Speaker 1: Hello, and welcome to another episode of the Markmas Show,
Speaker 1: where we talk about the decentralized revolution each and every week,
Speaker 1: talking about the way the world is changing, and of
Speaker 1: course we want to understand that, not just because it
Speaker 1: brings us some peace, so we kind of understand what's
Speaker 1: going on, but more importantly, we're trying to figure out
Speaker 1: how to navigate this correctly. Where should we live, what
Speaker 1: should we buy, how do we invest, what type of
Speaker 1: business should we run? How do I plan for my family?
Speaker 1: And all these things, and so as this world is
Speaker 1: changing rapidly, we need to be in front of these things,
Speaker 1: and so we're talking about the decentralized revolution. The world
Speaker 1: changes on a pendulum about every two and fifty years
Speaker 1: from the centralized structure to a decentralized structure, and we
Speaker 1: look at it through the lens of politics, finance, and technology.
Speaker 1: We look at through the lens of those three things,
Speaker 1: because when you're looking at complex systems like the body,
Speaker 1: complex systems like the economy, like the markets, like the
Speaker 1: geopolitical world, you can't just look at one small piece
Speaker 1: of it. That's the problem with modern medicine, right you
Speaker 1: have these special going into be a specialist in cardiac care,
Speaker 1: for example, But all they do, they're this specialist in that,
Speaker 1: but they haven't looked at the total body overall, and
Speaker 1: so a lot of times they miss things because they
Speaker 1: don't have enough of the other information. And so the
Speaker 1: body is complex, the markets are complex, and so we
Speaker 1: look at through the lens of those three things, politics, finance,
Speaker 1: and technology. Now, technology is the thing that changes the
Speaker 1: world more than anything else. When we look back through
Speaker 1: thousands of years of history, we see it's always technology
Speaker 1: that changes things. And technology changes things, it changes us,
Speaker 1: and then we're changed because of that, and then we
Speaker 1: have different problems than technology comes to solve those. But
Speaker 1: it also typically changes the way that we organize ourselves
Speaker 1: from a decentralized world to a centralized world. And so
Speaker 1: today I want to talk about that piece specifically, where
Speaker 1: we're going to talk about the technology, and we normally
Speaker 1: talk about the decentralized technology of bitcoin, the decentralized revolutionary technology,
Speaker 1: and bitcoin is giving us this decentralization at a time
Speaker 1: as the world is trending back towards decentralization, which is
Speaker 1: very interesting. But I want to talk about a different
Speaker 1: technology today and the different technology that I want to
Speaker 1: talk about today is could potentially be the opposite, the
Speaker 1: antithesis of bitcoin, and I'm talking about AI. So while
Speaker 1: Bitcoin is a decentralized technology that will help us start
Speaker 1: to decentralize how we store our value, how we communicate
Speaker 1: our value, how we transfer value, all those things, AI
Speaker 1: is almost this centralizing technology where we could all become
Speaker 1: very dependent on one or two of these big AIS,
Speaker 1: which could be a problematic. So we'll see this kind
Speaker 1: of shaping up. Now. I got a lot to cover today.
Speaker 1: I want to get to two main companies that are
Speaker 1: really pushing this AI, and one of them is a
Speaker 1: very centralizing company, and one of them is a decentralized AI.
Speaker 1: So we're gonna talk about that. We'll get to that
Speaker 1: in a little bit, but I want to cover it
Speaker 1: from a different angle. Now you might have heard, or
Speaker 1: you might be expecting me to start to cover like
Speaker 1: what it does and how you can use it and
Speaker 1: will it replace your job and how much money can
Speaker 1: you make from it and all those things, which are
Speaker 1: all good things, and we could discuss those. I did
Speaker 1: do a video on my main YouTube channel recently and
Speaker 1: I kind of covered a lot of those topics. So
Speaker 1: if you go to my main YouTube challenge of search
Speaker 1: Mark Moss, you can find that video and you'll see
Speaker 1: kind of what it is, how we can use it,
Speaker 1: what potential it has, things like that. But I want
Speaker 1: to talk about it from a different angle today, and
Speaker 1: I want to look at how it could work in
Speaker 1: this decentralized world that we're transitioned into. As we go
Speaker 1: from this unipolar world where basically the kind of have
Speaker 1: this one world government right this United States homogene this
Speaker 1: you know, one world currency, the dollar, so to speak.
Speaker 1: But now as the world's breaking apart and China's spinning
Speaker 1: off and Russias spinning off and etc. How does it
Speaker 1: work then as the world moves away from peace and
Speaker 1: more towards decentralization, deglobalization, unipolar to a multipolar world, there's
Speaker 1: going to be the more friction. It's gonna be more battle,
Speaker 1: more competition, which in itself is maybe a good thing
Speaker 1: the competition side, not if it leads to warfare, obviously,
Speaker 1: But I want to talk about the potential for the
Speaker 1: AI to really speed up this decentralized transition and what
Speaker 1: that means. We're gonna talk about the US, China, artificial
Speaker 1: intelligence arms race. We're gonna talk about potentially the problems
Speaker 1: of AIS fighting AIS, talking about the potential for this
Speaker 1: to really escalate into a cyber security problem, which of
Speaker 1: course we hear the world that I'm going form talking
Speaker 1: about all the time. And then we'll talk about it
Speaker 1: from an investment standpoint where some of these investments are
Speaker 1: who's invested into it? And then, as I said, I
Speaker 1: want to get into kind of this open AI versus
Speaker 1: decentralized AI. So I got a lot to cover now.
Speaker 1: To frame this up a little bit, there's two big
Speaker 1: a very broad general categories for AI. We have what
Speaker 1: would be considered narrow AI and then broader general AI.
Speaker 1: And so narrow AI is artificial intelligence, so it's it's
Speaker 1: really machine learning where the computer, you know, the machine
Speaker 1: the software is learning how to do things. And in
Speaker 1: this narrow AI, you can train it to do very
Speaker 1: specific and narrow tasks. So you could teach it how
Speaker 1: to play chess, for example, right, you could give it
Speaker 1: a document and tell you to write a summary of
Speaker 1: that document. So those are narrow tasks that I can do.
Speaker 1: Then there's what would be considered broader general AI, and
Speaker 1: that is where it has to have like intelligence and
Speaker 1: creativity that a human could have where it could build
Speaker 1: its own experiences and opinions. And as far as I know,
Speaker 1: and I've done quite a bit of research on this.
Speaker 1: As a matter of fact, I had the pleasure the
Speaker 1: opportunity to actually sit down with the vall Ramakon, who
Speaker 1: is a Silicon Valley you know, venture capital legend. Let's
Speaker 1: just say that I had a chance to sit down
Speaker 1: and have this conversation with him face to face, and
Speaker 1: according to my research, according to him, we are really
Speaker 1: no closer into getting this broad general AI moving forward
Speaker 1: than we have been in the last fifty years. So
Speaker 1: we're making massive progress in this narrow AI, but not
Speaker 1: so much progress in the general AI. And the reason
Speaker 1: why I just want to lay that part out is
Speaker 1: because a lot of people are very scared of this
Speaker 1: AI where it's you know, the singularity moment where it's
Speaker 1: going to become smarter than humans. We go into this
Speaker 1: terminator like you know from the movie Terminator, where the
Speaker 1: AI gets smarter than humans and then realize that, well,
Speaker 1: humans are the problem, and let's just kill all the humans. Right.
Speaker 1: That's kind of this narrative that's been brought out by
Speaker 1: this singularity moment and by these terminator movies. I think
Speaker 1: that is overblown. It's certainly overblown for now. For now,
Speaker 1: we're certainly no closer to that becoming a reality than
Speaker 1: we ever have been. Now, some people are saying maybe
Speaker 1: by twenty forty, twenty fifty, we could be making progress
Speaker 1: on that. So you know, we'll check back in on
Speaker 1: that in twenty or thirty years from now. I probably
Speaker 1: won't be here on the radio in twenty or thirty
Speaker 1: years from now, but we'll check back in on that.
Speaker 1: But for now, we have this narrow AI and it's
Speaker 1: making massive, massive progress, and so there appears to be
Speaker 1: an arms race happening right now. There's an article that
Speaker 1: came out this week from a Harvard researcher warning that
Speaker 1: the AI arms race could actually destroy civilization, which is
Speaker 1: a pretty big claim. Now, it's obviously no surprise that
Speaker 1: the US and China have been in a competitive war.
Speaker 1: At least we'll say, I believe it's actually a financial war,
Speaker 1: probably kicked off by the Trump era teriffs that we're
Speaker 1: put into place. But there's this arms race going on now.
Speaker 1: Each country is trying to spend more and more money
Speaker 1: trying to get this AI going. In the year twenty
Speaker 1: twenty one, the US government spent ten billion on AI
Speaker 1: R and D nine point three, which came from the
Speaker 1: Department of Defense. It's a pretty big number. Of course,
Speaker 1: the Chinese public expenditures for AI is less transparent. They're
Speaker 1: not transparent about anything, so we really don't know how
Speaker 1: much money they spent. However, analysts are saying it's probably
Speaker 1: about the same amount of money. So kind of racing
Speaker 1: for this, it's trying to see which could go on,
Speaker 1: which one could lead lead the pace here. But this
Speaker 1: AI arms race carries potentially huge risk for both countries.
Speaker 1: Of course, any arms race poses huge risk for any country.
Speaker 1: The race to nuclear weapons or any weapons for that matter,
Speaker 1: poses huge risk. But we're at this interesting point in
Speaker 1: time where as we've seen arms races and warfare change,
Speaker 1: it's become a lot more critical, a lot more dangerous
Speaker 1: for all of humanity. So I'm gonna talk about that.
Speaker 1: We'll get into this AI versus AI and cyberspace, cyber pandemics,
Speaker 1: and some of the investment stuff. We'll come back with
Speaker 1: all that. If you're just tuning in, you're listening to
Speaker 1: the Mark Moss Show talking about the decentralized Revolution, talking
Speaker 1: specifically about how this new artificial intelligence boom it's really
Speaker 1: been accelerating the last about ninety days, is changing things
Speaker 1: on that front. So I got a lot to cover
Speaker 1: when I come back. Don't go away. I'll be right
Speaker 1: back in just a minute. We're back, all right, Welcome back.
Speaker 1: If you just tune in, you're listening to the Mark
Speaker 1: Moss Show. We're talking about, of course, each and every week,
Speaker 1: the decentralized revolution as we look at it through the
Speaker 1: lens of politics, finance, and technology. Today we are diving
Speaker 1: into the technology bucket and we're looking at how artificial
Speaker 1: intelligence is playing a very crucial role as this world
Speaker 1: continues to decentralize. Now we're talking about specifically how AI
Speaker 1: could lead to this a new form of arms race.
Speaker 1: It's a new weapon that could be used both both
Speaker 1: defensively and offensively. Of course, we're yet to see how
Speaker 1: this could play out. But part of the reason why
Speaker 1: is because humans are no good at imagine in the future.
Speaker 1: What humans do is we imagine better versions of what
Speaker 1: we have today. We have cars today, we'll have flying
Speaker 1: cars in the future. But we can't imagine or envision
Speaker 1: new things because we don't have the building blocks to
Speaker 1: build those things yet today, and so we just kind
Speaker 1: of imagine things. So when we can sit here and speculate,
Speaker 1: as I said, I was kind of reading this article
Speaker 1: from this Harvard researcher talking about how it could destroy civilization. Well,
Speaker 1: we don't really know how it could destroy civilization. He
Speaker 1: doesn't really point any ways in how that could do that.
Speaker 1: We just sort of have this speculation that, well, I
Speaker 1: guess I saw the movie Terminator when I was a kid,
Speaker 1: and so it could just destroy civilization like that, And
Speaker 1: maybe it could. I just don't think we're there yet,
Speaker 1: going back to that kind of narrow versus broad AI.
Speaker 1: But another article that came out this week plenty of
Speaker 1: fearmongrain here it says that soon AI will battle other
Speaker 1: AI in cyberspace. This is from an Israeli expert. He's
Speaker 1: predicting this, saying that artificial intelligence is expected to lead
Speaker 1: to a spike in cyber attacks. Now, one reason why
Speaker 1: I think this is important is because, of course, the
Speaker 1: World Economic Forum, good old cloud schwabing buddies, they just
Speaker 1: met in Davos a few weeks ago and the one
Speaker 1: thing they kept talking about, well, climate change, misinformation, and
Speaker 1: cyber attacks. That's what they keep talking about. Cyber attacks,
Speaker 1: cyber attacks, cybertecks. They're coming, they're coming, they're coming, They're planning,
Speaker 1: they're planning, they're planning, and oh now they're here. So
Speaker 1: we're starting to see this really start to pick up
Speaker 1: a lot of steam. And so is it that they're
Speaker 1: sort of conditioning for this to happen, so we're prepared
Speaker 1: for it when it happens. So we're prepared to give
Speaker 1: them the opportunity to save us from these cyber pandemics.
Speaker 1: We'll see. But basically they're saying that AI could lead
Speaker 1: to an increase in that The reason why is because
Speaker 1: AI can create an infinite amount of content in seconds. Okay,
Speaker 1: but experts are already warning of an AI based cyber
Speaker 1: attack and they predict these experts, supposedly experts, predict that
Speaker 1: only other AIS will be able to put a stop
Speaker 1: to them. So again, back to the Terminator movie, the
Speaker 1: only way to stop the terminator sent back in time
Speaker 1: was to send another AI terminator back in time. And
Speaker 1: that's kind of what they're saying here. AI could create
Speaker 1: these cyber attacks but the only way to stop this
Speaker 1: AI from cybertacking would be to create another AI to
Speaker 1: put a stop to them, says there's this event called
Speaker 1: Cybertech tel Aviv in twenty twenty three. It just took place,
Speaker 1: and they said, the world's top cybersecurity leaders came together
Speaker 1: to look at the problems and the solutions to combat
Speaker 1: these types of threats. So some of the things, for example,
Speaker 1: is like chat GPT which we were talking about, which
Speaker 1: could basically write essays, right, It can write summaries, it
Speaker 1: can write emails, it can write all these things, and
Speaker 1: they've put kind of gates or restrictions onto what chat
Speaker 1: gbt can do. So for example, you can't ask it
Speaker 1: to write hate speech, you can't ask it to write
Speaker 1: like racist things and things like that. And you also
Speaker 1: can't supposedly ask it to do things like create viruses
Speaker 1: and malware and things like that. So they've put these
Speaker 1: restrictions with these gateways on it to try to prevent
Speaker 1: it from being used for bad But what this group found,
Speaker 1: cyber arc found was that with a little bit of persistence,
Speaker 1: you could get chat gbt to actually create malware, so
Speaker 1: like viruses for computers, which of course it's not supposed
Speaker 1: to be able to do it. Says that the researchers
Speaker 1: managed to get chat gbt to create malicious code, but
Speaker 1: also they found a way to hide that malicious code
Speaker 1: from your standard anti virus system in a way that
Speaker 1: is quite original. So not only do they use it
Speaker 1: to create a new one, but they also used it
Speaker 1: to create a new one that could be hidden from
Speaker 1: all known malware anti virus systems today. The thing that
Speaker 1: you know, we have to understand is that technology is
Speaker 1: a tool. It's no different than a set of tools
Speaker 1: to fix a car, a pair of scissors, a fork, right,
Speaker 1: and that, and that screwdriver could be used for many things.
Speaker 1: It comes down to who picks that screwdriver up and
Speaker 1: how they decide to use it. You could obviously attack
Speaker 1: somebody and cause a lot of damage and harm with
Speaker 1: a screwdriver, or you could open up a bottle, or
Speaker 1: you could fix something with it. That's what really comes
Speaker 1: down to it. And so when we have tools like this,
Speaker 1: the tools themselves are neutral. And this is why it
Speaker 1: kind of goes to this gun debate that's been raging forever,
Speaker 1: and a gun is also a tool. The proponents of
Speaker 1: guns would say that it's not what's in a man's hand,
Speaker 1: it's what's in a man's heart. Right. If somebody wants
Speaker 1: to kill somebody with a gun and you take away
Speaker 1: the gun, well they could find any number of ways,
Speaker 1: any number of hundreds of other ways to kill somebody, right,
Speaker 1: I mean this obviously there's we all drive big vehicles.
Speaker 1: That's pretty dangerous. I mean, you can get any type
Speaker 1: of thing from hardware stores and I'm not going to
Speaker 1: list those here, but you understand that you can't really
Speaker 1: stop someone. I mean you can do it with your
Speaker 1: bare hands. And so it really always comes back down
Speaker 1: to what's in a man's heart, not what's in a
Speaker 1: man's hand. And so when we start looking at tools
Speaker 1: like this, they can put all types of gateways and
Speaker 1: checkpoints on there, but it also limits what we can
Speaker 1: do for good as well. If you go up to
Speaker 1: the mountains at all, I like to go snowboarding. I
Speaker 1: was just up in Vancouver snowboarding last week, and at
Speaker 1: the where the chairlifts are where you getting on and
Speaker 1: off the mountain, they have tools so you can adjust
Speaker 1: your bindings and things like that, right, But the screwdrivers
Speaker 1: have a chain and their chain to the bench there,
Speaker 1: and so they could chain that screwdriver down so I
Speaker 1: couldn't go attack people in the line with it. But
Speaker 1: then it also limits what I'm able to do if
Speaker 1: I needed to work on like a car, like a
Speaker 1: SnowCat that came over a snowmobile, the chain isn't long
Speaker 1: enough to go do that. So we can put these checks,
Speaker 1: these gateways in, but then it limits what we're able
Speaker 1: to do in the potential chance that maybe a couple
Speaker 1: of people might try to do something crazy like create
Speaker 1: malicious code. Most of us would never even think about that.
Speaker 1: What they're saying is that there's even greater threats to
Speaker 1: cybersecurity because of this. Now. They said that according to
Speaker 1: the World Incomic Forum, cyber attacks already increased by almost
Speaker 1: forty percent last year. Forty percent now. Of course, right
Speaker 1: more people are using computers, more bad actors, and we're
Speaker 1: going to have more cyber attacks, I guess, But they're
Speaker 1: saying that they could rise exponentially over the coming year
Speaker 1: because of these AI models, because the average person now
Speaker 1: could write their own code and do this. And it
Speaker 1: says that the primary challenge for cybersecurity is that the
Speaker 1: attackers seem to be one step ahead. I've always wondered
Speaker 1: about this. Right, here's a quote here. AI based attacks
Speaker 1: are going to be much more pervasive, much more adaptable,
Speaker 1: and much more rapid than they were in the past,
Speaker 1: and human defenders can't keep up with the pace. So
Speaker 1: think about that. The anti virus, the cybersecurity experts are
Speaker 1: trying to stay one step in front of the exploiters,
Speaker 1: but they can't do that. I've always wondered, how does
Speaker 1: the anti virus software stay in business if there aren't
Speaker 1: actually viruses? Could it be plausible that they could release
Speaker 1: the virus and then release the software. Of course that
Speaker 1: would just be you know, I mean, that would be
Speaker 1: really really bad, apparently. Right. If you're just tune in,
Speaker 1: you're listening to the Markmas Show. We're talking about the
Speaker 1: Decentralized Revolution, talking about how AI plays a pivol role
Speaker 1: in this. I got a lot to cover. I needed
Speaker 1: to start getting faster here, so don't miss it. I'll
Speaker 1: be right back. Don't go away, all right, welcome back.
Speaker 1: If you're just tune in, you're listening to the Markmas Show.
Speaker 1: We're talking about the Decentralized Revolution. We're talking about how AI.
Speaker 1: We always talk about the decentralized revolution as through the
Speaker 1: lens of politics, finance, and technology technologies what changes things.
Speaker 1: Typically we're talking about technology in regards to bitcoin, but
Speaker 1: we're talking about technology in regards to AI, and they're
Speaker 1: talking about how the cybersecurity experts are saying that AI
Speaker 1: could make it easier and more efficient for attackers to
Speaker 1: do these cyber type of crimes, and how hard it
Speaker 1: will be for them to keep up the pace with this. Basically,
Speaker 1: what they're saying here is that a human defender won't
Speaker 1: be able to figure out what's going on, find the
Speaker 1: right countermeasures, and react fast enough because the AI attack
Speaker 1: would have already reached this destination. So what they're saying
Speaker 1: is that we're gonna have to fight fire with fire
Speaker 1: and assign the defense task to an AI based system.
Speaker 1: So we have to create machines to battle the machines,
Speaker 1: is what they're saying. The problem is that when you
Speaker 1: start leaving all of this up to AI, is AI
Speaker 1: able to make these types of decisions? It says, here
Speaker 1: are AI knows how to autonomously classify information, saving months
Speaker 1: and sometimes years of work for an organization, and so
Speaker 1: we should be able to classify these types of changes
Speaker 1: and know if they're malicious or not. We'll see how
Speaker 1: this shapes up. But like I said, I want what
Speaker 1: I'm interested in is like we're hearing more and more
Speaker 1: and more about this cyber pandemic and is this again,
Speaker 1: is it picking up because of what the World that
Speaker 1: Eccamyforum has been talking about. We saw that just after
Speaker 1: the world that Recament Forum was talking about these potential
Speaker 1: cyber attacks, we started getting more of them, including we
Speaker 1: saw in the United States the FAA computers were attacked
Speaker 1: and shutdown cars, causing the largest blackout of flights or
Speaker 1: the largest shutdown of flights I believe in US history.
Speaker 1: And it didn't just happen in the US. It happened
Speaker 1: in I believe, Canada and maybe it was Australia a
Speaker 1: few other places as well. So it happened right after
Speaker 1: of course the WEF was talking about it, and we
Speaker 1: also just saw that it also happened in Italy. Italy
Speaker 1: had its Internet restored after having a nationwide outage on
Speaker 1: the Internet. There's reports of a global ransomware attack that
Speaker 1: was happening. And again, is this just all coincidence or
Speaker 1: sometimes is it too coincidental. It is it. When there's smoke,
Speaker 1: there's fire, And that's sort of what we're seeing right here.
Speaker 1: We saw that this Italy's National Cybersecurity Agency warned about
Speaker 1: these ransomware attacks and how they were targeting servers worldwide
Speaker 1: and they're looking to exploit a software vulnerability. You know.
Speaker 1: Part of the thing with centralized software versus decentralized software
Speaker 1: is I think you could with decentralized software, you can
Speaker 1: get a lot more people working on the software. Potentially,
Speaker 1: you can get a lot more eyes on it. You
Speaker 1: can find a lot more of these bugs. Maybe that's
Speaker 1: a benefit, trying to find these exploitations before they become
Speaker 1: a problem. But a lot of people were talking about
Speaker 1: this over the week over on social media, talking about
Speaker 1: is this the first of like what to expect about
Speaker 1: lockdowns happening on the internet? Was this a dry run?
Speaker 1: Could this have been coincident all that the WEFF was
Speaker 1: just talking about it and then it's happening, And I
Speaker 1: don't know, that's just conspiratorial talk. We don't really have
Speaker 1: any evidence of that, but it is certainly again very
Speaker 1: coincident all that that's happening right now now. On another side,
Speaker 1: back to kind of the economic side of things. One
Speaker 1: of the kind of famous technology stockpickers Cathy Wood. She
Speaker 1: runs a firm or an ETF called ARC and it
Speaker 1: basically has all the tech companies in this ETF, which
Speaker 1: of course is famously down. She's lost so much money
Speaker 1: it's a wonder that people still listen to her. But
Speaker 1: she's now talking about how hour. She's predicting that Amazon
Speaker 1: would have more robot workers than human workers by twenty thirty.
Speaker 1: And that's not surprising. It's not surprising at all. It says,
Speaker 1: if you compare the number of robot Amazon has to
Speaker 1: the number of employees, it's about a third right now,
Speaker 1: and we believe that by the year twenty thirty, Amazon
Speaker 1: will have more. So Amazon already has what would be
Speaker 1: considered robots. But what do you consider robots? Anytime a
Speaker 1: machine does one thing like picks up a package and
Speaker 1: moves it somewhere else, like, that's not happening all over
Speaker 1: the place. It's not happening all the time. Well, of
Speaker 1: course it is. It's happening about a third of the
Speaker 1: people right now. But they're saying that by twenty thirty
Speaker 1: it could replace all of them. Now is that a
Speaker 1: bad thing. That Amazon currently has more than five hundred
Speaker 1: and twenty thousand robots in use and could potentially get
Speaker 1: over to about one point six million employees over the
Speaker 1: next seven years, is that a bad thing. It could
Speaker 1: be bad if you were one of those warehouse workers
Speaker 1: that got your job replaced, unless you went and found
Speaker 1: a better job. So, since the dawn of time, technology
Speaker 1: always puts people out of work, that's the whole point.
Speaker 1: That's the entire point. If I was carrying one brick
Speaker 1: at a time, it would take me very long to
Speaker 1: move these bricks over distance, right, So then using my
Speaker 1: brain and human ingenuity, I would say, well, instead of
Speaker 1: having ten people all carrying bricks back and forth, why
Speaker 1: don't I make a wheelbarrow and then I can put
Speaker 1: all the bricks into a wheelbarrow, and then I could
Speaker 1: do the work of ten men carrying all the bricks
Speaker 1: at once in a wheelbarrow. That was a piece of technology,
Speaker 1: and it replaced the work of those ten people that
Speaker 1: were needed to carry those bricks. Was that bad, Well,
Speaker 1: it was if that was your only way to make money,
Speaker 1: it was carrying those bricks. But it wasn't bad because
Speaker 1: ultimately what it does is it freed those people up
Speaker 1: to go focus on higher value things. Now, the world
Speaker 1: had stayed pretty much dirt. The world had stayed pretty
Speaker 1: much with no real technological advancements for most of history.
Speaker 1: Things really got interesting in the late seventeen hundred in
Speaker 1: the eighteenth century, which was the start of the industrial Revolution,
Speaker 1: And all of a sudden, a new technological revolution happened,
Speaker 1: and we created machines, and all of a sudden, a
Speaker 1: machine could do the work of five thousand men. The horror,
Speaker 1: what's going to happen to all those five thousand men?
Speaker 1: They got their jobs replaced by one machine. And of
Speaker 1: course the answer is, well, those men would go on
Speaker 1: to do science and medicine and further improve the world.
Speaker 1: So we can talk about this all the time. Technology
Speaker 1: always replaces the need for human power, but it allows
Speaker 1: those humans to go work on higher level tasks. We
Speaker 1: could have ten thousand guys out there digging roads, or
Speaker 1: we could bring in one tractor and just do the
Speaker 1: work of all those people. But what are all those
Speaker 1: people going to go do. Well, they're going to find
Speaker 1: new things to go work on, like creating new forms
Speaker 1: of tractors and all these service businesses based around tractors
Speaker 1: and making parts for tractors, and on and on and on,
Speaker 1: designing AI for example. And so we could look back
Speaker 1: through time and look at any piece of technology and
Speaker 1: how it's made us more efficient. That's the whole point.
Speaker 1: It makes us more efficient, so we don't need as
Speaker 1: many hours to go into that, and then those hours
Speaker 1: freed up allows us to go work on other things. Now,
Speaker 1: the only way that you're really affected by this is
Speaker 1: if I hate to say it, but you're too should
Speaker 1: I say lazy, to pour into your own self, into
Speaker 1: your own education. For the lazy and uninitiated, it's a
Speaker 1: bad thing. But for the smart and for the people
Speaker 1: willing to take on this new technology and use it,
Speaker 1: it's powerful. What's happening is that as this technology has
Speaker 1: continue to change things. As I say all the time,
Speaker 1: technology is what changes the way the world works and
Speaker 1: how we organize ourselves. And so really, about two hundred
Speaker 1: and fifty years ago, at the start of this Industrial Revolution,
Speaker 1: it started to centralize us and put us into cities
Speaker 1: with factories, and we had these big factories and these
Speaker 1: big cities, and it became very centralized. In nineteen o eight,
Speaker 1: we had that the third or fourth the fourth Industrial Revolution,
Speaker 1: which was automobiles and mass production or assembly lines. Now
Speaker 1: that change things drastically, and it is also part of
Speaker 1: this American story of this middle class in the shrinking
Speaker 1: middle class. I'm gonna break that down for you, and
Speaker 1: then we'll talk about these different types of AI, the
Speaker 1: open source versus closed source. If you're just tuning in,
Speaker 1: you're listening to the markmas Show. Of course we talk
Speaker 1: about the decentralized revolution, talking about the way the world
Speaker 1: is changing, and today we're talking about it specifically through
Speaker 1: the technology piece, which is of course always the biggest
Speaker 1: piece talking about AI. I got a whole lot to
Speaker 1: cover when I come back in a minute. You don't
Speaker 1: want to miss it, so don't go away. I'll be
Speaker 1: right back, all right, Welcome back. If you just tune in,
Speaker 1: you're listening to the Mark Moss Show, we're talking about
Speaker 1: the decentralized Revolution. We're talking specifically about the technology piece.
Speaker 1: We're talking about AI. Now, what I was saying is
Speaker 1: that since the beginning of time, every time there's been
Speaker 1: a new piece of technology, people are worried about it
Speaker 1: because it replaces jobs, and it does, but it also
Speaker 1: opens up new jobs, and so as humans, we have
Speaker 1: unlimited potential, unlimited And the reason why we have unlimited
Speaker 1: potential is because we have ingenuity and we have creativity.
Speaker 1: And as long as we have creativity, we're always going
Speaker 1: to see problems that need to be solved, and we're
Speaker 1: always going to come up with new solutions to solve
Speaker 1: those problems, and we're always going to have progress, and
Speaker 1: we're always going to have advancement, and there's never going
Speaker 1: to be a lack or a shortage of things to
Speaker 1: work on. The problem is, if you're not creative, if
Speaker 1: you're not ambitious, if you're not looking at those things well,
Speaker 1: and all you want to do is the one task,
Speaker 1: you could have a hard time. So an example would
Speaker 1: be in the Pacific Northwest, we had all these logging
Speaker 1: towns and entire towns were built just for logging there.
Speaker 1: But now that's all been basically shut down. Most of
Speaker 1: us move up to Canada or other countries, and these
Speaker 1: logging towns that used to be robust and busy and
Speaker 1: have lots of jobs have now shriveled up and died.
Speaker 1: Now some of these towns want to supply or provide
Speaker 1: welfare or UBI or whatever you want to call it
Speaker 1: to these people, because what are they going to do?
Speaker 1: I mean, they were a logger and now there's no logging,
Speaker 1: and now they're in this town and all they'd know
Speaker 1: how to do is logging, and there's no logging jobs,
Speaker 1: and so they have nothing to do, so we have
Speaker 1: to give them money. Well, I can tell you what
Speaker 1: they should do. They should learn a new skill and
Speaker 1: they should move somewhere else. Right, that's exactly the point here.
Speaker 1: So we have this situation where computers are yes replacing jobs.
Speaker 1: You imagine how many people used to take to sit
Speaker 1: there and transcribe books by hand, and then we came
Speaker 1: up with the printing press. But what about all those
Speaker 1: people that are transcribing books though they do something else.
Speaker 1: So Amazon's helping. Amazon says that they've committed about one
Speaker 1: point two billion dollars to provide employees with educational programs,
Speaker 1: one point two billion offering megatronics, mechatronics, robotics, all these programs.
Speaker 1: And so hopefully these people who see that, you know,
Speaker 1: there's this potential for their job to get replaced, could
Speaker 1: take advantage of this and move up higher on the
Speaker 1: food chain rights. That's what we want them to do. Now,
Speaker 1: this is a big, big piece because what happened is,
Speaker 1: you know, after back to nineteen o eight, Henry Ford
Speaker 1: invented the automobile and the mass production the assembly line.
Speaker 1: What happened is that led to massive abundance and prosperity
Speaker 1: for the United States got this very robust middle class,
Speaker 1: not just the United States, the developed world that was
Speaker 1: embracing this industrial revolution. We got this massive growth and
Speaker 1: this robust middle class. And the reason why is because
Speaker 1: the assembly line like equalizes everybody. So you could be
Speaker 1: the smartest person in the world, that could be the
Speaker 1: dumbest person in the world. And we're next to each
Speaker 1: other on the assembly line, and I plug in my
Speaker 1: part and you plug in your part, and we've done
Speaker 1: the exact same work. Even though you're smarter and I'm
Speaker 1: not as smart as you, we've provided the same value.
Speaker 1: We've each plugged in our part, and we each get
Speaker 1: paid equally. And basically, what it did is it took
Speaker 1: all these people who were not motivated and not smart
Speaker 1: and didn't want to work smarter, and it pushed them
Speaker 1: up and made them on an even playing field as
Speaker 1: the people who were smarter and more ambitious, and that
Speaker 1: worked pretty well, but the middle class has obviously been
Speaker 1: hollowed out. You hear about stories all the time. Now.
Speaker 1: Part of it is because we shipped a bunch of
Speaker 1: jobs overseas. Apparently we did, so that's part of it.
Speaker 1: But the reason why is because those types of jobs
Speaker 1: don't require people to be very smart or hard working
Speaker 1: or innovative, and so let's just give those two other
Speaker 1: countries that can do the much cheaper. There's there's other
Speaker 1: reasons why. I don't want to dig into that, but
Speaker 1: the part that I want to dig into is that
Speaker 1: we've moved into a new We've moved into into the
Speaker 1: information age. So the technological revolutions of the seventeen to
Speaker 1: eighteen hundreds and the early nineteen ndards were all transportation based.
Speaker 1: So that was where the big technologies were steam engines
Speaker 1: to move stuff across continents, steel and steam engines to
Speaker 1: move stuff across the oceans, the automobiles. It was all
Speaker 1: transportation based. When we got into nineteen seventy one, we
Speaker 1: had the new innovation, the technological revolution, which was a microprocessor,
Speaker 1: which brought us computers and telecommunications and the internet. We
Speaker 1: entered the information age. And the problem is now we
Speaker 1: don't need to depend so much on the physical and
Speaker 1: the transportation side. I mean, of course we still need that,
Speaker 1: but now we're working more on the information age, and
Speaker 1: that now puts the preference back to people who are smarter,
Speaker 1: who are building their own education, who are taking time
Speaker 1: to educate themselves, who are taking time to think creatively,
Speaker 1: looking for problems and coming up with solutions and things
Speaker 1: like that. And that difference of us moving from an
Speaker 1: assembly line where everybody was equal to the information age,
Speaker 1: where they're smarter, people are really able to start pulling
Speaker 1: out ahead, is really led to this massive difference in
Speaker 1: the income. So you hear about this income inequality, which
Speaker 1: I think is a wrong metric to look at, but
Speaker 1: you look at you know how much people at the
Speaker 1: top are making versus how much people to bottom and
Speaker 1: AI And as we continue to move into the information age,
Speaker 1: as we continue to have tools to help with the
Speaker 1: information age, like I and all the other ones that
Speaker 1: will come in after it, we're going to continue to
Speaker 1: get a bigger gap. Now we shouldn't. I would hope
Speaker 1: that you listening, I would hope that everybody would step
Speaker 1: up and go shoot I better learn this new stuff.
Speaker 1: I'd better learn to start thinking creatively. I better start
Speaker 1: paying attention. I should start watching videos. I should start
Speaker 1: playing with this stuff. But instead most people would rather
Speaker 1: watch the Kardashians and play with TikTok. And that's fine.
Speaker 1: You should have the ability and the right to do that.
Speaker 1: Just don't complain when your job gets replaced, right, because
Speaker 1: we always have to be providing more value to the world,
Speaker 1: and as the world changes, we have to stay on
Speaker 1: top of that. It's happened since the beginning of time
Speaker 1: and it's always going to continue to happen. It's called
Speaker 1: creative destruction. It destroys some things, but it creates new ones.
Speaker 1: And we're humans, We're able to learn things. This old
Speaker 1: dogs can't learn new tricks. We're not dogs. We can
Speaker 1: learn new things. We can learn new skills, and we should.
Speaker 1: Let's talk about the two different types of a I.
Speaker 1: So the big one is this open AI that's the
Speaker 1: name of the company, is called open AIE. But the
Speaker 1: irony there is that it's not open. Open AI is
Speaker 1: a closed AI that's been trained. Somebody gave them all
Speaker 1: the information, but who gave it to them, who built
Speaker 1: up the AI? Who told it what it can and
Speaker 1: can't do. It can't provide malicious code, It can't write
Speaker 1: hate speech. Well, what is hate speech? What qualifies? And
Speaker 1: so who controls that? It's a big deal. It's a
Speaker 1: dangerous problem. The founder of Open Ai, Sam Altman, he
Speaker 1: came out and said this week that AI is poised
Speaker 1: to break capitalism. Now, whatever that means, I don't even
Speaker 1: I don't even know what that means. I've tried to
Speaker 1: understand it. Capitalism isn't something to be broken human nature.
Speaker 1: We all are. We all are capitalists. We have private property,
Speaker 1: our own private body, our own ideas, and our labor,
Speaker 1: and we have our resources that we acquire our private property,
Speaker 1: and we always work to try to be more efficient
Speaker 1: with those resources, those scarce resources that we have, and
Speaker 1: we do that through a number of ways, innovation and
Speaker 1: also through free and voluntary exchange. And everywhere there's capitalism.
Speaker 1: Little kids in preschool are trading sandwiches for crackers, in prison,
Speaker 1: they're trading, you know, onions for cigarettes, and in North
Speaker 1: Korea they're trading stuff. Right, We're always trading. We're always
Speaker 1: trying to be more efficient with the scarce resources. That's
Speaker 1: capitalism and AI is just one more tool that will
Speaker 1: help us to use our resources more efficiently. So I
Speaker 1: don't even know where he gets off saying that it's
Speaker 1: going to break capitalism. You can't break capitalism. It's going
Speaker 1: to break ingenuity. It's going to break the desire to
Speaker 1: be more efficient with our scarce resources. It's going to
Speaker 1: break the desire to freely trade with one another. Like
Speaker 1: that's never going to happen. Now, on the other side,
Speaker 1: we have stable Diffusion, and Stable Diffusion is poised to
Speaker 1: be an open source AI which is in contract us
Speaker 1: to open a HI which is actually closed. I'm running
Speaker 1: out of time. I don't have time to get into
Speaker 1: stable diffusion, but I would ask you to go do
Speaker 1: your own research on that. Just search stable diffusion, check
Speaker 1: that out. If you're just tuning in you're listening to
Speaker 1: the Markmas Show. We're talking about the decentralized revolution and
Speaker 1: the role that AI as a technology is playing in
Speaker 1: this new revolution as it will lead to more decentralization.
Speaker 1: That's what I got. Thanks so much for listening.