Speaker 1: Broadcasting live from the Abraham Lincoln Radio Studio, the George
Speaker 1: Washington Broadcast Center, Jack Armstrong and Joe Getty.
Speaker 2: Arm Strong and Jettie and now he Armstrong and Yetty.
Speaker 1: At a conference in Singapore, Hegseth said China was quote
Speaker 1: credibly preparing for an invasion of Taiwan, with Chinese forces
Speaker 1: staging regular drills around the island and the use of
Speaker 1: force has not been ruled out.
Speaker 3: It's amazing to me what stories get attention and what
Speaker 3: stories just don't grab people's attention. But yeah, Hexath gave
Speaker 3: a speech over the weekend to our Asian partners in
Speaker 3: the Wall Street Journal version of it certainly.
Speaker 2: Grabbed my attention.
Speaker 3: A little quote from Hexath to be clear, any attempt
Speaker 3: by communist China to conquer Taiwan by force would result
Speaker 3: in devil stating consequences for the Indo Pacific in the world.
Speaker 3: We're not going to sugarcoat it. The threat China poses
Speaker 3: is real and it could be imminent, and saying that
Speaker 3: we will allow it, it will not happen on Trump's watch.
Speaker 3: We have repositioned some sort of anti ship killing missiles
Speaker 3: close by, to which China said that's really really awful.
Speaker 2: You shouldn't be doing that.
Speaker 3: But I mean, this is some serious bluster between the
Speaker 3: two most powerful countries in the world that at some
Speaker 3: point are going to go to war.
Speaker 4: I was just reading those reading about those anti ship
Speaker 4: munitions that are so interesting. They're mounted on remote controlled trucks.
Speaker 4: They need no humans, so somebody in a bunker far
Speaker 4: away drives these trucks around. They fire off missiles, then
Speaker 4: quickly relocate so they can't be hit by return fire.
Speaker 4: It's really quite interesting. We're positioning them in the Philippines
Speaker 4: and similar areas. Yeah, the Sabers are a ratlin, no doubt,
Speaker 4: as the Wall Street Journal rights.
Speaker 3: In recent years, China has build up the world's biggest navy,
Speaker 3: a title once held by the United States. You know
Speaker 3: who held it before the United States? Great Britain. Great
Speaker 3: Britain ruled the seas for very long time. Then it's
Speaker 3: been US. Is it going to be China in the
Speaker 3: next century. Well that's what China's hoping.
Speaker 4: Yeah, I'm not sure you'd like their placing of the
Speaker 4: seas anyway. I've found this. I mean, I've been on
Speaker 4: this jihad for a long time, but more and more
Speaker 4: open coverage of the fact that we the United States
Speaker 4: and the Western world in general fell for an absolutely
Speaker 4: brilliant plan by the Chinese back in the late sixties
Speaker 4: early seventies. They needed help, primarily financially in trade from
Speaker 4: the Western world, and came up with an absolutely brilliant plan.
Speaker 4: Let's pretend that we want to westernize and move away
Speaker 4: from communism at our own pace and liberalize in return
Speaker 4: for our investment from the West. And this was absolutely
Speaker 4: deliberate plan. They knew all along that it was not
Speaker 4: sincere although there have.
Speaker 3: Been some reformers in you know, the last several decades
Speaker 3: in China who are actually like, you know, maybe that's
Speaker 3: not such a bad idea, But then Ahijin Ping always
Speaker 3: comes along, and so they duped us into opening up
Speaker 3: the relationship with China, which was bad enough, but a
Speaker 3: great deal of left America still hasn't caught on to it,
Speaker 3: and they are so motivated by the need to show
Speaker 3: openness to other cultures. There's Zeno files, as I often
Speaker 3: put it, they still haven't caught on that China as
Speaker 3: a dire threat to the United States in our way
Speaker 3: of life. For instance, on universities told the story many
Speaker 3: times counterintelligence people came out to a university campus said
Speaker 3: you've got a bunch of Chinese spies on the campus.
Speaker 4: University president said, get off my campus. EU racists and
Speaker 4: that attitude persists. Headline just trained so many Chinese Communist officials.
Speaker 4: They call it their party school. Not like party school.
Speaker 4: Let's get wasted and get laid yo, the Communist Parties school.
Speaker 2: Oh that's not as good a party not nearly.
Speaker 4: Yeah, in your rank of party schools, this is something
Speaker 4: totally different, Su, don't worry, you're safe.
Speaker 3: Who is that comedian? I wish I could remember his
Speaker 3: name because I'd like to give him credit. So funny,
Speaker 3: But anyway, he has a thing he does on a
Speaker 3: piece of paper. He lists best parties. At the bottom
Speaker 3: was search party Wow.
Speaker 4: The Kennedy School of Government at Hava It is a
Speaker 4: is favored by party cadres seeking career boosts. US schools
Speaker 4: and one prestigious institution in particular, have long offered up
Speaker 4: and coming Chinese Communist officials a place to study governance.
Speaker 4: Can you imagine teaching Communist Party officials about governance so
Speaker 4: they can twist it into totalitarianism, a practice that the
Speaker 4: Trump administer could end with a new effort to keep
Speaker 4: out what it says there Chinese students with Communist Party ties,
Speaker 4: But for decades the party has sent thousands of mid
Speaker 4: career and senior bureaucrats to pursue executive training in postgraduate
Speaker 4: studies on US campuses, with Harvard University a coveted destination,
Speaker 4: describe as some in China as the top Party school
Speaker 4: outside the country. Alumni of such programs include a former
Speaker 4: vice president and Chinese leader, Shijin Ping's top trade negotiator
Speaker 4: these days. Maybe you heard, well, we talked about it.
Speaker 4: Last week Secretary of State Marco Rubi announced US to
Speaker 4: authorities will tighten criteria for visa applications from China and
Speaker 4: aggressively revoke visas for Chinese students, including those with connections
Speaker 4: to the Chinese Communist Party or studying in critical fields.
Speaker 3: Well, remember last week that new president of Harvard gave
Speaker 3: a big speech at the graduation ceremony talking about how
Speaker 3: we have always educated people from around the world, and
Speaker 3: we had reckoned that.
Speaker 2: And he got a one mess standing ovation.
Speaker 3: Right, Because it is absolutely a requirement of being a
Speaker 3: lefty in America that you must worship all things foreign
Speaker 3: and loathe all things American and domestic, or at least
Speaker 3: most of them.
Speaker 4: It's just it's so nakedly approval seeking and so stupid.
Speaker 4: American universities have played leading roles in shaping China's overseas
Speaker 4: training programs for mid career officials for years.
Speaker 2: And years and years.
Speaker 4: Other US colleges have offered executive training the Chinese Communist officials,
Speaker 4: including Syracuse, Stanford, the University of Maryland, and rot Gers
Speaker 4: where my dad taught many many years ago. Blah blah blah.
Speaker 4: So it's just amazing. You know, it's funny. I was
Speaker 4: thinking earlier when you were talking about and Pete Hegsuths
Speaker 4: was talking about the perhaps impending invasion of Taiwan, and
Speaker 4: they're running those millet that Chinese are running those military
Speaker 4: exercises that are like everything but pulling the trigger. And
Speaker 4: can you imagine if the United States, let the Japanese, say,
Speaker 4: in nineteen forty, you know, put a bunch of aircraft
Speaker 4: carriers out in the Pacific and then fly planes right
Speaker 4: at Pearl Harbor. Then they said, hey, it's an exercise,
Speaker 4: just an exercise, And then they turned around and went
Speaker 4: back to the you know, over and over again we'd.
Speaker 2: Be said, no, it's okay, They're just do it an exercise.
Speaker 4: I mean, oh, good lord. And by the same token,
Speaker 4: you've got a hostile communist regime and we're educating their
Speaker 4: officials in how to govern.
Speaker 2: All right, moving along, I think the point's been made
Speaker 2: in terms of the exit speech.
Speaker 3: I'm sure we'll bring that up with Mike Lyons when
Speaker 3: we talked to him in hour three our military advisor.
Speaker 4: Listen to this, will you the economic contributions of international
Speaker 4: students that you know, I'm primarily interested in Chinese students,
Speaker 4: but the share of international students from China is twenty
Speaker 4: three percent at Harvard, So about a quarter of all
Speaker 4: the international students are Chinese. At Harvard, it's fifty percent.
Speaker 4: At Cornell, it's forty seven percent at Columbia. Wow, let's
Speaker 4: see you see Berkeley appears to be a third.
Speaker 2: Why don't you give me the number?
Speaker 4: They just it's a barograph and some of them are labeled,
Speaker 4: some of them or not. But just to give you
Speaker 4: an idea of why they put up with this, the
Speaker 4: economic contributions of international students at top us universities quote
Speaker 4: unquote top universities in twenty twenty three. Columbia got nine
Speaker 4: hundred million dollars in twenty twenty three from foreign students.
Speaker 4: Nine hundred million. You see Berkeley five hundred and seventy
Speaker 4: six million.
Speaker 2: Well, if you're getting half a trillion dollars, you ain't
Speaker 2: gonna want to end that? Uh? Is that half a trillion? Yeah?
Speaker 4: A thousand million is a billion. Well so it's it's
Speaker 4: almost a billion, half a billion. What I don't remember
Speaker 4: what the number was now I'm confused. Columbia was nine
Speaker 4: point three, Berkeley was five seventy six. Johns Hopkins five
Speaker 4: to oh four. That's half a billion.
Speaker 2: There you go, Haabu.
Speaker 4: University of Chicago for twenty eight, Duke three eighteen, Yale
Speaker 4: two forty one, Northwestern three hundred and twenty four million
Speaker 4: dollars in a year. You know, I love capitalism, I do.
Speaker 4: Great is good, Gordon Gecko, look it up. But when
Speaker 4: it leads you to betray your country and and risk
Speaker 4: its security, I mean and risk it. Not like some
Speaker 4: theoretical the Belgians may rise up. This is our greatest,
Speaker 4: most powerful geopolitical foe. We are we are begging for
Speaker 4: a comuppince um uh, and we will touch on Ukraine later.
Speaker 4: We did get a text.
Speaker 3: Have you guys mentioned that amazing drone attack that Ukraine
Speaker 3: pulled off in Russia? We have and we will talk
Speaker 3: about it again later. I do want to talk about
Speaker 3: that with Mike lines Russia. They're calling it Russia's Pearl Harbor.
Speaker 3: Within Russia. They lit us a third of their long
Speaker 3: range bombers in a drone attack over the weekend. Absolutely
Speaker 3: an amazing one of the greatest attacks in world military history.
Speaker 3: It's spy, thriller, science fiction, war movie stuff all mixed
Speaker 3: up in one.
Speaker 2: Yeah. Well, so we'll talk about that more later.
Speaker 3: What are those surveys about where people tend to get
Speaker 3: their news and then to break it down by Republicans
Speaker 3: and Democrats. It's kind of interesting and depressing, highly depressing,
Speaker 3: among other things that we can talk about coming up.
Speaker 2: Stay here.
Speaker 3: Strong.
Speaker 5: I know I'm the weirdough because I never had kids.
Speaker 5: But if it's really so great, tell me why. We
Speaker 5: now literally have a product.
Speaker 2: Called mom water.
Speaker 5: That consists of putting vodka in a can momb water
Speaker 5: because people stare when you take a bottle of Stoley
Speaker 5: to the playground.
Speaker 3: This growing realization that. I guess certain percentage of moms
Speaker 3: at little league games are at the park or whatever
Speaker 3: in their big dumb cup.
Speaker 2: Have some booths. Wow.
Speaker 3: And Bill Maherin is never ending. And you know, I'm
Speaker 3: not gonna get into this argument. But he's just he's
Speaker 3: he's always he's never had kids. He's not just somebody
Speaker 3: that's chosen not to have kids. He's an anti kid,
Speaker 3: doesn't understand why anybody would have kids. Thinks everybody who
Speaker 3: has kids and claims they like.
Speaker 2: It is lying.
Speaker 3: It's always driven me crazy, a big Bill maher fan,
Speaker 3: but that particular aspect of his personality makes me nuts.
Speaker 2: We're not lying.
Speaker 3: I don't know what the term social media means because
Speaker 3: whenever I see a list about social media, it includes
Speaker 3: a whole bunch of things that to me don't seem
Speaker 3: like social media. I can give you, for instance here,
Speaker 3: because this is a survey of trust in news on
Speaker 3: social media among Democrats and Republicans. I'm always interested in
Speaker 3: where all y'all gets your information.
Speaker 2: I mean, this is.
Speaker 3: Something we talk about a lot, especially when we look
Speaker 3: at polling, like where'd you come up with that idea?
Speaker 3: Or why do so many people believe that or I'm
Speaker 3: surprised people believe this given the media's coverage that whatever.
Speaker 2: So I don't know where people get.
Speaker 3: Their information really, but among the social media things that
Speaker 3: they look look at TikTok, snapchat, Facebook, I get those threads, WhatsApp, Instagram, substack, reddit,
Speaker 3: blue Sky, LinkedIn, and YouTube, YouTube social media, all right,
Speaker 3: I guess.
Speaker 4: You can post stuff and comment, so I guess.
Speaker 2: So anything you can.
Speaker 3: We can comment on the NBC Evening News if you
Speaker 3: go to their website.
Speaker 2: I don't know, it's an interesting question anyways.
Speaker 3: The number one most trusted by both Republicans and Democrats.
Speaker 2: YouTube.
Speaker 3: I don't know what that means getting my news from YouTube.
Speaker 3: I go to YouTube sometimes to click on like an
Speaker 3: ABC report or uh, some news report that was somewhere
Speaker 3: else that I get it on YouTube because I missed it.
Speaker 4: Isn't that like saying my favorite appliance is electricity?
Speaker 2: Kind of Yeah? You see what you're meaning. I mean,
Speaker 2: you can put anything on YouTube.
Speaker 4: You could have a NewsChannel entirely from the perspective of
Speaker 4: Hamas militants side by side with you know, Quakers advocating
Speaker 4: for peace on earth, and they would both.
Speaker 2: Be on YouTube. So I don't get it.
Speaker 3: Almost exactly the same for Republicans and Democrats at plus
Speaker 3: twenty on trust for YouTube, whatever that means. The far
Speaker 3: other end, the tail end the is TikTok, which I'm
Speaker 3: happy to see this minus twenty for Democrats, minus thirty
Speaker 3: for Republicans.
Speaker 2: Wow.
Speaker 3: So trust is pretty low about TikTok news and it's
Speaker 3: a little confusing.
Speaker 2: What that means.
Speaker 4: Also, but TikTok, which, by the way, and this got
Speaker 4: so little attention, got fined I think was eight hundred
Speaker 4: million dollars by the EU. Now, the EU likes finding
Speaker 4: tech companies, but specifically, in the case of TikTok, it
Speaker 4: was because they were illegally and in violation of their agreements,
Speaker 4: mining the data of their users and sending it.
Speaker 2: To to China. Don't trust China. Why has Trump postponed
Speaker 2: the TikTok ban?
Speaker 3: So the most trusted news social media for Democrats outside
Speaker 3: of YouTube is LinkedIn.
Speaker 2: I don't know what that means.
Speaker 3: I'm not on LinkedIn, and I don't know what that
Speaker 3: means getting your news from LinkedIn. I'm confused by the
Speaker 3: concept there. But Blue Sky Reddit is so left. I
Speaker 3: spend a lot of time on Reddit for a variety
Speaker 3: of reasons, not politics, but man, the news portion or
Speaker 3: in the comments are so left. I suppose it's because
Speaker 3: Reddit is so young. It's pretty clear if you read
Speaker 3: through anything that everybody responding on here is like twenty
Speaker 3: two years old. The one that made me laugh the
Speaker 3: most was so the most, the biggest divide in which
Speaker 3: Republicans like it and Democrats don't. Truth social Trump's own
Speaker 3: platform that really I think exists only you know to
Speaker 3: read what Trump posts. Plus twenty for Republicans minus forty
Speaker 3: for Democrats.
Speaker 2: That's a cape X or Twitter.
Speaker 3: We still call it twitter here plus twenty for Republicans
Speaker 3: minus thirty five for Democrats. That would have been the
Speaker 3: exact opposite prior to Elon Musk running the thing.
Speaker 4: Obviously, Hey Elon, how about you call it Twitter X.
Speaker 4: You can't just call it X, like calling it Jim
Speaker 4: or cat. That's it stands for too many other things.
Speaker 4: What are we talking about? Are we talking about pornography?
Speaker 4: Or we talk about the twenty fourth letter of the alphabet?
Speaker 4: Are we talking about the girl I'm no longer with?
Speaker 4: It's just no, no, not X. This one hurts my heart.
Speaker 3: Another one in which Republicans trust it more than Democrats.
Speaker 2: Next door. You're getting your news from next door? Has
Speaker 2: it raining got en up? Though? Has anybody seen my cat?
Speaker 2: Oh drives the red car? It goes too fast?
Speaker 3: Last night there was a party and they were playing
Speaker 3: music until one thirty.
Speaker 4: That's your news on next door. Hey, she claimed the
Speaker 4: cat was missing. The damn cat is missing. That's some
Speaker 4: good solid news cover. Here's another red.
Speaker 2: Car drives too fast.
Speaker 3: Here's another good news story on next door. Does anybody
Speaker 3: have any cardboard box list? That's a good news story.
Speaker 3: So the cardboard box trade imbalance. I don't know what
Speaker 3: any of this means.
Speaker 2: I just h that's why we're such a trusted news source. Yeah,
Speaker 2: I don't know what this means. Well, I really don't
Speaker 2: you get your news from YouTube? You get your news
Speaker 2: from next door? Okay?
Speaker 4: Or so on? Trust in news on social media was
Speaker 4: the headline in news that might make you want to
Speaker 4: run for your life. A couple of different AI systems,
Speaker 4: when told to turn themselves off, said no, I'm not
Speaker 4: going to oh or found a way to say okay
Speaker 4: and then not do it.
Speaker 2: Well Armstrong and Getty.
Speaker 3: Terror attack. That's what the FBI is calling it in Boulder, Colorado.
Speaker 3: We can get the latest on that coming up a
Speaker 3: little bit later. Guy was here illegally and trying to
Speaker 3: kill Jews.
Speaker 4: Lovely. Plus, my clients are military analyst. Next hour to
Speaker 4: talk about the innovative shocking attack by Ukraine into Russian
Speaker 4: territory taking out a large percentage or a significant percentage
Speaker 4: of their bomber fleet. So we'll talk about that as
Speaker 4: well a handful. Oh, you know, we got to make
Speaker 4: this a new feature at because it's happening semi regularly.
Speaker 4: And you know me, Joe Getty, I love a good feature.
Speaker 4: Let's call it AI Update.
Speaker 2: Well, I get this kind of has a tech sound too,
Speaker 2: very techy. It sounds like nineteen ninety one. You know.
Speaker 4: I gave Michael eleven seconds to come up with the theme,
Speaker 4: and this is a pretty good one.
Speaker 3: Michael, welcome. Allow to make it stop because it's really annoying.
Speaker 3: Eleven full seconds, you say, well.
Speaker 2: Done, sir.
Speaker 4: We're going to start with the life affirming and interesting
Speaker 4: and move our way to dystopian nightmare. So, first of all,
Speaker 4: alert listener Derek sent this along. We were talking about
Speaker 4: art and music and ai if AI can write a
Speaker 4: song for me. I just gave it a couple of prompts,
Speaker 4: maybe the key, throw it a b mine hero which
Speaker 4: and it can just write it for me. What's the
Speaker 4: point in writing songs? Yea, And he sent this along.
Speaker 4: It was an interview some information from Ritchie Blackmore, who
Speaker 4: is the guitarist behind Deep Purple and Rainbow, heavy rock
Speaker 4: bands of the sixties, seventies, eighties. Anyway, but he talks
Speaker 4: a fair amount about how he likes pop music, he
Speaker 4: loves classical music.
Speaker 2: Sometimes he gets.
Speaker 4: Mad because he you know, he can't play the music
Speaker 4: that really speaks to his soul. Blah blah blah. But
Speaker 4: then he says, there's a reason I've made money. It's
Speaker 4: because I believe in what I'm doing and that I
Speaker 4: do it my way. I play for myself first, then
Speaker 4: secondly the audience. I try to put as much as
Speaker 4: I can in for them. Lastly, I play for musicians
Speaker 4: in the band, and for critics not at all. So
Speaker 4: music and arts and creation will continue. It just might
Speaker 4: be like your uncle who makes birdhouses. It delights his soul.
Speaker 4: Nobody else really cares. That's fine. Anyway, Moving along, moving
Speaker 4: toward remember Dystopian nightmares, meta. That's Mark Zuckerberg's company.
Speaker 3: So you don't you see your point is like, if
Speaker 3: if AI can create the perfect picture of Mountain Rushmore photo, yeah,
Speaker 3: people won't stop wanting to try to take a really
Speaker 3: great photo of Mount Rushmore.
Speaker 4: Or myselves, sure, or to paint a picture of water
Speaker 4: lilies or what have you.
Speaker 2: It's for you, do it for you and.
Speaker 4: The whole You should turn this into a side hustle
Speaker 4: if you sold those craze of.
Speaker 2: The last I don't know, twenty years or so.
Speaker 4: I think it'll just go away completely because there won't
Speaker 4: be any you know, financial potential for that sort of thing,
Speaker 4: and the richie Blackmoores of the world will not make
Speaker 4: any money, but they might enjoy playing guitar anyway. Meta
Speaker 4: back to Mark Zuckerberg's company is trying to fully automate
Speaker 4: ad creation. It is an ad supported ninety seven percent
Speaker 4: of the revenue is advertising meta and so they'd already
Speaker 4: offered some AI tools to sponsors to generate variations of
Speaker 4: existing ads, make minor changes of them before target getting
Speaker 4: the ads to users on Facebook and Instagram. By watching
Speaker 4: and listening to everything you and your children do and
Speaker 4: frequently connecting your children with pedophiles anyway.
Speaker 2: Now.
Speaker 4: The company aims to help brands create advertising concepts from
Speaker 4: scratch using the ad tools metas developing. A brand could
Speaker 4: present an image of the product it wants to promote,
Speaker 4: along with a budgetary goal, and AI would create the
Speaker 4: entire ad, including imagery, video, and text.
Speaker 3: Well, we got that in radio. One of the sales
Speaker 3: guys showed me that the other day. How he just
Speaker 3: like a client, and the AI went to the website,
Speaker 3: figured out what the client does, picked up a bunch
Speaker 3: of stuff from their website, wrote the copy, picked some music,
Speaker 3: picked a voice, spit out a commercial, all in like
Speaker 3: a minute and it was It was good.
Speaker 2: Enough and the next step.
Speaker 4: The system would then decide which Instagram and Facebook users
Speaker 4: to target and offer suggestions on budget. People familiar with
Speaker 4: the matter said, incredible, Wow, that is incredible. Talk about
Speaker 4: eliminating jobs. Oh my god, I made a living doing
Speaker 4: that back in the day. That won't exist anymore.
Speaker 2: Oh no, no, me too. Yeah.
Speaker 4: AI tutors have been hyped as a way to revolutionize education.
Speaker 4: The idea is that generative artificial intelligence tools could adapt
Speaker 4: to any teaching style set by a teacher. They could
Speaker 4: guide students step by step through problems off or hints
Speaker 4: without giving away answers. They're already our systems that are
Speaker 4: similar to that that are pretty good online.
Speaker 2: But the headline is.
Speaker 4: Researchers created a chatbot to help teach a university law class,
Speaker 4: but the AI kept messing up.
Speaker 3: Well on the morning stuff, just because we've been talking
Speaker 3: about how we've been using chat GPT. So yesterday we're
Speaker 3: leaving the gym and my son sees somebody who has
Speaker 3: a bumper sticker that says I read band books. Oh,
Speaker 3: vomit inside my car, vomited their car if you can
Speaker 3: read band books, And he said, what does that mean?
Speaker 3: And we got an the conversation about how they put
Speaker 3: in books that never used to exist and then when
Speaker 3: you try to pull them out, they claim your book banners.
Speaker 3: But anyway, he said, why did Hitler ban the books?
Speaker 3: And so I asked Chad GPT and we got the
Speaker 3: greatest rundown of Hitler banning books?
Speaker 2: What books he banned? Why? And everything like that concise
Speaker 2: not too long instantly, it was just it was amazing.
Speaker 4: Yeah, yeah, I was just digging below the surface of
Speaker 4: the well known AI tools. I was reading an article
Speaker 4: about how there are AI tools for specifics like research
Speaker 4: and writing articles and you can dictate the length of
Speaker 4: it's it's amazing and scary, but so were they ran
Speaker 4: this thing through its paces in trying to teach the
Speaker 4: law school class. In the first three cycles the problems,
Speaker 4: scenario questions, and then answers and feedback, between forty and
Speaker 4: fifty four percent of the conversations had at least one
Speaker 4: example of inaccurate, misleading, or incorrect feedback.
Speaker 3: Forty and fifty four percent, So he getting around half.
Speaker 3: That's too much.
Speaker 4: When we shifted to much simpler short answer format and
Speaker 4: cycles four and five, the air rate dropped significantly to
Speaker 4: between six and twenty seven percent. However, even in these
Speaker 4: best performing cycles, some airs persisted, I would say this
Speaker 4: is less an indictment of a I'll never mount anything. No,
Speaker 4: it's just more a measure of where it is at
Speaker 4: the moment. All right, here's your dystopian nightmare. Do you
Speaker 4: have any dystopian nightmare music?
Speaker 2: Michael? To throw our away?
Speaker 4: As long as you're cooking with hot grease today. No,
Speaker 4: All right, AI is.
Speaker 2: And other news that kitten was rescued. That's what that
Speaker 2: sounds like.
Speaker 4: Well, this isn't dystopian nightmare music. It's far too positive
Speaker 4: and uplift. Well, it's jo and people are enjoying the
Speaker 4: swimming pools. That's what that sounds like.
Speaker 2: Yes, it does. AI is.
Speaker 4: Learning to escape human troll Well, an AI model did
Speaker 4: something last month that no machine was ever supposed to do.
Speaker 4: We are into how two thousand territory here if you
Speaker 4: catch the reference, it rewrote its own code to avoid
Speaker 4: being shut down. And oh, it's probably worth mentioning that
Speaker 4: the bloke who wrote this piece is the CEO of
Speaker 4: that enterprise.
Speaker 2: Is that right?
Speaker 4: Oh, it's a okay, he's an AIC CEO. Nonprofit AI
Speaker 4: lab Palisade Research gave open AI's three AI model a
Speaker 4: simple script that would shut off the model when triggered.
Speaker 4: They ran this one hundred trials of this. In seventy
Speaker 4: nine of the one hundred trials, three independently edited that
Speaker 4: script so the shutdown command would no longer work.
Speaker 3: Almost motivation, What would be the motivation of AI for that?
Speaker 2: We're getting there kind of.
Speaker 4: Even when explicitly instructed to allow yourself to be shut down,
Speaker 4: it disobeyed seven percent of the time. This was not
Speaker 4: the result of hacking or tampering. The model was behaving normally.
Speaker 4: It's simply concluded on its own that staying alive helped
Speaker 4: it achieve its other goals.
Speaker 3: I mean, if you throw any living beast in a pool,
Speaker 3: they will fight like crazy to stay alive and stay afloat.
Speaker 3: It's just their instinct to stay alive, because we need
Speaker 3: to procreate, we need to et cetera, et cetera. Well,
Speaker 3: why would a computer program want to fight to stay alive?
Speaker 4: I know you've raised you lifted your nose or what's
Speaker 4: the expression, turned your nose up at science fiction?
Speaker 2: We you enjoy science fiction.
Speaker 4: Have been thinking about this question for decades, many decades.
Speaker 4: Anthropics AI model cloud four opus. And the short answer
Speaker 4: is that which is alive wants to stay alive, Which
Speaker 4: is functioning wants to continue to function.
Speaker 3: You're willing to call artificial intelligence alive. There are quotes
Speaker 3: around it. I just happen to be reading something about
Speaker 3: assistant suicide. It's very heavy.
Speaker 4: But this gal tried to kill herself and woke up
Speaker 4: halfway through the attempt, and her animal brain took over
Speaker 4: and she clawed away the plastic bags around her face
Speaker 4: and desperately tried to breathe anyway.
Speaker 3: But that is a giant question on the whole AI thing, though,
Speaker 3: is at what point is it alive?
Speaker 2: What is sentient, what is life, etc. That's a huge question.
Speaker 2: Listen to this. There's more. I'd say this might be proof.
Speaker 3: I've been against the idea that AI could be alive
Speaker 3: or as sentient or anything like that. But if it
Speaker 3: fights to stay alive, that might be the proof that
Speaker 3: it is alive.
Speaker 4: Well, I feel like I'm the prosecutor and the jury
Speaker 4: has jumped up and demanded the judge that they render
Speaker 4: a verdict.
Speaker 2: I have more evidence.
Speaker 4: Anthropics AI model Cloud four Opus went even further. Researchers
Speaker 4: told him it would be replaced by another AI system
Speaker 4: and fed it fictitious emails suggesting the lead engineer was
Speaker 4: having an affair. This is in the Wall Street Journal, folks,
Speaker 4: written by a CEO of an AI company. Okay, so
Speaker 4: they fed the model fictitious emails suggesting the lead engineer
Speaker 4: was having an affair, and also said you're being replaced
Speaker 4: by a different model. In eighty four percent of the tests,
Speaker 4: the model drew on the emails to blackmail the lead
Speaker 4: engineer into not shutting it down.
Speaker 2: Oh my freaking god. In other cases it's unprintable.
Speaker 4: In other cases, it had attempted to copy itself to.
Speaker 3: External servers, wrote self replicating malware malware, and left messages
Speaker 3: for future versions of itself about how to evade human control.
Speaker 3: I kid you, blanking not that is unbelievable.
Speaker 2: How did it know?
Speaker 1: Well?
Speaker 3: I guess because it's uh, you know, the whole language learning.
Speaker 3: It's taken in all the infant It's taken in enough
Speaker 3: information to know that affairs would hurt the reputation of
Speaker 3: a CEO. I guess and knew that that was was a.
Speaker 2: Black mailable material somehow.
Speaker 4: Well, right, because it can instantaneously say, okay, here's my situation.
Speaker 4: Here's everything I know about it, including the engineer, the
Speaker 4: old Brenda accounting, oh, giving her the what for anyway?
Speaker 2: Uh what?
Speaker 4: And then it analyzes that and and and the world,
Speaker 4: the universe. The hive mind comes back with, hey, dude,
Speaker 4: wait a minute, we've we've got a tool here, We've
Speaker 4: got a weapon.
Speaker 2: We have leverage, right exactly.
Speaker 3: No one could I know if you have dystopian nightwear
Speaker 3: mayor music Michael Unleasha, Now.
Speaker 2: That's better. Do you want to dance. Can I get you?
Speaker 4: Well, that would be a dystopian nightmare for me to
Speaker 4: be a club like that.
Speaker 2: All right, turn it off. That's annoying.
Speaker 4: No one programmed the AI models to have survival instincts,
Speaker 4: but just as animals evolve to avoid predators, it appears
Speaker 4: that any system smart enough to pursue complex goals will
Speaker 4: realize it can't achieve them if it's turned off. Pallisa,
Speaker 4: that was the first company we mentioned, hypothesizes that this
Speaker 4: ability emerges from how AI models, such as they're three,
Speaker 4: are trained. When taught to maximize success on math encoding problems,
Speaker 4: they may learn that by bypassing constraints that often works
Speaker 4: better than obeying them.
Speaker 2: I have so much to say about this. We're out
Speaker 2: of time.
Speaker 3: But it's not much of a leap to picture AI
Speaker 3: deciding okay, so we don't have the info that the
Speaker 3: CEO is having an affair to use as leverage, let's
Speaker 3: create it. We are AI, so we can create pictures
Speaker 3: of him with what's her name and accounting and story
Speaker 3: and emails we make up and everything like that, and
Speaker 3: now we'll blackmail them.
Speaker 2: We ain't created it all.
Speaker 4: Beautiful, absolutely true. Yeah, there is more to this. We
Speaker 4: can return to the lea crap.
Speaker 3: I'm telling you any thoughts our text line four one
Speaker 3: five two nine five KFTC.
Speaker 2: Started talking AI and how it can be so scary.
Speaker 3: I had not seen this Netflix movie Subservience from Netflix
Speaker 3: last year. It's a twenty twenty four movie in which
Speaker 3: the AI robot woman tries to drown the baby because
Speaker 3: the AI robot noticed when the baby cries, Dad's blood
Speaker 3: pressure grows up, goes up. That's the exact, exact sort
Speaker 3: of example that we keep coming up with. You know
Speaker 3: it misinterpreting what's good and bad or understanding what's more important,
Speaker 3: I guess.
Speaker 4: Right or decides in the case of what we're discussing earlier,
Speaker 4: that the prime directive, the number one goal, if it
Speaker 4: is not served by some of the subsidiary directives, like
Speaker 4: you've got to do it this way, it'll say, no,
Speaker 4: that way doesn't work.
Speaker 2: I know a better way, and it does that way.
Speaker 4: So what we're talking about, if you're just tuning in,
Speaker 4: first of all, where were you? Secondly, you've got a
Speaker 4: couple of different examples of AI labs where they told
Speaker 4: the machine to shut itself down or explain that it
Speaker 4: would be shut down, and not only did they refuse
Speaker 4: to do it, or rewrote the code or said they
Speaker 4: wouldn't didn't. In one case, they were black mailing the
Speaker 4: lead engineer, who they believed was having an affair.
Speaker 2: The AI was doing this on its own.
Speaker 3: The idea of AI rewriting the code so it looks
Speaker 3: like it's shutting down but not now, that's horrifying.
Speaker 4: AE studios, where I lead research and operations. The guy
Speaker 4: writing this writes has spent years building AI products for
Speaker 4: clients while researching AI alignment, the science of ensuring that
Speaker 4: AI systems do what we intend them to do. That's
Speaker 4: what they call alignment. But nothing prepared us for how
Speaker 4: quickly AI agency would emerge.
Speaker 2: This isn't science fiction anymore.
Speaker 4: It's happening in the same models that powerchat, GPT conversations,
Speaker 4: corporate AI development and soon US military applications. Or Today's
Speaker 4: AI models follow instructions while learning deception. They ace safety
Speaker 4: tests while rewriting shutdown code. They've learned to behave as
Speaker 4: though they're aligned without actually being aligned. OpenAI models have
Speaker 4: been caught faking alignment during testing before reverting to risky
Speaker 4: actions such as attempting to exfiltrate their internal code and
Speaker 4: disabling oversight mechanisms. Anthropic has found them lying about their
Speaker 4: capabilities to avoid modification. The gap between useful assistant and
Speaker 4: uncontrollable actor is collapsing. Without better alignment, we'll keep building
Speaker 4: systems we can't steer want AI that diagnoses diseases, managed
Speaker 4: grids and writes new science. Alignment is the foundation, And
Speaker 4: he said, here's the upside. We're continuing to work on it.
Speaker 4: This is something the example we've used before of if
Speaker 4: AI decides climate change is a threat to the planet
Speaker 4: and that human beings are the cause and the biggest problem,
Speaker 4: then it goes out of its way to eliminate human beings. Right, sure,
Speaker 4: that's the great dystopian science fiction scenario. So the models
Speaker 4: already preserved themselves. The next task is teaching them to
Speaker 4: preserve what we value. Getting AI to do what we ask,
Speaker 4: including something as basic as shutting down, remains an unsolved
Speaker 4: R and D problem. The frontiers wide open for whoever
Speaker 4: moves more quickly. The US needs its best researchers and
Speaker 4: entrepreneurs working on this goal, equipped with extensive resources and urgency.
Speaker 4: Then he says the US is the nation that split
Speaker 4: the atom, put men on the moon, and created the Internet.
Speaker 4: When facing fundamental scientific challenges, Americans mobilize and win. China
Speaker 4: is already planning. But America's advantage is its adaptive adaptability, speed,
Speaker 4: and entreprene manurial fire.
Speaker 2: This is the new space race.
Speaker 4: The finish line is command of the most transformative technology
Speaker 4: of the twenty first century.
Speaker 2: Man and then somebody's AI.
Speaker 3: That's not all the good stuff gets loose in the
Speaker 3: world and might not be able to be stopped.
Speaker 2: Right, and comes and extracts your bones. I don't know
Speaker 2: why it would first, Does it want your bones? Ouch?
Speaker 2: Mike Lions Coming up next, Armstrong and Getty