13:17.880
<v Speaker 1>big white posters with a picture of a mysterious device

0:13:18.600 --> 0:13:20.680
<v Speaker 1>and a Dictionary definition of the word friend.

0:13:20.920 --> 0:13:24.520
<v Speaker 3>Those are actually ads for a wearable device called Friend,

0:13:25.200 --> 0:13:28.320
<v Speaker 3>and the ad copy says things like I'll never bail

0:13:28.360 --> 0:13:31.880
<v Speaker 3>on dinner plans, you know, stuff like that. I originally

0:13:31.960 --> 0:13:34.880
<v Speaker 3>found this story that I'm telling you right now on Tumblr.

0:13:34.880 --> 0:13:36.839
<v Speaker 3>I actually didn't see it in the subway and there

0:13:36.920 --> 0:13:39.800
<v Speaker 3>was like a thread on tumbler full of pictures of

0:13:39.840 --> 0:13:43.720
<v Speaker 3>these ads that are completely covered in graffiti. So over

0:13:43.760 --> 0:13:47.120
<v Speaker 3>these friend ads people would write things like surveillance capitalism,

0:13:47.280 --> 0:13:50.640
<v Speaker 3>or get real friends, or stop profiting off of loneliness,

0:13:50.800 --> 0:13:52.880
<v Speaker 3>or friends is flesh and blood.

0:13:53.040 --> 0:13:56.800
<v Speaker 1>In other words, people objected to this very much, company

0:13:57.120 --> 0:14:00.800
<v Speaker 1>claiming ownership of the word friend. That's exactly the product though,

0:14:00.880 --> 0:14:01.760
<v Speaker 1>is like a wearable AI.

0:14:02.000 --> 0:14:04.880
<v Speaker 3>This is a wearable device that looks like a miniature

0:14:04.920 --> 0:14:08.160
<v Speaker 3>smart speaker that you wear around your neck. It listens

0:14:08.200 --> 0:14:10.040
<v Speaker 3>to you all day like a friend. It collects your

0:14:10.120 --> 0:14:12.320
<v Speaker 3>data and then you can talk with it via text

0:14:12.360 --> 0:14:15.800
<v Speaker 3>about what's going on my friend, Yeah text, I mean

0:14:15.800 --> 0:14:17.840
<v Speaker 3>this is a lot of my relationships are like this.

0:14:18.240 --> 0:14:21.560
<v Speaker 3>And according to Adweek, friend dot com spent over one

0:14:21.680 --> 0:14:25.800
<v Speaker 3>million dollars in subway advertising. The CEO of VI Schiffman

0:14:26.240 --> 0:14:29.560
<v Speaker 3>designed the creative himself and boasted on x that quote,

0:14:29.600 --> 0:14:32.760
<v Speaker 3>this is the largest ad campaign in New York subway

0:14:32.800 --> 0:14:34.000
<v Speaker 3>advertising history.

0:14:34.640 --> 0:14:37.720
<v Speaker 1>I read that Avi Schiffman raised five million dollars for

0:14:38.040 --> 0:14:41.720
<v Speaker 1>Friend a year ago and spent, as you mentioned, one

0:14:41.760 --> 0:14:46.040
<v Speaker 1>million on this campaign. And he said to Adweek, I

0:14:46.080 --> 0:14:48.880
<v Speaker 1>don't have much money left. I spent it all on this.

0:14:49.280 --> 0:14:52.120
<v Speaker 1>It's a huge gamble. This makes me laugh because I

0:14:52.160 --> 0:14:55.920
<v Speaker 1>have a pretty strong feeling and you know, I'm waiting

0:14:55.920 --> 0:14:58.880
<v Speaker 1>to be corrected that Friend will not take off as

0:14:58.920 --> 0:14:59.400
<v Speaker 1>a product.

0:14:59.680 --> 0:15:01.840
<v Speaker 3>I think think what's really funny about it is that

0:15:02.160 --> 0:15:04.360
<v Speaker 3>sometimes the marketing is the thing itself. And I think

0:15:04.400 --> 0:15:07.200
<v Speaker 3>it's really funny that people are engaging so much in

0:15:07.240 --> 0:15:10.760
<v Speaker 3>the defacing of these ads. And I think what's interesting

0:15:11.320 --> 0:15:13.880
<v Speaker 3>is that people know exactly what it is when they

0:15:13.880 --> 0:15:15.880
<v Speaker 3>look at the ad, and they also know that they

0:15:15.880 --> 0:15:18.520
<v Speaker 3>don't want to engage in using it. And so I

0:15:18.560 --> 0:15:20.680
<v Speaker 3>think the proof is in the putting in terms of

0:15:20.840 --> 0:15:23.320
<v Speaker 3>what people are writing on these ads. And again it

0:15:23.360 --> 0:15:29.080
<v Speaker 3>ties back to there's this growing trend to pull away

0:15:29.160 --> 0:15:33.760
<v Speaker 3>from just the onslaught of like digital interface that we

0:15:33.800 --> 0:15:36.600
<v Speaker 3>have in our lives. It's just I think gen Z

0:15:36.800 --> 0:15:43.440
<v Speaker 3>is really aware of how much products devices are co

0:15:43.480 --> 0:15:47.000
<v Speaker 3>opting their lives, and they don't. They're mad as hell

0:15:47.000 --> 0:15:48.200
<v Speaker 3>and they don't want to take it anymore.

0:15:48.640 --> 0:15:52.080
<v Speaker 1>I think the big question for me really is, will

0:15:52.120 --> 0:15:57.200
<v Speaker 1>this anger and frustration there's coalescing around the role of

0:15:57.240 --> 0:15:59.960
<v Speaker 1>technology in our lives. Will it become a political force.

0:16:00.120 --> 0:16:03.880
<v Speaker 1>Will it be organized enough and durable enough to actually

0:16:04.280 --> 0:16:07.840
<v Speaker 1>drive any change in the way technology is used, the

0:16:07.840 --> 0:16:11.680
<v Speaker 1>way it's regulated. I mean, it's you know, it's really

0:16:11.720 --> 0:16:14.560
<v Speaker 1>it's really really hard to make society. What changes. Of course,

0:16:14.680 --> 0:16:18.400
<v Speaker 1>it did happen with cigarettes and sugar, ELTs and sugar,

0:16:18.480 --> 0:16:22.960
<v Speaker 1>and so, you know, we'll see after break. Some more headlines.

0:16:23.240 --> 0:16:25.800
<v Speaker 1>A top video game company is going private in a

0:16:25.880 --> 0:16:29.600
<v Speaker 1>fifty billion dollar deal. Italy becomes the first country in

0:16:29.600 --> 0:16:33.400
<v Speaker 1>the EU to pass its own AI regulations, and an

0:16:33.400 --> 0:16:37.560
<v Speaker 1>AI actress has agents lining up to sign her. Then

0:16:37.840 --> 0:16:48.160
<v Speaker 1>on chatting me, we learn Spanish. Stay with us. So, Kara,

0:16:48.360 --> 0:16:51.640
<v Speaker 1>you asked me at the beginning of the episode whether

0:16:51.680 --> 0:16:52.520
<v Speaker 1>I was wearing shoes.

0:16:52.760 --> 0:16:53.560
<v Speaker 3>Yeah I did.

0:16:53.840 --> 0:16:57.240
<v Speaker 1>I'm going to ask you now, do you play video games? Hell?

0:16:57.360 --> 0:16:58.560
<v Speaker 1>Yeah you do.

0:16:58.120 --> 0:17:00.760
<v Speaker 3>I know I knew you didn't, and I was wondering

0:17:00.760 --> 0:17:02.400
<v Speaker 3>if you're going to ask me, what do you play

0:17:02.520 --> 0:17:05.720
<v Speaker 3>I'm a big Moriocart eight switch user.

0:17:05.800 --> 0:17:06.600
<v Speaker 1>Oh interesting, yea.

0:17:06.960 --> 0:17:08.400
<v Speaker 3>I fall asleep with it on me all the time

0:17:08.440 --> 0:17:10.600
<v Speaker 3>and it hits me in the face and then I

0:17:10.600 --> 0:17:11.000
<v Speaker 3>wake up.

0:17:11.040 --> 0:17:13.199
<v Speaker 1>So as a resounding yes, yes, have you heard the

0:17:13.200 --> 0:17:14.920
<v Speaker 1>story about electronic arts this week?

0:17:15.160 --> 0:17:17.359
<v Speaker 3>E A Sports It's in the game. If I say

0:17:17.440 --> 0:17:18.960
<v Speaker 3>that to my sister, she'd be like, yep, I know

0:17:19.000 --> 0:17:20.040
<v Speaker 3>exactly what you're talking about.

0:17:20.600 --> 0:17:23.960
<v Speaker 1>So it's a massive video game company, both titled like Fifa,

0:17:24.520 --> 0:17:27.639
<v Speaker 1>Madden and the Sims, and it has agreed to go

0:17:27.720 --> 0:17:31.199
<v Speaker 1>private for the price of fifty five billion dollars. According

0:17:31.200 --> 0:17:33.280
<v Speaker 1>to The New York Times. If the deal goes through,

0:17:33.520 --> 0:17:36.199
<v Speaker 1>it will be the largest buyout of a publicly traded

0:17:36.240 --> 0:17:39.040
<v Speaker 1>company ever, not adjusting for inflation.

0:17:39.640 --> 0:17:41.240
<v Speaker 3>So what happens to the shareholders?

0:17:41.400 --> 0:17:47.240
<v Speaker 1>They get money two hundred and ten dollars per share,

0:17:47.240 --> 0:17:50.240
<v Speaker 1>which is a twenty five percent premium to the company's

0:17:50.240 --> 0:17:52.119
<v Speaker 1>share price as a public company.

0:17:52.680 --> 0:17:55.199
<v Speaker 3>So who's paying for this? This is just crazy money.

0:17:55.359 --> 0:17:59.719
<v Speaker 1>The group of investors led by Saudi Arabia's public investment fund,

0:18:00.000 --> 0:18:04.560
<v Speaker 1>Infinity Partners, which is Jared Kushner's private equity firm, and finally,

0:18:04.640 --> 0:18:08.280
<v Speaker 1>another firm Silver Lake, who also rumored to be part

0:18:08.359 --> 0:18:09.440
<v Speaker 1>of the TikTok deal.

0:18:09.800 --> 0:18:12.080
<v Speaker 3>So that is the other huge deal that's said to

0:18:12.080 --> 0:18:13.320
<v Speaker 3>be decided in the coming months.

0:18:13.480 --> 0:18:16.800
<v Speaker 1>I mean to me, these stories go side by side. Obviously,

0:18:16.920 --> 0:18:20.080
<v Speaker 1>Jared Kushner being involved in the EA deal and you

0:18:20.200 --> 0:18:24.240
<v Speaker 1>benefiting from his Trump connections. The TikTok deal has, you know,

0:18:24.359 --> 0:18:27.080
<v Speaker 1>Larry and David Ellison front and centered in a deal

0:18:27.119 --> 0:18:30.439
<v Speaker 1>being broken by the Trump administration and the Chinese government.

0:18:30.480 --> 0:18:34.760
<v Speaker 1>It's interesting to me, you know how US technology capitalism

0:18:34.880 --> 0:18:38.439
<v Speaker 1>is kind of more and more integrating with the state,

0:18:38.680 --> 0:18:41.520
<v Speaker 1>or at the very least the Trump the Trump Friends

0:18:41.560 --> 0:18:42.400
<v Speaker 1>and Family.

0:18:42.080 --> 0:18:44.639
<v Speaker 3>Circle, Yes, Trump fn F as we'd like to call it.

0:18:44.680 --> 0:18:48.800
<v Speaker 3>So what's going to happen next in this electronic arts buyout.

0:18:49.160 --> 0:18:51.320
<v Speaker 1>Well, the deal has to be approved by the government's

0:18:51.359 --> 0:18:55.800
<v Speaker 1>Committee on Foreign Investment, which reviews foreign buyouts for security concerns.

0:18:56.960 --> 0:18:59.600
<v Speaker 1>There are concerns about data, of course. I mean a

0:18:59.640 --> 0:19:02.800
<v Speaker 1>lot of people play video games in the US, which

0:19:02.880 --> 0:19:05.119
<v Speaker 1>means there's a lot of data that could be collected

0:19:05.160 --> 0:19:06.400
<v Speaker 1>by a foreign government.

0:19:07.400 --> 0:19:09.480
<v Speaker 3>So do you look at app store charts?

0:19:10.320 --> 0:19:11.960
<v Speaker 1>I look at podcast charts because.

0:19:11.720 --> 0:19:13.280
<v Speaker 3>You want to see how your podcasts are doing because

0:19:13.280 --> 0:19:15.959
<v Speaker 3>you're a founder. That's why I actually look at the

0:19:16.000 --> 0:19:19.080
<v Speaker 3>App store charts sometimes because I think it's really interesting

0:19:19.119 --> 0:19:21.280
<v Speaker 3>what's trend Usually it's the same stuff that's trending. But

0:19:21.600 --> 0:19:24.160
<v Speaker 3>last week I actually noticed that there was this new

0:19:24.160 --> 0:19:27.120
<v Speaker 3>app that I'd never seen before called Neon Mobile at

0:19:27.119 --> 0:19:27.800
<v Speaker 3>the top of the chart.

0:19:27.800 --> 0:19:28.560
<v Speaker 1>The top of the charts.

0:19:28.640 --> 0:19:29.840
<v Speaker 3>Yes, it was at the top of the charts, and

0:19:29.840 --> 0:19:33.840
<v Speaker 3>then it disappeared or it stopped being used for a

0:19:33.880 --> 0:19:34.679
<v Speaker 3>privacy issue.

0:19:34.840 --> 0:19:36.440
<v Speaker 1>Well why was it so popular in the first place?

0:19:36.480 --> 0:19:37.879
<v Speaker 3>Because people were making money?

0:19:38.080 --> 0:19:40.520
<v Speaker 1>Of course, Okay, back up a couple of steps. What

0:19:40.600 --> 0:19:43.760
<v Speaker 1>is neomobile and how are people making money from it?

0:19:43.960 --> 0:19:47.960
<v Speaker 3>So the app basically offered to pay you money for

0:19:48.080 --> 0:19:51.880
<v Speaker 3>recordings and transcripts of your side of phone calls, which

0:19:51.920 --> 0:19:55.600
<v Speaker 3>was data that they would then sell to AI companies.

0:19:56.240 --> 0:19:59.640
<v Speaker 1>So you'll bet I basically, as a Neon user, would

0:19:59.640 --> 0:20:03.280
<v Speaker 1>allow Neon to record my calls, my private calls, and

0:20:03.320 --> 0:20:06.240
<v Speaker 1>then sell them on to other companies.

0:20:06.600 --> 0:20:08.439
<v Speaker 3>I when you say.

0:20:08.320 --> 0:20:10.359
<v Speaker 1>It like that, how much people getting paid?

0:20:10.520 --> 0:20:12.680
<v Speaker 3>What the website says about Neon is that they pay

0:20:13.240 --> 0:20:16.560
<v Speaker 3>thirty cents per minute if you're calling another Neon user,

0:20:16.640 --> 0:20:18.919
<v Speaker 3>so if you had Neon and I had Neon and

0:20:18.960 --> 0:20:20.920
<v Speaker 3>we were calling each other, they would pay us thirty

0:20:20.920 --> 0:20:24.199
<v Speaker 3>cents per minute. If I was calling a non Neon

0:20:24.280 --> 0:20:27.960
<v Speaker 3>app user, it's fifteen cents per minute. The max that

0:20:28.000 --> 0:20:31.360
<v Speaker 3>you can make is thirty dollars a day. Last week,

0:20:31.680 --> 0:20:35.280
<v Speaker 3>this free app had thousands of users and was downloaded

0:20:35.320 --> 0:20:39.879
<v Speaker 3>seventy five thousand times in one day. So selling your

0:20:39.880 --> 0:20:42.520
<v Speaker 3>personal data to train an AI is one thing, but

0:20:43.080 --> 0:20:46.520
<v Speaker 3>TechCrunch actually discovered something even more sinister, which is this

0:20:46.640 --> 0:20:50.640
<v Speaker 3>security flaw that allowed users to access the phone numbers,

0:20:50.840 --> 0:20:54.560
<v Speaker 3>call recordings, and transcripts of any other user on the app.

0:20:54.640 --> 0:20:57.840
<v Speaker 1>So it wasn't just that you were consciously selling your

0:20:57.840 --> 0:21:01.280
<v Speaker 1>phone calls to companies. There was also a kind of

0:21:01.359 --> 0:21:04.440
<v Speaker 1>unconscious or there was actually flaw which meant that everything

0:21:04.920 --> 0:21:07.400
<v Speaker 1>you did while using Neon was exposed to everyone else

0:21:07.640 --> 0:21:11.280
<v Speaker 1>on Neon. Good old journalism, and that's why, as you mentioned,

0:21:11.280 --> 0:21:12.240
<v Speaker 1>it went offline.

0:21:12.440 --> 0:21:16.479
<v Speaker 3>Yes for now, for now. So Neon actually intends to

0:21:16.480 --> 0:21:18.879
<v Speaker 3>come back with a vengeance, but they have not given

0:21:18.920 --> 0:21:21.040
<v Speaker 3>any indication of how long it will take to fix

0:21:21.080 --> 0:21:23.639
<v Speaker 3>the privacy flaw. The reason I sent this to our

0:21:23.640 --> 0:21:25.600
<v Speaker 3>producers is because I was going to sign up for it, Yeah,

0:21:25.680 --> 0:21:26.200
<v Speaker 3>because I'm a.

0:21:26.119 --> 0:21:29.240
<v Speaker 1>Free thirty dollars a day not bad. That's like three

0:21:29.280 --> 0:21:33.240
<v Speaker 1>that would be thirty dollars a day, thirty cents a minute,

0:21:33.440 --> 0:21:39.960
<v Speaker 1>that's one thousand. That's a thousand, even outstrip your average

0:21:40.080 --> 0:21:41.400
<v Speaker 1>minutes per day on the phone.

0:21:41.440 --> 0:21:44.399
<v Speaker 3>But I think that the average user relates to me

0:21:44.480 --> 0:21:47.920
<v Speaker 3>and sees paid for phone calls with no downside. Yeah,

0:21:47.920 --> 0:21:48.760
<v Speaker 3>I'm going to sign up for that.

0:21:48.800 --> 0:21:50.080
<v Speaker 1>Why not say there is a downside?

0:21:50.160 --> 0:21:52.960
<v Speaker 3>There was a huge downside. I think the takeaway here

0:21:53.080 --> 0:21:56.120
<v Speaker 3>is that be very cautious of when you download any

0:21:56.160 --> 0:21:58.199
<v Speaker 3>apps that are permissioned to record your phone calls and

0:21:58.240 --> 0:21:59.280
<v Speaker 3>access your contacts.

0:21:59.320 --> 0:22:02.040
<v Speaker 1>One hundred percent. The takeaway for me is slightly different,

0:22:02.080 --> 0:22:06.639
<v Speaker 1>which is how you know, this surveillance society doesn't need

0:22:06.720 --> 0:22:10.520
<v Speaker 1>to be imposed, like we kind of volunteer for it ourselves.

0:22:10.680 --> 0:22:13.600
<v Speaker 1>And we're talking about Larry Ellison, but he said last

0:22:13.640 --> 0:22:17.359
<v Speaker 1>year citizens will be on their best behavior because we're

0:22:17.359 --> 0:22:20.280
<v Speaker 1>constantly recording and reporting everything that's going on.

0:22:20.880 --> 0:22:23.520
<v Speaker 3>I think what is evidence here is that people have

0:22:23.520 --> 0:22:26.560
<v Speaker 3>gotten a little bit cynical about surveillance capitalism and they're like,

0:22:26.640 --> 0:22:27.080
<v Speaker 3>you know what.

0:22:27.040 --> 0:22:28.679
<v Speaker 1>Pay me for it's happening anyway, pay me for that.

0:22:28.680 --> 0:22:29.480
<v Speaker 3>That's exactly right.

0:22:29.800 --> 0:22:34.600
<v Speaker 1>You know, elsewhere in the world, AI is actually being regulated,

0:22:34.840 --> 0:22:38.520
<v Speaker 1>and Italy passed the landmark law last week that addressed

0:22:38.520 --> 0:22:40.400
<v Speaker 1>a number of issues that have bubbled up on tech

0:22:40.480 --> 0:22:42.080
<v Speaker 1>stuff over the last few months.

0:22:42.240 --> 0:22:45.040
<v Speaker 3>What are some of the issues that have bubbled.

0:22:44.760 --> 0:22:48.960
<v Speaker 1>Up well, per Reuters, the new regulations in Italy include

0:22:49.320 --> 0:22:54.639
<v Speaker 1>restrictions on copyrighted content for AI driven text, required parental

0:22:54.640 --> 0:22:57.800
<v Speaker 1>consent for AI access for children under the age of fourteen, which,

0:22:57.840 --> 0:22:59.400
<v Speaker 1>by the way, I think is a huge one huge

0:23:00.160 --> 0:23:03.880
<v Speaker 1>in forced transparency around AI use in the workplace, Employees

0:23:03.920 --> 0:23:07.200
<v Speaker 1>will be required to inform workers when AI is being deployed,

0:23:07.720 --> 0:23:11.840
<v Speaker 1>and in the healthcare setting in particular, AI is allowed

0:23:11.840 --> 0:23:15.199
<v Speaker 1>to be used to assist in diagnosing patients, but doctors

0:23:15.240 --> 0:23:17.479
<v Speaker 1>will have to continue to make the final call and

0:23:17.520 --> 0:23:20.800
<v Speaker 1>also to inform their patients about how AI was used

0:23:21.000 --> 0:23:22.200
<v Speaker 1>in the diagnostic process.

0:23:22.600 --> 0:23:25.000
<v Speaker 3>That last one actually reminds me of the conversation we

0:23:25.080 --> 0:23:27.600
<v Speaker 3>had with Robert Capps about AI in the workplace and

0:23:27.640 --> 0:23:30.879
<v Speaker 3>how transparency and accountability are going to be a huge

0:23:30.880 --> 0:23:35.200
<v Speaker 3>part of our jobs as human AI collaboration grows more popular.

0:23:34.840 --> 0:23:37.320
<v Speaker 1>I think that's right. I mean, these are a lot

0:23:37.320 --> 0:23:39.960
<v Speaker 1>of these are guidelines for how to work in an

0:23:40.320 --> 0:23:44.280
<v Speaker 1>ethical way with AI, but there is also a section

0:23:44.800 --> 0:23:50.400
<v Speaker 1>devoted to AI crime and punishment, prison terms ranging from

0:23:50.600 --> 0:23:53.919
<v Speaker 1>one to five years for people who quote use technology

0:23:53.960 --> 0:23:57.520
<v Speaker 1>to cause harm such as generating deep fakes, and even

0:23:57.560 --> 0:24:00.480
<v Speaker 1>harsher penalties for those who use AI to commit crimes

0:24:00.520 --> 0:24:02.840
<v Speaker 1>like fraud and identity theft. So when I said that

0:24:02.840 --> 0:24:04.600
<v Speaker 1>this law addresses a lot of things we've talked about

0:24:04.600 --> 0:24:06.720
<v Speaker 1>on textuff this year, it actually really does. On the

0:24:06.720 --> 0:24:10.960
<v Speaker 1>other hand, without being too cynical, I'm not sure how

0:24:11.000 --> 0:24:15.960
<v Speaker 1>consequential a national law can be for an international technology.

0:24:16.200 --> 0:24:17.119
<v Speaker 3>That's what I was just thinking.

0:24:17.160 --> 0:24:19.360
<v Speaker 1>And yeah, this is, to be fair, built on top

0:24:19.400 --> 0:24:21.920
<v Speaker 1>of an EU AI law that was passed a few

0:24:21.920 --> 0:24:24.159
<v Speaker 1>months ago and it is being implemented in stages, and

0:24:24.560 --> 0:24:26.240
<v Speaker 1>EU as a whole, I think has this kind of

0:24:26.280 --> 0:24:29.680
<v Speaker 1>reputation of being the regulator in chief. But also it

0:24:29.680 --> 0:24:32.639
<v Speaker 1>doesn't have the political clout of China and the US.

0:24:32.720 --> 0:24:36.200
<v Speaker 1>So it'll be interesting to know whether you know, as these,

0:24:36.240 --> 0:24:40.080
<v Speaker 1>for example, these new Luddite movements emerge and gain political

0:24:40.119 --> 0:24:42.560
<v Speaker 1>clout here in the US, will they look to Europe

0:24:42.600 --> 0:24:44.480
<v Speaker 1>and say, O, wow, it's interesting they've actually done something

0:24:44.560 --> 0:24:49.000
<v Speaker 1>concrete and demand that legislators here do something similar or

0:24:49.040 --> 0:24:52.120
<v Speaker 1>will this be kind of shouting into the wind by

0:24:52.160 --> 0:24:54.720
<v Speaker 1>the block of countries who don't actually create on the

0:24:54.760 --> 0:24:56.439
<v Speaker 1>whole AI products, like in.

0:24:56.480 --> 0:24:58.800
<v Speaker 3>Other words, good for Italy, But yeah, does it matter

0:24:58.800 --> 0:24:59.360
<v Speaker 3>for anyone else?

0:25:00.080 --> 0:25:01.960
<v Speaker 1>Going to be any more relevant than the Colosseum.

0:25:03.280 --> 0:25:05.439
<v Speaker 3>So the last story I want to bring you is

0:25:05.880 --> 0:25:08.480
<v Speaker 3>about one of my favorite subjects, which is AI in Hollywood,

0:25:08.520 --> 0:25:11.720
<v Speaker 3>which brings me to a very popular story this week

0:25:11.840 --> 0:25:13.040
<v Speaker 3>about Tillie.

0:25:12.800 --> 0:25:15.120
<v Speaker 1>Norwood, who is Tillie Norwood.

0:25:15.400 --> 0:25:18.400
<v Speaker 3>Tilly Norwood has been all over my Instagram feed all

0:25:18.440 --> 0:25:22.280
<v Speaker 3>week because I work, as you know, in show business

0:25:22.320 --> 0:25:25.159
<v Speaker 3>when I'm not doing this, and I noticed on my

0:25:25.200 --> 0:25:28.440
<v Speaker 3>Instagram feed all these people are making like loll Tilly Norwood, Loll,

0:25:28.440 --> 0:25:31.800
<v Speaker 3>Who's going to sign Tilly Norwood? And I googled Tillie

0:25:31.840 --> 0:25:35.960
<v Speaker 3>Norwood last week and it turns out that Tillie Norwood

0:25:36.400 --> 0:25:37.960
<v Speaker 3>is AI hold On.

0:25:38.520 --> 0:25:42.040
<v Speaker 1>So you became aware of Tillie Norwood before you became

0:25:42.080 --> 0:25:44.360
<v Speaker 1>aware she was an AI character, That's correct. You were

0:25:44.400 --> 0:25:46.360
<v Speaker 1>like a star is born. I gotta know more.

0:25:46.320 --> 0:25:48.800
<v Speaker 3>Well, Like people were posting photos of her, and I

0:25:48.840 --> 0:25:50.399
<v Speaker 3>was like, is she an actress? Am I supposed to know?

0:25:50.520 --> 0:25:53.040
<v Speaker 3>Or is she a new angeneu? And then I mean,

0:25:53.280 --> 0:25:55.480
<v Speaker 3>I'm kind of exaggerating, but like very quickly I googled

0:25:55.480 --> 0:25:56.760
<v Speaker 3>her and I realized, Oh, she's AI.

0:25:57.240 --> 0:26:01.240
<v Speaker 1>Why had everyone suddenly come alive being fascinated by this

0:26:01.359 --> 0:26:05.960
<v Speaker 1>one AI generated figure actress? I mean, there's so many.

0:26:05.720 --> 0:26:08.720
<v Speaker 3>There's a very specific reason. Actually, they're looking for an

0:26:08.760 --> 0:26:12.199
<v Speaker 3>agent who's going to sign her. They're treating, and so

0:26:12.400 --> 0:26:15.399
<v Speaker 3>a lot of the further kind of discourse on Instagram

0:26:15.520 --> 0:26:18.600
<v Speaker 3>was like making a joke like Lowell, who's Tilly going

0:26:18.680 --> 0:26:19.160
<v Speaker 3>to go with?

0:26:19.680 --> 0:26:20.280
<v Speaker 1>And for?

0:26:20.720 --> 0:26:23.600
<v Speaker 3>I might be wrong and this might have been something

0:26:23.600 --> 0:26:27.359
<v Speaker 3>that people talked about with other sort of AI generated characters,

0:26:27.400 --> 0:26:30.359
<v Speaker 3>but this is the first time I've seen an AI

0:26:30.680 --> 0:26:33.720
<v Speaker 3>actress be talked about in the way that other actresses

0:26:33.760 --> 0:26:34.440
<v Speaker 3>are talked about.

0:26:34.720 --> 0:26:35.720
<v Speaker 1>What actor has been saying.

0:26:35.840 --> 0:26:39.119
<v Speaker 3>They're basically saying that like this is bullshit, They're like,

0:26:39.160 --> 0:26:42.239
<v Speaker 3>this is this could literally come for our jobs. I

0:26:42.240 --> 0:26:45.440
<v Speaker 3>want to actually read you these two quotes from Tilly's creator,

0:26:45.520 --> 0:26:48.879
<v Speaker 3>Aileen van der Velden. She put out a statement on

0:26:48.960 --> 0:26:52.960
<v Speaker 3>Instagram saying Tilly Norwood is not a replacement for a

0:26:53.000 --> 0:26:56.200
<v Speaker 3>human being, but a creative work, a piece of art.

0:26:56.640 --> 0:26:59.199
<v Speaker 3>I see AI as not a replacement for people, but

0:26:59.280 --> 0:27:02.520
<v Speaker 3>as a new tool, a new paint brush. I think

0:27:02.560 --> 0:27:07.360
<v Speaker 3>it's also important to note that when Tilly debuted, Aileen

0:27:07.480 --> 0:27:10.880
<v Speaker 3>said quote she wants Tilly to be the next Scarlett

0:27:10.920 --> 0:27:12.320
<v Speaker 3>Johansson or Natalie Portman.

0:27:12.640 --> 0:27:15.840
<v Speaker 1>Do you think Scott Johansson Natalie Portman identify more with

0:27:15.960 --> 0:27:19.680
<v Speaker 1>being a tool or paint brush. What do you think?

0:27:19.720 --> 0:27:21.760
<v Speaker 1>I don't think more as humans.

0:27:22.000 --> 0:27:25.040
<v Speaker 3>I mean, I guess, I know. I know what she's

0:27:25.080 --> 0:27:29.120
<v Speaker 3>saying in terms of actors read lines, but it's a

0:27:29.240 --> 0:27:31.960
<v Speaker 3>I think that's blurring the lines between being a person

0:27:32.440 --> 0:27:35.119
<v Speaker 3>or technology in a way that people are uncomfortable with. Still,

0:27:35.480 --> 0:27:37.960
<v Speaker 3>SAG actually put out a statement and in that statement

0:27:37.960 --> 0:27:41.800
<v Speaker 3>they claim that Tilly was trained using performances from actors

0:27:41.840 --> 0:27:46.639
<v Speaker 3>without permission or compensation, which is actually out of compliance

0:27:46.640 --> 0:27:52.160
<v Speaker 3>with their new union contract. And girsh which on Entourage

0:27:52.240 --> 0:27:55.080
<v Speaker 3>Ari Gold would call a second tier agency. But I

0:27:55.080 --> 0:28:02.000
<v Speaker 3>don't agree with that. But I love gersh Gers has

0:28:02.040 --> 0:28:04.040
<v Speaker 3>great clients and Tilly won't be one of them.

0:28:04.600 --> 0:28:06.480
<v Speaker 1>Well, that's funny. I wonder, I wonder if she will

0:28:06.520 --> 0:28:09.240
<v Speaker 1>end up getting signed by one of the major agencies.

0:28:09.520 --> 0:28:12.800
<v Speaker 3>It's like the most lol thing to me that and

0:28:12.840 --> 0:28:15.240
<v Speaker 3>it's so agency. It's like, here's a product or a

0:28:15.280 --> 0:28:17.880
<v Speaker 3>commodity that is hot, right now, go chase after it.

0:28:18.200 --> 0:28:20.880
<v Speaker 3>I don't think anyone at the agencies is like overthinking

0:28:20.880 --> 0:28:23.320
<v Speaker 3>the fact that she's AI. I think actors are like,

0:28:23.720 --> 0:28:26.600
<v Speaker 3>wait a second, the agency that represents me is looking

0:28:26.600 --> 0:28:30.479
<v Speaker 3>to represent an AI. Is that are they condoning, you know,

0:28:30.600 --> 0:28:32.639
<v Speaker 3>movies being made with AI actors in them. And I

0:28:32.640 --> 0:28:35.439
<v Speaker 3>think that that's a fair question for actors to be asking.

0:28:35.480 --> 0:28:45.320
<v Speaker 3>I don't think it's outrageous.

0:28:57.080 --> 0:29:00.520
<v Speaker 1>Okay, Kara is time for Chatting me nowment where we

0:29:00.560 --> 0:29:03.600
<v Speaker 1>hear from our listeners about how they're using AI in

0:29:03.640 --> 0:29:06.440
<v Speaker 1>their daily lives. And this week was interesting because we

0:29:06.520 --> 0:29:11.600
<v Speaker 1>got a submission and our producers weren't sure if the

0:29:11.680 --> 0:29:16.040
<v Speaker 1>submission was read by AI or a real person's voice,

0:29:16.120 --> 0:29:18.640
<v Speaker 1>and so we had a back and forth over email

0:29:18.760 --> 0:29:20.960
<v Speaker 1>with the person who submitted it, who said that he's

0:29:20.960 --> 0:29:24.400
<v Speaker 1>a teacher and therefore he may have a somewhat robotic

0:29:24.520 --> 0:29:27.240
<v Speaker 1>voice as a result, but also that his voice may

0:29:27.320 --> 0:29:30.440
<v Speaker 1>have been compressed by the voice recording software he's using,

0:29:30.520 --> 0:29:32.400
<v Speaker 1>So this is kind of a meta chat. To me,

0:29:32.640 --> 0:29:34.880
<v Speaker 1>the topic is not meta, but I wanted to bring

0:29:34.960 --> 0:29:37.520
<v Speaker 1>up the meta framework of this because this is kind

0:29:37.520 --> 0:29:39.360
<v Speaker 1>of the dominant question of our age.

0:29:39.720 --> 0:29:42.800
<v Speaker 3>Is that person real? This week we heard from Sean.

0:29:42.920 --> 0:29:45.480
<v Speaker 3>His voice is real and he is a digital communications

0:29:45.560 --> 0:29:49.160
<v Speaker 3>lead at what we in the US call a technical college,

0:29:49.400 --> 0:29:51.360
<v Speaker 3>and part of Sean's job is to teach both his

0:29:51.440 --> 0:29:54.920
<v Speaker 3>students and his colleagues to incorporate AI responsibly.

0:29:55.160 --> 0:29:57.160
<v Speaker 1>I'd be interested to get his take on the work

0:29:57.200 --> 0:29:59.280
<v Speaker 1>slop story we talked about. Well.

0:29:59.480 --> 0:30:02.040
<v Speaker 3>I think in this this case, Sean is clearly a pilot,

0:30:02.160 --> 0:30:06.480
<v Speaker 3>not a passenger. Unlike me. He's been thinking very creatively

0:30:06.560 --> 0:30:08.880
<v Speaker 3>about how to harness AI for his work, and he

0:30:08.920 --> 0:30:12.120
<v Speaker 3>says his school wants to use AI to reduce workload

0:30:12.160 --> 0:30:15.800
<v Speaker 3>on the staff, enhance creativity, and support personalized learning.

0:30:16.360 --> 0:30:20.600
<v Speaker 2>I had students take personality tests in Spanish and then

0:30:20.800 --> 0:30:25.080
<v Speaker 2>used AI to turn their personality data into unique paintings.

0:30:25.440 --> 0:30:28.560
<v Speaker 2>We then held an exhibition where other Spanish speakers could

0:30:28.640 --> 0:30:32.360
<v Speaker 2>engage with the students, who had to introduce the pieces

0:30:32.440 --> 0:30:33.640
<v Speaker 2>and answer questions.

0:30:34.000 --> 0:30:37.720
<v Speaker 1>I love this sort of paradigm of human machine human

0:30:37.800 --> 0:30:41.520
<v Speaker 1>machine engagement and making which I've been in Sean's class.

0:30:41.640 --> 0:30:43.719
<v Speaker 3>I also like that he's not just an AI booster,

0:30:43.800 --> 0:30:45.400
<v Speaker 3>that he actually sees the whole picture.

0:30:45.920 --> 0:30:49.480
<v Speaker 2>While we're enthusiastic about AI, we're also careful about using

0:30:49.560 --> 0:30:53.080
<v Speaker 2>it responsibly. I have worked with senior leaders to issue

0:30:53.120 --> 0:30:56.640
<v Speaker 2>clear AI guidance for students and staff to outline how

0:30:56.680 --> 0:31:01.040
<v Speaker 2>these tools should and shouldn't be used. In practical terms,

0:31:01.120 --> 0:31:04.000
<v Speaker 2>this means AI is to be used as a supportive tool,

0:31:04.480 --> 0:31:06.400
<v Speaker 2>not as a way to do a teacher's or a

0:31:06.520 --> 0:31:10.280
<v Speaker 2>student's work for them. By cultivating these habits now, we're

0:31:10.320 --> 0:31:13.480
<v Speaker 2>hopefully preparing our students to use AI wisely in their

0:31:13.520 --> 0:31:17.600
<v Speaker 2>future workplaces because AI tools will be part of their careers.

0:31:18.080 --> 0:31:22.320
<v Speaker 2>As an educator, I find this incredibly exciting. Most importantly,

0:31:22.600 --> 0:31:25.880
<v Speaker 2>our students are learning with AI and not in fear

0:31:25.960 --> 0:31:26.200
<v Speaker 2>of it.

0:31:26.680 --> 0:31:29.200
<v Speaker 1>So in case anyone was wondering what the opposite of

0:31:29.240 --> 0:31:32.720
<v Speaker 1>WORKSLOP is, we can thank Sean because we have our answer.

0:31:33.000 --> 0:31:35.080
<v Speaker 3>Thank you Sean for submitting your chating.

0:31:34.920 --> 0:31:37.959
<v Speaker 1>Me and please listeners, we want to hear more from you.

0:31:37.960 --> 0:31:40.480
<v Speaker 1>We want more chat and mes. Send your stories to

0:31:40.680 --> 0:31:47.680
<v Speaker 1>tech Stuff Podcast at gmail dot com.

0:31:47.840 --> 0:31:49.560
<v Speaker 3>That's it for this week for tech Stuff.

0:31:49.560 --> 0:31:52.440
<v Speaker 1>I'm care Price and I'm os Valoschin. This episode was

0:31:52.480 --> 0:31:55.840
<v Speaker 1>produced by Eliza Dennis, Melissa Slaughter, and Tyler Hill, who

0:31:55.920 --> 0:31:58.800
<v Speaker 1>was executive produced by me Caarra Price and Kate Osborne

0:31:58.840 --> 0:32:03.400
<v Speaker 1>for Kaleidoscope and Katria Novel for iHeart Podcasts. The Engineer

0:32:03.440 --> 0:32:06.880
<v Speaker 1>is Bihe Fraser and Jack Insley mix this episode Kyle

0:32:06.960 --> 0:32:08.040
<v Speaker 1>murder rodat Theme Song.

0:32:08.440 --> 0:32:11.200
<v Speaker 3>Join us next Wednesday for Text Up the Story, when

0:32:11.200 --> 0:32:13.960
<v Speaker 3>we will share an in depth conversation with David Ignatius

0:32:14.000 --> 0:32:17.320
<v Speaker 3>all about spycraft and how the CIA is faring in

0:32:17.360 --> 0:32:18.600
<v Speaker 3>the technological age.

0:32:18.880 --> 0:32:21.520
<v Speaker 1>And please do rate and review the show wherever you listen,

0:32:21.920 --> 0:32:24.520
<v Speaker 1>and send us your thoughts at tech stuff podcast at

0:32:24.520 --> 0:32:26.239
<v Speaker 1>gmail dot com. We love hearing from you.