1 00:00:02,520 --> 00:00:06,640 Speaker 1: Media. Hello, and welcome to this week's Better Offline Monologue. 2 00:00:06,640 --> 00:00:16,320 Speaker 1: I am your host ed Zeitron, of course, So if 3 00:00:16,320 --> 00:00:18,279 Speaker 1: you're listening to this as the episode's are, you're in 4 00:00:18,280 --> 00:00:20,240 Speaker 1: the middle of a two part episode about the systemic 5 00:00:20,320 --> 00:00:23,400 Speaker 1: risk caused by Open Ai, a company that's always been 6 00:00:23,480 --> 00:00:27,080 Speaker 1: unsustainable and is ultimately rigged for collapse. But today I 7 00:00:27,080 --> 00:00:28,960 Speaker 1: wanted to turn to a question I've been asked a 8 00:00:28,960 --> 00:00:31,680 Speaker 1: few times, what are the ways the media can avoid 9 00:00:31,760 --> 00:00:33,560 Speaker 1: doing this in the future, and what are the things 10 00:00:33,560 --> 00:00:36,920 Speaker 1: that they could have done differently? Well, it starts pretty simple. 11 00:00:37,360 --> 00:00:39,639 Speaker 1: I don't believe the media, and this partly falls upon 12 00:00:39,680 --> 00:00:42,479 Speaker 1: the people running media outlets actually knows enough about the 13 00:00:42,479 --> 00:00:44,839 Speaker 1: subject matter, be it the technical side of the financial 14 00:00:44,840 --> 00:00:47,520 Speaker 1: side of these companies. If you've ever read an article 15 00:00:47,560 --> 00:00:50,360 Speaker 1: about tech that just didn't seem to make sense, like 16 00:00:50,520 --> 00:00:53,239 Speaker 1: say about an AI company, like an obtuse series of 17 00:00:53,280 --> 00:00:56,240 Speaker 1: sentences that sounds rational, but when you really think about 18 00:00:56,240 --> 00:00:58,440 Speaker 1: it doesn't explain what it does. It's because the writer 19 00:00:58,560 --> 00:01:01,600 Speaker 1: doesn't actually understand what this saying. And that's because they're 20 00:01:01,600 --> 00:01:04,080 Speaker 1: really given the time or incentivized in any way for 21 00:01:04,240 --> 00:01:06,800 Speaker 1: knowing what it is they're talking about they're just there 22 00:01:06,840 --> 00:01:09,520 Speaker 1: to kind of get it out the door, and well 23 00:01:09,680 --> 00:01:11,920 Speaker 1: that an unalarming amount of tech writers are edited by 24 00:01:12,000 --> 00:01:15,600 Speaker 1: editors that don't know a fucking thing. When chat GPT launched, 25 00:01:15,600 --> 00:01:18,319 Speaker 1: the press absolutely lost their shit, despite nobody being able 26 00:01:18,319 --> 00:01:20,160 Speaker 1: to describe what it actually did and why it was 27 00:01:20,160 --> 00:01:22,840 Speaker 1: the future other than they could create an image or 28 00:01:22,880 --> 00:01:25,160 Speaker 1: a block of text based on a prompt, and this 29 00:01:25,280 --> 00:01:27,360 Speaker 1: was about the level of nuance that we'd see applied 30 00:01:27,400 --> 00:01:29,920 Speaker 1: to open AI for pretty much the rest of history. 31 00:01:30,400 --> 00:01:33,199 Speaker 1: Egregious to extrapolations were made in part because the media 32 00:01:33,319 --> 00:01:35,440 Speaker 1: was far too willing to just copypaste or quote whatever 33 00:01:35,440 --> 00:01:38,240 Speaker 1: Sam Altman said. When interviewed on stage at the Wall 34 00:01:38,280 --> 00:01:41,119 Speaker 1: Street Journals Tech Live event in October twenty twenty three, 35 00:01:41,240 --> 00:01:43,720 Speaker 1: a reporter allowed Sam Moltman to say that chat GPT 36 00:01:43,840 --> 00:01:47,040 Speaker 1: and I quote has this laval reasoning capacity that's going 37 00:01:47,040 --> 00:01:49,760 Speaker 1: to get better and better, and this was a great 38 00:01:49,800 --> 00:01:52,120 Speaker 1: moment to say, I'm sorry, Sam, what the fuck are 39 00:01:52,160 --> 00:01:54,240 Speaker 1: you talking about? And to be clear, this was October 40 00:01:54,240 --> 00:01:56,760 Speaker 1: twenty twenty three. It would be just under a year 41 00:01:57,360 --> 00:02:00,240 Speaker 1: later that they would release an actual reasoning product. No 42 00:02:00,280 --> 00:02:03,080 Speaker 1: one's bothered to return to that of course, I realize 43 00:02:03,120 --> 00:02:06,480 Speaker 1: I sound like I'm being nasty or facetious. But here, right, 44 00:02:06,560 --> 00:02:08,919 Speaker 1: here was an opportunity to push back on the narrative, 45 00:02:09,200 --> 00:02:11,440 Speaker 1: in part because the narrative was a guy will say 46 00:02:11,520 --> 00:02:15,040 Speaker 1: fucking anything and anybody will print him. The question, of course, 47 00:02:15,080 --> 00:02:17,360 Speaker 1: would have been can you explain what this means? And 48 00:02:17,680 --> 00:02:20,120 Speaker 1: once he mumbles out some nonsense, say I'm still not 49 00:02:20,160 --> 00:02:23,240 Speaker 1: sure I understand. I genuinely believe that there are some 50 00:02:23,280 --> 00:02:25,640 Speaker 1: reporters who don't want to push against the grain, but 51 00:02:25,680 --> 00:02:28,040 Speaker 1: I think that there are plenty more that are scared 52 00:02:28,080 --> 00:02:31,200 Speaker 1: of being wrong. Well, you're still wrong if you allow 53 00:02:31,240 --> 00:02:34,400 Speaker 1: a man to lie. Sam Mortman became a billionaire because 54 00:02:34,440 --> 00:02:37,360 Speaker 1: he was able to blather on nonsensically about whatever he wanted, 55 00:02:37,480 --> 00:02:40,440 Speaker 1: knowing that the crowd of Gordoner's business types would rather say, Wow, 56 00:02:40,480 --> 00:02:42,960 Speaker 1: he's so smart, I asked the future, than admit that 57 00:02:42,960 --> 00:02:46,200 Speaker 1: they have no idea what he fucking meant. Really, fixing 58 00:02:46,240 --> 00:02:49,120 Speaker 1: these problems starts with making people like Sam Mortman of 59 00:02:49,120 --> 00:02:53,160 Speaker 1: Open AI and Dario Amadeo of Anthropic actually explain themselves 60 00:02:53,280 --> 00:02:55,760 Speaker 1: and holding their feet to the fire even lightly on 61 00:02:55,800 --> 00:02:58,800 Speaker 1: their promises, and the economics underlying their companies. You can 62 00:02:58,880 --> 00:03:01,840 Speaker 1: beat this shit, you can do it. And early on 63 00:03:02,240 --> 00:03:04,760 Speaker 1: Sam Mortman actually been pushed back on. He would not 64 00:03:04,880 --> 00:03:07,400 Speaker 1: have been able to do this. And indeed, had everyone 65 00:03:07,440 --> 00:03:10,560 Speaker 1: not just copypasted, anytime Sam Mortman said anything about, oh, 66 00:03:10,560 --> 00:03:13,480 Speaker 1: I don't know this chat GPT will eventually be an 67 00:03:13,520 --> 00:03:15,680 Speaker 1: intelligent friend and knows everything about you, I believe he 68 00:03:15,760 --> 00:03:18,720 Speaker 1: said that, or he just said AI will be These 69 00:03:18,760 --> 00:03:20,800 Speaker 1: are the times to say I don't know print it 70 00:03:20,800 --> 00:03:24,000 Speaker 1: in say Sam Mortman lies. Sam Morman made something up. 71 00:03:24,040 --> 00:03:26,440 Speaker 1: I realized the media writ large is very bad at this, 72 00:03:26,520 --> 00:03:30,400 Speaker 1: but it's so much easier in tech. The fact that 73 00:03:30,440 --> 00:03:33,280 Speaker 1: both Open AI and Anthropic burned over five billion dollars 74 00:03:33,280 --> 00:03:35,920 Speaker 1: in twenty twenty four is abominable and any and all 75 00:03:35,960 --> 00:03:38,200 Speaker 1: interviews should have brought this up and doggedly demanded a 76 00:03:38,240 --> 00:03:41,840 Speaker 1: timeline for profitability and not accepted vagueness or dodging. And 77 00:03:41,880 --> 00:03:44,640 Speaker 1: I just want to be clear, I know that this 78 00:03:44,840 --> 00:03:46,720 Speaker 1: if you remember the media listening to so like, I 79 00:03:46,720 --> 00:03:48,520 Speaker 1: won't get Sam Mormon again, I won't get I won't 80 00:03:48,520 --> 00:03:51,720 Speaker 1: get dariy Amaday, who fucking cares? These interviews suck every 81 00:03:52,080 --> 00:03:54,920 Speaker 1: I think I've listened to or watched every Sam Mortman 82 00:03:54,960 --> 00:03:59,760 Speaker 1: interview that's online, and they're boring. They're like eating cardboard. 83 00:04:00,040 --> 00:04:03,280 Speaker 1: He's not an endearing speaker. Warrio Ama days even worse 84 00:04:03,320 --> 00:04:07,320 Speaker 1: that bloviating fuck where wah blah Blind twenty twenty seven. 85 00:04:07,560 --> 00:04:09,640 Speaker 1: The computer is going to be my best friend and 86 00:04:09,680 --> 00:04:12,960 Speaker 1: my girlfriend. Well he's married. I'm not saying Dario's anyway. 87 00:04:13,120 --> 00:04:15,040 Speaker 1: Daria's not going to fuck the computer. You've got me 88 00:04:15,080 --> 00:04:18,880 Speaker 1: on the record. The boint is you're afraid of losing access, 89 00:04:18,880 --> 00:04:21,320 Speaker 1: but you're also afraid of having a hostile interview. First 90 00:04:21,360 --> 00:04:24,799 Speaker 1: of all, skill issue. Second of all, why are you afraid? 91 00:04:25,400 --> 00:04:28,080 Speaker 1: Why would you possibly be afraid? These men are far 92 00:04:28,120 --> 00:04:31,080 Speaker 1: from invincible. Sam Wrtman is a solid conn artist, stand 93 00:04:31,080 --> 00:04:33,599 Speaker 1: a carnival barker, but when faced with blunt questions and 94 00:04:33,640 --> 00:04:36,679 Speaker 1: even the slightest hint of memory about what he just said, 95 00:04:36,760 --> 00:04:40,279 Speaker 1: he'd crumble. All of them would honestly Imdia train people 96 00:04:40,320 --> 00:04:43,480 Speaker 1: for a living, these people a week. They're poorly trained 97 00:04:43,480 --> 00:04:45,680 Speaker 1: and speciously informed and have no idea what to do. 98 00:04:45,839 --> 00:04:48,839 Speaker 1: If you just refuse to black like you just sit 99 00:04:48,920 --> 00:04:50,960 Speaker 1: on a question, if you're just like no, I'm not 100 00:04:51,080 --> 00:04:55,159 Speaker 1: happy with your answer, I don't understand that doesn't make sense, 101 00:04:55,720 --> 00:04:59,680 Speaker 1: or even hey, why won't you give me a straight answer? 102 00:05:00,320 --> 00:05:03,720 Speaker 1: Crazy crazy question? You could just ask any of them there, 103 00:05:03,839 --> 00:05:06,680 Speaker 1: You could do it today now. The other problem is 104 00:05:06,720 --> 00:05:09,919 Speaker 1: the journalists too regularly find ways to ask these obtuse, 105 00:05:10,040 --> 00:05:12,039 Speaker 1: muddied questions, in part because they want to find a 106 00:05:12,040 --> 00:05:14,039 Speaker 1: way to sound like they're being aggressive to their readers 107 00:05:14,240 --> 00:05:16,479 Speaker 1: without ever really showing any real aggression. And let me 108 00:05:16,480 --> 00:05:19,240 Speaker 1: give you one of my favorite examples. In May twenty 109 00:05:19,240 --> 00:05:21,920 Speaker 1: twenty four, Neelai Patel of The Verge, a man who 110 00:05:21,960 --> 00:05:23,960 Speaker 1: has never met an executive outside of into it that 111 00:05:24,000 --> 00:05:26,640 Speaker 1: he didn't want to let ramble, interviewed sund up As Shy, 112 00:05:26,720 --> 00:05:28,680 Speaker 1: the CEO of Google, and gave one of the single 113 00:05:28,680 --> 00:05:32,240 Speaker 1: worst interviews I've seen in my life. Neili Patel, as 114 00:05:32,279 --> 00:05:34,799 Speaker 1: a lawyer, as the editor in chief of The Virgin, 115 00:05:34,839 --> 00:05:37,640 Speaker 1: a reporter with over a decade of experience possibly more, 116 00:05:38,279 --> 00:05:42,120 Speaker 1: asked multiple questions of over a hundred words objection compound 117 00:05:42,160 --> 00:05:44,960 Speaker 1: question which may seem like he's being thoughtful, but is 118 00:05:45,000 --> 00:05:47,320 Speaker 1: actually what I like to call the buffet, an attempt 119 00:05:47,320 --> 00:05:50,000 Speaker 1: to give the illusion of nuanced analysis and conversation where 120 00:05:50,240 --> 00:05:52,760 Speaker 1: you're actually giving the person you're interviewing the opportunity to 121 00:05:52,760 --> 00:05:55,600 Speaker 1: answer the question they'd like to. Sometimes these points are 122 00:05:55,640 --> 00:05:58,440 Speaker 1: more like rambling statements, which again may seem harmless, like 123 00:05:58,520 --> 00:06:00,719 Speaker 1: Neelai is trying to have a conversation, but this is 124 00:06:00,760 --> 00:06:04,240 Speaker 1: the CEO of fucking Google. You're interviewing him, not up. 125 00:06:04,800 --> 00:06:07,840 Speaker 1: At one point, Nelai spends one hundred and fifty nine 126 00:06:07,920 --> 00:06:11,479 Speaker 1: words asking Sun dar Pashai whether he expected publishers to 127 00:06:11,520 --> 00:06:14,880 Speaker 1: act negatively to AI powered search results, but he did 128 00:06:14,920 --> 00:06:17,200 Speaker 1: so in such a cludgy way that Sun Dapashai is 129 00:06:17,200 --> 00:06:19,600 Speaker 1: able to wave it off, at which point Neeli commits 130 00:06:19,640 --> 00:06:22,000 Speaker 1: the ultimate sin one very common in the tech media, 131 00:06:22,080 --> 00:06:24,360 Speaker 1: where he doesn't listen to Peshai's answer and immediately asks 132 00:06:24,400 --> 00:06:27,520 Speaker 1: another question based on some theory he has called Google zero, 133 00:06:27,600 --> 00:06:32,720 Speaker 1: whether traffic from Google it ends, which was already happening. Neelike, 134 00:06:32,760 --> 00:06:34,760 Speaker 1: you talk to one of the many talented people you're 135 00:06:34,800 --> 00:06:38,640 Speaker 1: fucking outlet. This, by the way, is the real fundamental 136 00:06:38,640 --> 00:06:41,520 Speaker 1: flaw of American journalism, where an interviewer asks the question, 137 00:06:41,640 --> 00:06:44,159 Speaker 1: doesn't listen to the answer, then asks another I cannot 138 00:06:44,200 --> 00:06:47,440 Speaker 1: express enough how many times this happens with tech CEOs, 139 00:06:47,560 --> 00:06:49,839 Speaker 1: how much advantage they take of it and how quickly 140 00:06:49,839 --> 00:06:51,839 Speaker 1: they collapse. If you listen to their answer, and I 141 00:06:51,880 --> 00:06:54,120 Speaker 1: don't know, ask the follow up question relevant to it. 142 00:06:54,560 --> 00:06:57,640 Speaker 1: Nelai's interview could have been far more direct. Hey, why 143 00:06:57,680 --> 00:07:00,479 Speaker 1: does Google search suck? Now? I've got eight different examples 144 00:07:00,520 --> 00:07:03,160 Speaker 1: of it sucking? Why are they so bad? Neeli does 145 00:07:03,160 --> 00:07:05,720 Speaker 1: have an example searching for best chromebook, and he has 146 00:07:05,760 --> 00:07:10,000 Speaker 1: this clumsy, mumbling, meandering bullshit thing about how in the query, well, 147 00:07:10,040 --> 00:07:12,800 Speaker 1: the query in there. I didn't say what is the 148 00:07:12,800 --> 00:07:14,840 Speaker 1: best chromebook? I did this and that, and he just 149 00:07:14,920 --> 00:07:19,840 Speaker 1: like fumbles around with it and then allows allows some 150 00:07:19,960 --> 00:07:22,680 Speaker 1: doctor to just kind of ramble him. Neli, you could 151 00:07:22,760 --> 00:07:25,160 Speaker 1: just ask a simple fucking question. You're a lawyer, man, 152 00:07:25,640 --> 00:07:27,680 Speaker 1: I don't know. I don't know, man. Maybe you're more 153 00:07:27,680 --> 00:07:30,640 Speaker 1: concerned being fucking famous. The reason I'm so angry is 154 00:07:30,640 --> 00:07:33,000 Speaker 1: that the AI bubble was inflated on interviews like these. 155 00:07:33,120 --> 00:07:35,520 Speaker 1: I realized Neeli Patel wants to continue getting access to 156 00:07:35,520 --> 00:07:38,720 Speaker 1: the executives, But how do he directly said search is bad, 157 00:07:38,760 --> 00:07:40,680 Speaker 1: here's the proof it's bad, and AI results are worse, 158 00:07:40,800 --> 00:07:42,560 Speaker 1: and refuse to back off of it. That would have 159 00:07:42,640 --> 00:07:45,280 Speaker 1: had a meaningful effect on Google's willingness to push this shit. 160 00:07:45,800 --> 00:07:49,000 Speaker 1: It would have shown other journalist's solidarity that they too 161 00:07:49,480 --> 00:07:51,800 Speaker 1: could step up and spit in the face of these people. 162 00:07:51,960 --> 00:07:53,720 Speaker 1: And I know some of you are going to say, heed, 163 00:07:53,840 --> 00:07:56,320 Speaker 1: you can't spit in the face of them. I only 164 00:07:56,320 --> 00:07:58,280 Speaker 1: feel like that because they want to run away so bad, 165 00:07:58,360 --> 00:08:00,760 Speaker 1: because they don't want to have a real interview, because 166 00:08:00,760 --> 00:08:02,880 Speaker 1: they don't have anything to say, they don't want to 167 00:08:02,920 --> 00:08:05,520 Speaker 1: say it. And the same goes for Samultman or Warrio 168 00:08:05,680 --> 00:08:09,280 Speaker 1: Dario ama Day or any other AI executive. They've garnered 169 00:08:09,320 --> 00:08:11,760 Speaker 1: thousands of headlines and billions of dollars of funding by 170 00:08:11,800 --> 00:08:15,360 Speaker 1: making shit up, or using lives of emission, or just 171 00:08:15,400 --> 00:08:17,520 Speaker 1: being very vague and allowing people to fill in the 172 00:08:17,560 --> 00:08:19,880 Speaker 1: gaps for them, which then gets published in the media, 173 00:08:19,880 --> 00:08:21,960 Speaker 1: which then gets pushed to investors who then line up 174 00:08:21,960 --> 00:08:24,360 Speaker 1: to invest in shit that doesn't work, or does not 175 00:08:24,520 --> 00:08:28,360 Speaker 1: exist or can never exist. I even believe that access 176 00:08:28,440 --> 00:08:31,120 Speaker 1: journalism can continue. We just need to show that there's 177 00:08:31,120 --> 00:08:34,640 Speaker 1: a deep intolerance across the industry for marketing bullshit. A 178 00:08:34,640 --> 00:08:36,720 Speaker 1: brick wall in front of anyone who would bullshit and 179 00:08:36,760 --> 00:08:40,240 Speaker 1: an interest in having actual conversations versus regurgitated talking points 180 00:08:40,320 --> 00:08:43,280 Speaker 1: and nodding to an audience of half conscious patagonia gargoyles. 181 00:08:43,840 --> 00:08:45,520 Speaker 1: And I want to bring something up. I run a 182 00:08:45,520 --> 00:08:48,680 Speaker 1: PR firm, immedia trained people. This is actually how fucking 183 00:08:48,760 --> 00:08:51,679 Speaker 1: startups are talked to by journalists. You're a seed startup 184 00:08:51,720 --> 00:08:54,079 Speaker 1: or a series A. You get asked these fucking questions 185 00:08:54,120 --> 00:08:57,680 Speaker 1: all the time. You get grilled, you get absolutely beaten 186 00:08:57,720 --> 00:09:00,480 Speaker 1: to shit. But once you reach a certain scale, once 187 00:09:00,520 --> 00:09:03,720 Speaker 1: you're worth i don't know, some three hundred billion theoretical 188 00:09:03,800 --> 00:09:06,720 Speaker 1: dollars that you fit into a narrative, suddenly the gloves 189 00:09:06,720 --> 00:09:11,320 Speaker 1: are off and that's when the jerkins starts. I realized 190 00:09:11,360 --> 00:09:14,400 Speaker 1: that was quite gross. But look, if you're listening to 191 00:09:14,400 --> 00:09:15,839 Speaker 1: this as a member of the media and think I'm 192 00:09:15,880 --> 00:09:19,000 Speaker 1: being mean to these executives, there's absolutely nothing stopping you 193 00:09:19,040 --> 00:09:22,600 Speaker 1: from having fun, interesting conversations about the shit you love. 194 00:09:22,920 --> 00:09:26,480 Speaker 1: There's nothing, nothing, nothing, nothing wrong with knowing subjects deeply 195 00:09:26,520 --> 00:09:29,800 Speaker 1: and finding reasons to be excited. But please, fuck actually 196 00:09:29,880 --> 00:09:32,720 Speaker 1: learn what you're talking about and be excited about something 197 00:09:32,760 --> 00:09:36,640 Speaker 1: that's actually happening. But I think that that might be 198 00:09:36,640 --> 00:09:38,800 Speaker 1: the problem deep down. That's the art and more problem 199 00:09:38,800 --> 00:09:41,320 Speaker 1: with the tech media. I don't think enough people writing 200 00:09:41,320 --> 00:09:44,520 Speaker 1: about technology actually know or give a shit about technology, 201 00:09:44,800 --> 00:09:48,280 Speaker 1: or at least know enough to do their jobs. They 202 00:09:48,280 --> 00:09:51,520 Speaker 1: see these executives as their sports teams factions to ally behind, 203 00:09:51,720 --> 00:09:53,400 Speaker 1: only learning enough about the take to be able to 204 00:09:53,400 --> 00:09:55,760 Speaker 1: write embargoed articles about whatever the next thing that open 205 00:09:55,760 --> 00:09:59,640 Speaker 1: aiye does, even if they don't really understand or care readers. 206 00:10:00,000 --> 00:10:02,800 Speaker 1: Listners deserved better, and when all of this shit collapses, 207 00:10:02,800 --> 00:10:04,520 Speaker 1: I believe they'll start treating some of the members of 208 00:10:04,520 --> 00:10:06,480 Speaker 1: the tech media with well deserved scorn.