Speaker 1: Hey, guys, Saga and Crystal here.
Speaker 2: Independent media just played a truly massive role in this election,
Speaker 2: and we are so excited about what that means for
Speaker 2: the future of the show.
Speaker 1: This is the only place where you can find honest
Speaker 1: perspectives from the left and the right that simply does
Speaker 1: not exist anywhere else.
Speaker 2: So if that is something that's important to you, please
Speaker 2: go to Breakingpoints dot com. Become a member today and
Speaker 2: you'll access to our full shows, unedited, ad free, and
Speaker 2: all put together for you every morning in your inbox.
Speaker 1: We need your help to build the future of independent
Speaker 1: news media and we hope to see you at Breakingpoints
Speaker 1: dot com.
Speaker 2: Let's go ahead and talk about John Stewart and Stephen
Speaker 2: A here, because this is a little more fun than
Speaker 2: nuclear war. Death in nuclear war and ping fascism is.
Speaker 3: Fleeing.
Speaker 2: It's on par I'd say it's likely roughly equivalent. So
Speaker 2: in any case, Steven A goes on with John Sire.
Speaker 2: I watched the whole interview. You know, they were growing out,
Speaker 2: they were like bonding over their next tragic result, which
Speaker 2: you know, I have some of that going on in
Speaker 2: my household as well. In any case, the part of
Speaker 2: the conversation. People were really interested in though, is Stephen
Speaker 2: a is this like very centristy figure. He also just
Speaker 2: like he's not a I know, he's like floated this
Speaker 2: idea of running for president, but his political takes a
Speaker 2: pret surface level. He's not like deep in the weeds
Speaker 2: with this kind of stuff, you know. And John Stewart
Speaker 2: obviously is like deeply in the weeds with this kind
Speaker 2: of stuff. So they get into a bit of a
Speaker 2: battle over what is the reason why the Democratic Party
Speaker 2: with Kamal Harris lost to Trump in this last election cycle.
Speaker 2: Let's go ahead and listen to how that went down.
Speaker 4: The left definitely blew it. I thought that I thought
Speaker 4: that the progressive left, the extreme left, really really ruined
Speaker 4: the election for the Democrats. And that's that's how I
Speaker 4: view this is the truth, and I think that I
Speaker 4: think that because that happened, it positioned him to get
Speaker 4: away with a lot of things. Then you're putting forth
Speaker 4: some of these policies, whether it's transgender issues of other
Speaker 4: stuff that they would bring up. You had a lot
Speaker 4: of people to say, that's not where our focus should lie.
Speaker 5: When don't you think that's their focus focus?
Speaker 3: The right?
Speaker 5: I feel like the right is far more focused on
Speaker 5: where you go to the bathroom. They allowed what people
Speaker 5: would consider to be a centrist old guard Democrat to
Speaker 5: run again for president, and then you say, the progressive
Speaker 5: left wing is the one that didn't. They didn't choose
Speaker 5: Joe Biden. They don't have the power in that party.
Speaker 5: Chuck Schumer is out there, you know, writing eight strongly
Speaker 5: worded questions to Donald Trump about getting The Progressives are
Speaker 5: the one going people in this country want medicare for all,
Speaker 5: do something. They're the ones that have a principal agenda
Speaker 5: that they are going to put forth that all the
Speaker 5: Democrats have run from in under the guise of we
Speaker 5: have to be moderate and we have to be centrist.
Speaker 5: But that doesn't appeal to changing the culture and dynamic
Speaker 5: of how this government should work by the people, for
Speaker 5: the people of the people.
Speaker 4: That's a great argument, and I don't disagree.
Speaker 6: What I'm saying to you is that we're done here.
Speaker 2: So Johnston then goes on Emily to make a case
Speaker 2: that I think he'll be maybe more sympathetic too than
Speaker 2: that one.
Speaker 7: I mean that one.
Speaker 2: I totally agree with rights like utterly obsessed with gender
Speaker 2: identity and genitals at this point, but well, we can
Speaker 2: pause that debate at.
Speaker 7: The moment.
Speaker 3: On that people can look it up and fought with.
Speaker 7: Piers Morgan on this you can oh much better than me.
Speaker 2: But in any case, he goes on and make this
Speaker 2: case of like, don't you think the real problem is
Speaker 2: that Democrats didn't actually like deliver or promise to deliver
Speaker 2: anything real. And so when you've got Bernie Sanders and
Speaker 2: AOC and that they're doing this like stop oligarchy to doing,
Speaker 2: they're saying like, we're going to help you with your wages,
Speaker 2: We're going to get you held gere, Like, isn't that
Speaker 2: really the problem is that Democrats had no credibility on
Speaker 2: actually addressing people's he didn't put it this way, but
Speaker 2: addressing people's material concerns. And Steve and A couldn't really
Speaker 2: couldn't really respond to that. He goes, well, that's a
Speaker 2: good point, and then went on to say, you know,
Speaker 2: some other stuff. But you know, I thought John did
Speaker 2: an effective job of positioning this because to just frame
Speaker 2: it in terms of left right, I think is deeply confusing.
Speaker 2: And this gets to this other piece of news that
Speaker 2: just came out, like Josh Holly is now introducing fifteen
Speaker 2: dollars minimum wage bill in the Senate. I don't know
Speaker 2: if it'll make it to the floor. I'm sure there's
Speaker 2: like literally no other Senate Republicans who would vote for it.
Speaker 2: But really getting to the left of some of the
Speaker 2: Democrats on an issue that should be a core democratic issue,
Speaker 2: and no one would look at that and be like, oh,
Speaker 2: this is going to cause like Josh Holly to lose,
Speaker 2: or this is going to be bad for Republicans. No,
Speaker 2: there is a broad recognition that any of this sort
Speaker 2: of more populous pieces that whether it's Josh Holly or
Speaker 2: Trump has pushed with the no tax on tips or whatever,
Speaker 2: that these are good ideas that are also really popular.
Speaker 2: And so John Stewart's point is basically like Democrats should
Speaker 2: do more of that, and that would be you know,
Speaker 2: an effective way of winning people. Oh or if they
Speaker 2: actually feel like you have credibility delivering on something real
Speaker 2: to them.
Speaker 3: Yeah, And I mean, I think this is one of
Speaker 3: the biggest problems but also opportunities for the left. Opportunities
Speaker 3: in the sense that Bernie Sanders and Alexandre Acostio Cortez
Speaker 3: on the fighting aligarchy tour have leaned into I think
Speaker 3: the opportunities presented by that challenge. So it's actually a
Speaker 3: challenge that I think forces Democrats to confront those questions.
Speaker 3: On the other hand, I think part of the problem
Speaker 3: here is that politically, the left wing of the Democratic
Speaker 3: Party has the most attractive, appealing, palatable economic agenda. You know,
Speaker 3: a lot of my conservative friends, like Blanche at that
Speaker 3: be like what the hell you're talking about. But it's
Speaker 3: actually much easier to sell voters on Medicare for all
Speaker 3: than it is to sell voters on the status quo
Speaker 3: or some tweak to the status Yeah.
Speaker 2: Like we're going to negotiate drug prices or medicare on
Speaker 2: like five drugs. It's not a don't you feel like
Speaker 2: your life is transformed by that? I mean it's like, okay,
Speaker 2: well that's better, I guess, right.
Speaker 3: But the problem is when the left wing's economic solutions
Speaker 3: are the most palatable and appealing, then you also have
Speaker 3: the people who have signed the ACLU pledges like Kamala
Speaker 3: Harris did. That allowed the Republicans to run that ad
Speaker 3: on supporting taxpayer funded I think it was transition surgeries
Speaker 3: for incarcerated migrants the most specific thing possible. But I
Speaker 3: think that's where you see Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Cosio
Speaker 3: Cortez and Holly is trying to do this from the right,
Speaker 3: by the way, because it's also a challenge slash opportunity
Speaker 3: for the right where you have the most MAGA people
Speaker 3: having economics that are easier to sell, more palatable to
Speaker 3: sell to general election populations, statewide populations, and all of that,
Speaker 3: but they're also the ones that are now super super
Speaker 3: tied down to the MAGA brand. If you look at Holly,
Speaker 3: for example, a lot of people remember Holly because the
Speaker 3: image of him with the raised fist outside of the
Speaker 3: capital in the Mourning of January sixth. So it's not
Speaker 3: as though any side has like the upper hand politically
Speaker 3: on the question. It's it's actually something that they're both
Speaker 3: confronting in their own ways, which is quite interesting.
Speaker 2: I think there's a lot to that because what always
Speaker 2: irritates me is, first of all, number one, it is
Speaker 2: one Republicans who bring up transgender issues more regularly than
Speaker 2: Democrats because they feel like it's a good issue for them.
Speaker 7: There's a.
Speaker 2: Go ahead, try meum, So there's an obsession.
Speaker 7: There is an obsession there. I mean, there's no doubt
Speaker 7: about it.
Speaker 2: But what drives me crazy is I'm like, Okay, so
Speaker 2: let's accept that, like democratic positioning on the specific issue,
Speaker 2: not even transgender issues in general, the specific issue of
Speaker 2: transgender girls in sports, let's accept that democratic positioning on
Speaker 2: that is not in sync with public opinion. Look at
Speaker 2: how many wildly unpopular things that Trump says, does and embraces,
Speaker 2: pardoning the violent January six ers, some of whom beat
Speaker 2: up cops pulls at about like ten percent, Okay, wildly unpopular,
Speaker 2: a bunch of the things that were done at DOJE
Speaker 2: wildly unpopular, insane across the board, haphazard tariffs, wildly unpopular.
Speaker 2: So then you ask the question, Okay, so if if
Speaker 2: both sides have and I would say that Trump has
Speaker 2: specifically more issues that pull way worse than the overall
Speaker 2: broad like democratic program or what Kamway Harris specifically ran
Speaker 2: on where you know she intentionally in her campaign didn't
Speaker 2: talk about a lot of the things that were less popular.
Speaker 7: For if Trump has, let's just call it even.
Speaker 2: And they both have unpopular issues that you know that
Speaker 2: they support and that they have said things about in
Speaker 2: the past. Why does it matter for one and not
Speaker 2: the other? And to me, the reason is number one,
Speaker 2: Trump is just a talented figure. Number two, he has
Speaker 2: a story that I think is wrong and bad and
Speaker 2: evil in all of those things, but makes some sense.
Speaker 2: The reason your life is bad is because of immigrants,
Speaker 2: trans people, cultural elites. So if people sort of broadly
Speaker 2: get on board with that narrative, they're willing to forgive
Speaker 2: and forget some of the bullshit that is like wildly indefensible.
Speaker 2: Democrats first of all, don't seem like they stand for
Speaker 2: literally anything at all, which is why this whole like
Speaker 2: pull testing. Let me put my finger in the wind,
Speaker 2: let me try to reposition on trans issues, let me
Speaker 2: like focus test some response on girls in sports that's
Speaker 2: gonna not piss off this person, but is gonna appeal
Speaker 2: to a moderate, etc. People can smell that a mile away.
Speaker 2: So if you don't have a coherent story to tell
Speaker 2: and there aren't things that you are demonstrably willing to
Speaker 2: fight for, then yeah, they're going to have a lot
Speaker 2: more room to tar you with your least popular positions
Speaker 2: and frame them in the way that they want to
Speaker 2: frame them. So to me, That's the big difference between
Speaker 2: why the rights, why Trump specifically unpopular issues don't seem
Speaker 2: to matter as much as Democrats is because Democrats frequently
Speaker 2: don't have a spine, don't stand out for themselves, don't
Speaker 2: have principles they're willing to stand on, aren't willing to
Speaker 2: fight for anything, and don't have a coherent story about
Speaker 2: what has gone wrong or honesty really about the struggles
Speaker 2: that people are facing. Bernie Sanders is the most popular
Speaker 2: politician in the country right now, most popular politician in
Speaker 2: the country. Does he have a different position on trans issues?
Speaker 3: Now?
Speaker 7: No, he doesn't.
Speaker 2: The reason is because he has credibility on fighting for
Speaker 2: things that people care about, and he has a story
Speaker 2: that makes sense to people about who is screwing them over,
Speaker 2: why things have gone sideways in this country, and how
Speaker 2: critically it could be put back on track.
Speaker 3: Right people believe him speaking of the opportunities created by
Speaker 3: all of this. Let's put d three on the screen
Speaker 3: and talk about zomentum so zoron momdani his Actually he's
Speaker 3: now trailing according to this new pole Andrew Cuomo in
Speaker 3: a one to one race. So keep that in mind.
Speaker 3: He's now trailing Cuomo by only two points. My suspicion
Speaker 3: is that that's at least pretty close to the margin
Speaker 3: of error. I'll have to go look at the pole here.
Speaker 3: But that was also conducted before the Alexandria Occassio Cortes
Speaker 3: endorsement of Zoron, Mom, Donnie, and we can put D
Speaker 3: four on the screen as well.
Speaker 7: Dan before the debate, which went well for Zoron.
Speaker 3: Yes, yes, and went very poorly for Cuomo. So big
Speaker 3: thing for Zoron here across the board. The places where
Speaker 3: he lower net favorabilities are just the places where fewer
Speaker 3: voters know about him to have an opinion. No demo
Speaker 3: has particularly high unfavorables for him overall. And then another post,
Speaker 3: a tale of two candidates. Zoron plus forty three net
Speaker 3: favorability twenty eight percent haven't heard enough, Cuomo minus one
Speaker 3: net favorability, three percent haven't heard enough, So.
Speaker 7: Crystal room to grow for Zoran.
Speaker 3: Well, also, you heard it here first, truly, you heard
Speaker 3: it here first. Zomentum is absolutely realm is absolutely real.
Speaker 7: Yeah, no, there's no doubt about it.
Speaker 2: I mean, listen, I want to be fair and say
Speaker 2: there are other poles out Salem's rejoined the chat. There
Speaker 2: are other poles out that show a larger gap in
Speaker 2: favor of Cuomo. This particular polling outfit, though, was extremely
Speaker 2: accurate in the Eric Adams mayor race. It's not a
Speaker 2: crazy poll right, No, they do have a track record.
Speaker 2: I don't think anyone denies that Zoron has significant momentum
Speaker 2: right now. And this poll coming before the debate before
Speaker 2: AOC endorses, is significant because interestingly, in terms of the
Speaker 2: gender divide, Zoran is actually doing better with men. So Democrats,
Speaker 2: if you're looking for a candidate who can appeal to men,
Speaker 2: and specifically actually white men, there's something to learn from
Speaker 2: Zoron's candiacy because he's doing really well with young white
Speaker 2: men are probably his, I'm quite confident are his best demographic.
Speaker 2: So he's got some answers for you in this whole
Speaker 2: man conversation. But you know, the point about the groups
Speaker 2: where he's faring the poorest are also the ones that
Speaker 2: know the least about him, I think is a really
Speaker 2: important one and may help to explain some of why
Speaker 2: women are voting more for Cuomo than Zoran at this point,
Speaker 2: which disturbing and really a little bit head scratching, but
Speaker 2: women also knew less about Zoran at this point, so
Speaker 2: there may be rooms to grow there. You know, he
Speaker 2: still has some of the demographic challenges that have plagued
Speaker 2: the left. I think, you know, older black voters are
Speaker 2: the weakest demographic for him. Makes sense because you have
Speaker 2: a larger number of conservatives who you know, older black
Speaker 2: voters tend to as a group be more conservative than
Speaker 2: some of the other parts of the Democratic He's he's
Speaker 2: doing pretty well with Latinos though, so he's gained a
Speaker 2: lot of ground there, and you know, we'll see they're
Speaker 2: hitting him quite hard. They're really trying to go after
Speaker 2: him in all sorts of ways, and it's it's going
Speaker 2: to be continue to be a difficult hill to climb.
Speaker 2: But I think if you're looking at who has room
Speaker 2: to grow, obviously he is way more favorable, way higher
Speaker 2: favorability than Cuomo. I think he's you know, he's really
Speaker 2: got a shot in this thing, which is pretty wild
Speaker 2: and pretty extraordinary commentary on the way that the Democratic
Speaker 2: base has moved in Trump two point zero as well.
Speaker 3: Yeah, that favorability gap is insane and it'll be really
Speaker 3: sad if New Yorkers are stuck with Andrew Cuomo because
Speaker 3: I don't think anybody wants that. Even people who are
Speaker 3: saying they're maybe favorable to Andrew Cuomo are probably favorable
Speaker 3: to him in the respect that they don't like the
Speaker 3: other candidates, and they're like, Okay, he's fine, I know him,
Speaker 3: but really, nobody wants Andrew Cuomo to be the mayor
Speaker 3: of New York City. I mean, maybe like five people
Speaker 3: want Andrew Cuomo to the mayor of New York City.
Speaker 3: They're all named Cuomo. So if voters are stuck, maybe
Speaker 3: they're uncomfortable with Zoron's full democratic socialist platform. And honestly,
Speaker 3: that's fully understandable, especially after the city was mismanaged under
Speaker 3: build the Blasio Like, I get it, I get it.
Speaker 3: So if you're forced to choose between Andrew Cuomo and
Speaker 3: somebody who's, by his own admission, on the left flank,
Speaker 3: that just sucks for voters. So if it ends up Cuomo,
Speaker 3: I mean, good luck. Everyone, Like, that's just I'm sorry
Speaker 3: that those are your those are your choices.
Speaker 2: Let me let me say something about the way Zorn's
Speaker 2: run his campaign though, too. Yeah, because to the you
Speaker 2: know circles back to the like John Stair Stephen A
Speaker 2: Smith to tion and positioning. So Zoron has you know,
Speaker 2: all the lefty positions, no doubt about it. His tagline
Speaker 2: is Zoron for New York you can afford. And every
Speaker 2: time we've played as clips, you guys talk to him,
Speaker 2: like every time you talk to him, you know what
Speaker 2: his policy platform is. Freeze the rent, you know, government
Speaker 2: owned grocery stores to compete so that you can, you know,
Speaker 2: in food desert, so that you have some fresh fruit
Speaker 2: food options. He is laser focused on housing in particular,
Speaker 2: free bussing, you know, so that people can ride public transit,
Speaker 2: and additional investments in public transit. People know what his
Speaker 2: platform is, they know what he stands for. It's really clear.
Speaker 2: He has a very clear message, very clear story about
Speaker 2: what has gone wrong in New York, the way it's
Speaker 2: become an intentionally a luxury good under mayors like Bloomberg
Speaker 2: and Juliani and Eric Adams. And he wants to make
Speaker 2: it so that you can live in New York and
Speaker 2: it doesn't have to be such a struggle. Now, will
Speaker 2: one person be able to accomplish that in one term? No,
Speaker 2: But he's put forward some achievable. I think concrete goals
Speaker 2: that people can really wrap their heads around. And that's
Speaker 2: why his campaign has taken And it's not just against Cuomo,
Speaker 2: Like there are a bunch of long time established New
Speaker 2: York City palls in this race who were getting no traction.
Speaker 2: He has sucked up all of the oxygen, all of
Speaker 2: the like not Cuomo oxygen. And it's a real testament
Speaker 2: to the strength of his very straightforward proposition and his
Speaker 2: direct pitch to people's materials concerns and his story about
Speaker 2: you know, how how we got.
Speaker 7: Here and what went wrong as well.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and you know the white the white bros, the
Speaker 2: young men, Emily, they're eating it up again. Lessons to
Speaker 2: be learned here.
Speaker 3: Yeah, it's how aoc one and it's not like esoteric
Speaker 3: DSA naval gazing. It's yeah, a huge lesson I think
Speaker 3: for for National Democrats. So Crystal, should we move on
Speaker 3: to updates in the case of Gretit Sunberg.
Speaker 7: Yeah, let's do that.
Speaker 2: We've been covering the Gaza Aid Freedom flotilla, which was
Speaker 2: intercepted in international waters illegally by Israel. The members of
Speaker 2: that vessel were, including Greta Tunberg, were arrested, in President
Speaker 2: Trump's words and mine as well, kidnapped by Israel, taken
Speaker 2: to an Israeli prison, and then they, in order to
Speaker 2: effectuate their release, were made to sign these forms that
Speaker 2: would consent to their deportation but also would confess to
Speaker 2: basically illegally entering Israel, which is not what happened whatsoever.
Speaker 2: So some of the activists have refused to sign those forms.
Speaker 2: Greta did sign the form and has been released. She
Speaker 2: was flown back to Sweden. Reporters spoke to her there
Speaker 2: about the ordeal and why she did what she did.
Speaker 2: Let's go ahead and take a listen to a little
Speaker 2: bit of what she had to say.
Speaker 3: Berg is speaking to reporters. Let's take a listen to
Speaker 3: what she has to say.
Speaker 8: Yeah, on international waters, we were illegally attacked and kidnapped
Speaker 8: by Israel and the taken against our will to Israel,
Speaker 8: where we were detained and then some of us deported.
Speaker 3: Some are still there.
Speaker 4: Uh, there are very.
Speaker 8: Big uncertainties because it was quite chaotic and uncertainly, so
Speaker 8: I don't really know what's going on. I haven't had
Speaker 8: a phone for many days, and I the last few
Speaker 8: hours they were absolutely nothing compared to what what people
Speaker 8: are going through in Palestine, especially Gaza right now, and
Speaker 8: it is this is yet another international a violation of
Speaker 8: international rights, adding to the list of countless of such
Speaker 8: especially towards Palestinian that Israel are committing by blocking and
Speaker 8: preventing humanitarian aid from entering Gaza.
Speaker 3: That is a that is illegal.
Speaker 8: Sandwiches. Yeah, they probably have posted lots of pr stunt videos.
Speaker 8: As I said, I have not seen anything, but they
Speaker 8: did an illegal act by kidnapping us on international waters
Speaker 8: and against our will, bringing us to Israel, keeping us
Speaker 8: in the bottom of the boat, not letting us getting
Speaker 8: out and so on. But that is not the real
Speaker 8: story here.
Speaker 3: The real story is.
Speaker 8: That there's a genocide going on in Gaza and a
Speaker 8: systematic starvation following the seas and blockade now which is
Speaker 8: leading to food, medicine, water that are desperately needed to
Speaker 8: get into Gaza is prevented from doing so. But of
Speaker 8: course there are many attempts like this mission, both by
Speaker 8: seeing and land to break that siege and open up
Speaker 8: a humanitarian corridor. And this was a mission of attempting
Speaker 8: to once again bring aid to Gaza, which is desperately needed,
Speaker 8: but also to send solidarity and say that we see you,
Speaker 8: we see what is happening, and we cannot accept just
Speaker 8: see witnessing all this and doing nothing.
Speaker 3: That can never be an option.
Speaker 2: She also spoke more about how these horrors in Gaza
Speaker 2: have been allowed to persis. Let's go ahead and take
Speaker 2: a listen to her reaction there.
Speaker 9: Why do you think so many countries governments around the
Speaker 9: world are just ignoring what is happening in Gaza because
Speaker 9: of racism, That's the simple answer.
Speaker 8: I would say, racism and basically desperately trying to defend
Speaker 8: a destructive, deadly system that systematically puts a short term
Speaker 8: economic profit.
Speaker 9: And to maximize due political power over the well being
Speaker 9: of humans and the planet.
Speaker 3: And right now.
Speaker 9: It's very, very difficult to mortally defend that. It is impossible,
Speaker 9: but still they are desperately trying, which is absurd is
Speaker 9: not the word, but in words to describe it.
Speaker 2: And Emily, I'm curious for your reaction to this. You know,
Speaker 2: there's a lot I think that she said there that
Speaker 2: is interesting, but in particular I want to highlight that
Speaker 2: she mentions this isn't part of just one effort, and
Speaker 2: in fact, the organization that she's involved with. We spoke
Speaker 2: with the the spokesperson for the Freedom Flotilla group. They
Speaker 2: plan to attempt this many more times, and there are
Speaker 2: two separate additional efforts that they're in coordination with to
Speaker 2: also try to break the siege. So there's been a
Speaker 2: lot of discussion about Greta in particular. What do you
Speaker 2: make of of what's gone down here?
Speaker 3: Yeah, I mean I don't have a like super I
Speaker 3: think it kind of went exactly as I expected that
Speaker 3: it would, and you know, it's better actually than it
Speaker 3: could have gone. It's a little interesting.
Speaker 6: Was low.
Speaker 3: The bar was really low. Bar was really low, and
Speaker 3: you know, the it's interesting that people still over there.
Speaker 3: I also think, hey, this is an example of people
Speaker 3: putting their money where their mouth is and actually doing
Speaker 3: the thing, walking the walk. So you know, even if
Speaker 3: I disagree with her, I'm not mad about it.
Speaker 7: To be honest, it was genuinely courageous. I mean, that's
Speaker 7: to me.
Speaker 2: And the other thing is, look, she is a high
Speaker 2: profile person. People paid much more attention to this effort
Speaker 2: because she was on board. I think Israel's reaction, which
Speaker 2: I don't want to underplay, I mean, it was illegal,
Speaker 2: like they acted as pirates kidnapping even like I said
Speaker 2: before Trump called it, so they kidnapped her, right, but
Speaker 2: they didn't kill her, which they've done before with you know,
Speaker 2: humanitarian activists previously back in twenty ten. And in fact,
Speaker 2: the spokesperson we talked to was on board that ship
Speaker 2: that they attacked and killed ten people who were on board,
Speaker 2: So they didn't do that. And you know, I think
Speaker 2: that level of quote unquote restraint also is partly attributable
Speaker 2: to the fact that they realized, like, shit, we can't
Speaker 2: kill Greta Tunberg, like this is gonna there's gonna be
Speaker 2: a lot of international attention to that. So I think
Speaker 2: she very effectively used the large platform that she has
Speaker 2: undertook an action that was genuinely courageous, that entailed genuine
Speaker 2: personal discomfort and extreme risk in order to try to
Speaker 2: do something. And so you know, if you have I
Speaker 2: saw Omar Botder front of the show tweeting like if
Speaker 2: you had one thousand people who did the same thing
Speaker 2: and also sent ships trying to break the siege, it
Speaker 2: would become you know, intercepting all of those people and
Speaker 2: trying to hold on to this blockade preventing starving people
Speaker 2: from getting food like that would become unsustainable with even
Speaker 2: you know, a comparatively small level of organization that Greta
Speaker 2: has you know, made much more likely and much more
Speaker 2: possible here. So I think what she did was extraordinary.
Speaker 2: I think I don't know, I don't really understand why
Speaker 2: the right really fixates on her and really hates her
Speaker 2: in the way that they do. But I think she's
Speaker 2: also proved a lot of the haters wrong who felt
Speaker 2: like she had this sort of like corporate friendly level
Speaker 2: of you know, approved activism. This was certainly not in
Speaker 2: that vein both because of the danger of the action
Speaker 2: and also because there is nothing corporate approved about standing
Speaker 2: up for Palestinian rights.
Speaker 3: Yeah, I mean, I think she had like a youthful
Speaker 3: naivete that was easy to make fun of. On the
Speaker 3: climate issue, I genuinely feel badly for anybody who gets
Speaker 3: famous as a child, whether it was their choice, their parents' choice,
Speaker 3: or nobody's choice. So I feel like she's growing up
Speaker 3: in front of cameras and panopticon and that just sucks.
Speaker 3: But much more this is a this is a version
Speaker 3: of Greta Tunberg that has definitely grown up compared to them.
Speaker 3: There's there's no question about it. Big w Forgreta on
Speaker 3: this one, not for Bebe.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I would say, so, let's go and put this
Speaker 2: image up on the screen. This is the latest video
Speaker 2: of a quote unquote AID and the way that this
Speaker 2: operation looks, I know drop site is reporting that you
Speaker 2: had another massacre in the context of Hungary Palace to
Speaker 2: means attempting to obtain AID from this Gaza Humanitarian Foundation.
Speaker 2: You know, hundreds of people now who have been killed
Speaker 2: because of this setup of this aid effectively trap at
Speaker 2: this point, and at the same time, we also have
Speaker 2: the ambassador to Israel, Mike Kakabee, who is kat Oh
Speaker 2: my god.
Speaker 3: The ambassador at a breaking points.
Speaker 2: Salem, Salem, Yes, Mike Kakabee significantly changing US policy and
Speaker 2: just I mean making it plain now we don't we
Speaker 2: don't support the previous contours of any idea of a
Speaker 2: two state solution.
Speaker 7: Let's go ahead and take a listen to that.
Speaker 10: I think the question is what does that Palestinian state
Speaker 10: look like? Okay, where is it? Where is it going
Speaker 10: to be? Well, what does it have to be in
Speaker 10: Judae and Samaria? Does it need to be somewhere different.
Speaker 10: Does it need to be an opportunity for people to
Speaker 10: have a true place that is completely their own, or
Speaker 10: is it going to be in the existing areas that
Speaker 10: are currently under the dominion of the PA. So there's
Speaker 10: a lot of questions. That's why I'm saying I don't
Speaker 10: believe anybody can say it's impossible, it will never happen.
Speaker 10: But if someone wants to declare that this is the
Speaker 10: exact strip of geography that is going to be the
Speaker 10: future Palestinian state, that's where the complication comes from.
Speaker 3: Well, maybe the word is exact, that's the problem.
Speaker 5: Are you suggesting that somewhere other than mandatory Palestine area,
Speaker 5: that it could be in Saudi Arabia or something.
Speaker 10: I'm just saying that I think every option should be
Speaker 10: and could be on the table.
Speaker 2: Wow, what did you Yeah, what did you make of that?
Speaker 2: Emily So he's designed but not in Palestine.
Speaker 3: Well yeah, but he's also like being clever and winking
Speaker 3: and nodding and saying, basically, Palestine is impossible because none
Speaker 3: of that land belongs to Palestine from his perspective, and.
Speaker 7: It stands the area.
Speaker 3: Yeah. It reminds me of when the Biden administration. Joe
Speaker 3: Biden is mister two state solution is funding a war
Speaker 3: for Netsan, Yaho, who is explicitly against the idea of
Speaker 3: a two state solution. Here you have Mike Kuckabee actually
Speaker 3: saying something very different than the president himself. And Trump
Speaker 3: is hard to pin down on this issue obviously, like
Speaker 3: is his Mara Gaza idea technically under the umbrella of
Speaker 3: a Palestinian state as Propalestine activists would define it. No,
Speaker 3: absolutely not. But he also would not be comfortable with
Speaker 3: just saying, hey, screw it, give it all to Israel
Speaker 3: because he has all of these relationships with other Arab
Speaker 3: states that he thinks are important and contingent upon finding
Speaker 3: a fair solution or a solution that they see is
Speaker 3: fair for the people of Palestine. So Mike Cockabe in
Speaker 3: that clip, it's not at all surprising. He's saying exactly
Speaker 3: what you know, people from the dispensationalist evangelical movement believe
Speaker 3: about that land, and it happens to be what a
Speaker 3: lot of Israelis believe about that land. But it's not
Speaker 3: what the quote unquote America First movement believes about that
Speaker 3: that believes about the solution.
Speaker 2: Yeah, well, I mean it is quite consistent with Trump's
Speaker 2: like We're going to ethnically cleanse Gaza and push them
Speaker 2: somewhere else. Like it certainly fits with that. And we
Speaker 2: know there have been discussions that have been ongoing with
Speaker 2: a variety of different countries to try to push them
Speaker 2: to accept these Palestinian refugees that Trump wants to create.
Speaker 2: And so you know, I think it's I think it's
Speaker 2: part and parcel with that.
Speaker 3: You know.
Speaker 2: The easy thing to say here is like, okay, well,
Speaker 2: if you've made it impossible to have a two state
Speaker 2: solution with the ongoing settlement, illegal settlement project, which all
Speaker 2: Israeli prime ministers have engaged in, by the way, but
Speaker 2: have really ramped up in recent years under net Yahoo
Speaker 2: and specifically post October seven, if you've made that impossible, okay,
Speaker 2: then how about everybody gets equal rights?
Speaker 7: How about that?
Speaker 2: How about you just live up to your rhetoric about
Speaker 2: how you know, you don't discriminate in your democracy and
Speaker 2: making an actual democracy where everybody's actually treated equally. Because
Speaker 2: if a two state solution is not going to be possible,
Speaker 2: and you're putting that off the table and you're doing
Speaker 2: everything you can which is a stated goal of Nan
Speaker 2: Yahoo to make it. So that's impossible. Well, that's the
Speaker 2: other solution that's available to you.
Speaker 3: But in a sense, I don't think he's being honest
Speaker 3: about it. In a sense, it's the like sadly realistic
Speaker 3: situation on the ground is that that area in I mean,
Speaker 3: he's in Jerusalem right there, but you know, the Temple mount,
Speaker 3: I mean the Al Aksa, Like nobody wants that to
Speaker 3: be given to the other side, is least of all
Speaker 3: people who are of the like dispensationalist ideology as people
Speaker 3: like Mike Huckabee. Are you know that's so?
Speaker 4: Yeah?
Speaker 3: I mean is it impossible?
Speaker 5: Sure?
Speaker 3: Or should it be impossible? No? And I think that's
Speaker 3: where the just depressing reality sets in.
Speaker 7: Yeah.
Speaker 2: Indeed, we've got a great guest standing by to talk
Speaker 2: about some extraordinary developments with regard to AI, So let's
Speaker 2: go ahead and get to that. There have been a
Speaker 2: bunch of very significant developments with regard to AI development
Speaker 2: that we did not want to lose sight of this week.
Speaker 2: So really excited to be joined this morning by tarn
Speaker 2: Steinbreckner Kaufman. She's the CEO of the Golden Gate Institute,
Speaker 2: for AI On. She's going to take us through some
Speaker 2: of these developments. Taran is great to have you, great
Speaker 2: to meet you.
Speaker 6: Thanks so much. It's lovely to be here.
Speaker 2: So, first of all, in the wake of the protests,
Speaker 2: which at times turned violent in La, there has been
Speaker 2: an effort to spread all kinds of propaganda, as is
Speaker 2: quite typical in these news cycles these days, but added
Speaker 2: to the mix now we have these just outright AI
Speaker 2: generated scenes, which this one in particular, I'm about to show.
Speaker 2: It's kind of crazy to me that some people even
Speaker 2: thought this was real, because it takes a very surreal
Speaker 2: turn quite quickly, but some people did just watch a
Speaker 2: piece of it and actually think that it was real. So,
Speaker 2: you know, that's putting aside more sort of sophisticated efforts
Speaker 2: to create these images and shape people's understanding of events
Speaker 2: that are happening in this country. So let's go ahead
Speaker 2: and take a look at this one video in particular
Speaker 2: AI generated that went viral.
Speaker 6: Why are you rioting? I don't know.
Speaker 3: I was paid to be here and I just want
Speaker 3: to destroy stuff? Is what you are doing illegal?
Speaker 7: Well, these are peaceful protests. Even that guy over there
Speaker 7: says so and so Taren.
Speaker 2: This really speaks to one of the concerns people have
Speaker 2: with regard to AI development, which is just how difficult
Speaker 2: it makes it to sort through what even is reality.
Speaker 11: Yeah, this is really important issue. Uh, these are going
Speaker 11: to get One thing to know is that these are
Speaker 11: going to get much more realistic.
Speaker 6: Like these are.
Speaker 11: You know, if you're a discerning eye and you sort
Speaker 11: of know what you're looking for, it's pretty obvious that
Speaker 11: this is AI generated. Still it kind of has like
Speaker 11: a sheene, it doesn't quite kind of look exactly photo realistic.
Speaker 11: And they've gotten much more realistic in the last year,
Speaker 11: and they're going to keep getting much more realistic. I
Speaker 11: would assume that a year from now I won't be
Speaker 11: able to tell easily whether something like that is real
Speaker 11: or not based on the actual images and audio. The
Speaker 11: second thing, you know is this is a really hard
Speaker 11: problem to solve. I've heard, you know, lots of solutions
Speaker 11: floating around, like we should you know, require AI generated
Speaker 11: video to have a water mark, or we should you know,
Speaker 11: It's just really hard. It's not really clear how any
Speaker 11: policy solution at scale could work to to you know,
Speaker 11: to stop bad actors from making videos and circular them
Speaker 11: that are not real. And the third thing which you
Speaker 11: pointed to, I think is this is sort of what
Speaker 11: I call the truth fog, which is it goes beyond
Speaker 11: the effect of the actual negative videos, the false videos,
Speaker 11: which is to say that like now, I can't you know,
Speaker 11: in a year, I don't think I'm going to be
Speaker 11: able to tell whether a video is real, which is
Speaker 11: going to make me discredit true videos evidence as well. Right,
Speaker 11: And that's a problem too, because anything, you know, I'll
Speaker 11: be able to share. If I share a video of
Speaker 11: you know, a candidate for president saying something and I'm like,
Speaker 11: you should vote for them because they said this, people
Speaker 11: are going to be like, how do I know they
Speaker 11: actually said that?
Speaker 6: Right?
Speaker 2: And we are I think Emily already seeing some of that.
Speaker 2: I know there was an incident with regard to a
Speaker 2: doctor in Gaza whose kids were killed by the Israelis,
Speaker 2: and there was you know, video of the aftermath, the
Speaker 2: horrific aftermath of that, and there are all these claims
Speaker 2: that the videos weren't real, that these were just AI generated.
Speaker 2: I think we're already seeing some of that fall out
Speaker 2: that Tarren's talking about.
Speaker 3: Yeah, it's a good point. I mean, it just becomes
Speaker 3: harder to trust anything at all. I wanted to ask
Speaker 3: about this news both from The New York Times in
Speaker 3: Bloomberg that Mark Zuckerberg is announcing a nine figure by
Speaker 3: to bring top talent on for quote unquote super intelligence.
Speaker 3: You know that that year timescale. I'm glad you mentioned
Speaker 3: it because it was one of the things I asked
Speaker 3: about you. At what point are we going to have
Speaker 3: a situation where even experts have to exert a huge
Speaker 3: amount of effort to tell what's real and what's fake
Speaker 3: on social media and even then maybe have a hard
Speaker 3: time doing it. What does super intelligence mean as defined
Speaker 3: by Mark Zuckerberg and the industry, and is this, you know,
Speaker 3: hurdling us even more quickly along in that timeline.
Speaker 11: Everybody has their own term. There's super intelligence, there's advanced
Speaker 11: general or artificial general intelligence, agi there's a There's all
Speaker 11: these terms floating around, and a lot of people don't
Speaker 11: define what they mean by them. So I don't know
Speaker 11: exactly what Mark Zuckerberg means. Like when I think about this,
Speaker 11: what I'm thinking about is an artificial intelligence that can
Speaker 11: do most or almost all of the things that humans
Speaker 11: can do on a computer.
Speaker 6: And that includes there for many many jobs.
Speaker 11: There are many many jobs that people can do from
Speaker 11: their computer, and when we have an artificial intelligence that
Speaker 11: can do all of those tasks remotely, that's obviously going
Speaker 11: to have very huge economic impacts. It's going to have
Speaker 11: a lot of other impacts on society as well. So
Speaker 11: that's my own definition, and I think it's probably sort
Speaker 11: of roughly aligned with many people in the industry's definition.
Speaker 11: But as I said, different people mean different things. I mean,
Speaker 11: I think the number one thing to take away for
Speaker 11: there's still a large segment of people, I think who
Speaker 11: dismiss AI as hype and you know, sort of like, oh,
Speaker 11: this is kind of like crypto, like this thing these
Speaker 11: tech bros and Silicon Valley are doing. Mark Zuckerberg has
Speaker 11: never paid anyone nine figures for crypto. R AI is
Speaker 11: in a different category, and everybody needs to be taking
Speaker 11: it very seriously. It's going to have extremely large impacts
Speaker 11: on the economy, on the way our democracy works, and
Speaker 11: on the rest of our society in many many ways.
Speaker 11: And then I think that that's my number one takeaway
Speaker 11: from this is like, look, the world's largest corporations are
Speaker 11: taking this extremely seriously.
Speaker 6: And you need to as well.
Speaker 2: What does it look like to you to take this
Speaker 2: extremely seriously, because I feel like that's where I get
Speaker 2: a little lost. I am deeply concerned. I think the
Speaker 2: job loss is going to be extraordinary. I don't put
Speaker 2: off the table some of the most maximust dystopian possibilities
Speaker 2: here as well. But I'm not really sure what to
Speaker 2: do about it at this point, because you have this
Speaker 2: administration that is totally like no breaks on.
Speaker 7: The car Wild Wild West.
Speaker 2: We've got to we're in this race versus China, and
Speaker 2: we've got to be the first to get to it,
Speaker 2: and they, you know, have this very aggressive no regulations
Speaker 2: approach to it. You have people like Sam Altman and
Speaker 2: others who are overtly out there like, yeah, we want
Speaker 2: to replace as much of human labor and possibly all
Speaker 2: of humor human labor as possible, and we're probably going
Speaker 2: to have to completely upend the social contract in order
Speaker 2: for this to all work out.
Speaker 7: And yet, you know, I don't see any.
Speaker 2: Real large scale conversation, which is where you come in,
Speaker 2: about what that new social contract is going to look
Speaker 2: like and how we're going to make sure that people
Speaker 2: outside of trillionaires are okay in that new world. So
Speaker 2: when you say something like we need to be taken seriously,
Speaker 2: like what specific things do you have in mind in particular?
Speaker 11: Yeah, it's hard because the field is moving so fast
Speaker 11: that we haven't had time for a real like civil
Speaker 11: society ecosystem to evolve around AI.
Speaker 6: Yeah.
Speaker 11: So if you're somebody who might have the like interesting
Speaker 11: wherewithal in like starting a new organization around AI, there
Speaker 11: are gaps everywhere. Like here's an example is I don't
Speaker 11: know of any concerted programs to educate state legislators about AI.
Speaker 6: That's just like one example.
Speaker 11: Another example is, like I've heard many experts in the field,
Speaker 11: like Ezra Klein and Kevin Russ and think tank people
Speaker 11: in DC say we don't have nearly enough economic frameworks
Speaker 11: for thinking about how about the labor dislocations that we
Speaker 11: expect are going to happen from AI.
Speaker 6: It's not like there's just gaps everywhere.
Speaker 11: If you're familiar with this field, if you think that
Speaker 11: somebody is doing something about AI, and you've got an
Speaker 11: idea that somebody should be doing something, probably nobody is
Speaker 11: yet or certainly not enough people. So you should go
Speaker 11: like investigate and like maybe think about starting an effort
Speaker 11: in that field. And I don't think that there are
Speaker 11: a lot of pathways yet for people who to like engage,
Speaker 11: but I think, but I think you should call your legislators.
Speaker 11: I think you should talk to your legislators about how
Speaker 11: big of an issue this is, how much you're worried
Speaker 11: about it. Right now, AI is still not showing up
Speaker 11: as a big issue in public opinion polling, and legislators
Speaker 11: and politicians aren't hearing that much about it. I mean
Speaker 11: when I say it's not showing if this big issue,
Speaker 11: I mean it's not showing up. Like if you ask
Speaker 11: people what their top issues are, what they're most worried about,
Speaker 11: AI is not showing up on those lists.
Speaker 6: And we need to shift politicians perceptions of that.
Speaker 11: So if you're not going to go start a new organization,
Speaker 11: you can at least like talk to your to your
Speaker 11: legislators and your representatives about why what they You know
Speaker 11: that they need to be paying attention to this.
Speaker 3: And I want to ask, oh, go ahead, go ahead,
Speaker 3: was it? I want to ask about this next element
Speaker 3: we put on the screen the Apple paper that went
Speaker 3: viral and got a lot of reactions to it. This
Speaker 3: post from Reuben Hassid says Apple just proved AI quote
Speaker 3: unquote reasoning models like Claude Deepseagar one, and oh three
Speaker 3: many don't actually reason at all. They just memorize patterns
Speaker 3: really well, here's what Apple discovered parentheses. Hint, we're not
Speaker 3: as close to AGI as the hype suggests. I read
Speaker 3: that post and I think, okay, yeah, I mean, no,
Speaker 3: they don't reason, they just memorize patterns really well, they're
Speaker 3: freaking computers. Yes, that's exactly right. But then, on the
Speaker 3: other hand, to use that as a way to dismiss
Speaker 3: the our current proximity to AGI and to say that
Speaker 3: this is all over hyped and it's it's really moving
Speaker 3: very slowly seems ill advised. And I just kind of
Speaker 3: wanted to get your reaction to I guess your reaction
Speaker 3: to the reaction from that paper. Yeah.
Speaker 11: Look, there's a set of people out there who do
Speaker 11: make their money off of and their and their fame
Speaker 11: off of dismissing AI, and you know they'll sort of
Speaker 11: seize onto papers like this to do that. I don't
Speaker 11: think that this paper is actually that big.
Speaker 6: Of a deal.
Speaker 11: In some sense, it's not saying anything that's particularly surprising.
Speaker 11: As you pointed out, it's it's asking the models to
Speaker 11: do a set of very hard problems, and they at
Speaker 11: some point are like, basically, the models are like, this
Speaker 11: problem is too hard. I'm going to stop now, and
Speaker 11: then the authors, well, I don't even think the authors
Speaker 11: aren't necessarily interpreting that as these models aren't good at
Speaker 11: what they do. It's then there's a sort of a
Speaker 11: whole you know, Twitter ecosystem that's like, well, now we've
Speaker 11: proved that these models aren't good at what they do.
Speaker 11: Guess what if you give me one of these hard
Speaker 11: problems that they gave these models. I'm also going to
Speaker 11: be like, yeah, sorry, I don't have time for this.
Speaker 11: This is like you've because had a said I have
Speaker 11: to solve this. They give the models constraints like you
Speaker 11: have to solve this in a certain context window, which
Speaker 11: is maybe roughly equivalent to telling me I have an
Speaker 11: hour to solve it, and I'm like, I can't solve
Speaker 11: that problem in an hour, So I'm going to stop
Speaker 11: now and then interpreting. But I hope you all think
Speaker 11: that I'm artificial intelligence or sorry, I'm general intelligence, right,
Speaker 11: I'm not artificial intelligence.
Speaker 6: And so they're sort of actually in.
Speaker 11: Some ways behaving a lot like humans in these situations,
Speaker 11: and we're interpreting. Some people are interpreting that as saying
Speaker 11: that they aren't smart, which I think is just not true.
Speaker 2: Another thing that I've wondered is there's this sort of
Speaker 2: like line that's drawn. We were talking about the metaproject
Speaker 2: to develop AGI ared Official General Intelligence, and you were saying,
Speaker 2: there's all kinds of different terminologies for you know, meaning
Speaker 2: whatever this milestone is, Like how much of a just
Speaker 2: sort of like line that you cross is AGI and
Speaker 2: how much of it is more of a sense. And
Speaker 2: it's a little bit hard to tell whether you're there
Speaker 2: or you're not. Like, help me understand when people talk
Speaker 2: about AGI, how much it will be clear when we've
Speaker 2: achieved this whatever this benchmark is. Because I also see
Speaker 2: things like you I see that study from you know,
Speaker 2: I see that particular study that was going around. I
Speaker 2: also see these other studies where AI is scheming to
Speaker 2: make sure it's not getting shut off and trying to
Speaker 2: like blackmail an engineer with an affair that they think
Speaker 2: the engineer is engaged in to avoid having their programming change.
Speaker 2: You know, I see things that are deeply disturbing in
Speaker 2: terms of AI engaging in. I mean those are very
Speaker 2: like human type behaviors and trying to defy the wishes
Speaker 2: of their programmers.
Speaker 7: So where are we in that development and will we.
Speaker 2: Really Is it like this hard fast line of we
Speaker 2: are not at AGI and now we are at AGI
Speaker 2: and it's very clear cut.
Speaker 11: Yeah, this is a great question. I think different. Well,
Speaker 11: I think most people in the industry would say it's
Speaker 11: not a hard line. And there's there's a term that's
Speaker 11: called the jagged frontier. It's like the models can be
Speaker 11: very good at some things and very bad other things
Speaker 11: that humans can do. That by the same token, you
Speaker 11: could say that humans have a jagged frontier, like humans
Speaker 11: are very good at some things compared to AI, and
Speaker 11: very bad at other things.
Speaker 6: Compared to current AI.
Speaker 11: So I don't think we're going to immediately cross the
Speaker 11: rubicon of like suddenly the models are very are better
Speaker 11: than humans at everything, including for instance, operating a physical
Speaker 11: body in physical space. Right, that's not going to happen
Speaker 11: literally overnight, probably, But you always have to qualify everything
Speaker 11: you say about AI as like I think so probably
Speaker 11: anybody who's not qualifying their statements. I think you have
Speaker 11: to give you have to be worried about how much
Speaker 11: you can trust what they're saying. So, but I think
Speaker 11: that you know we are we at AGI now. I mean,
Speaker 11: it's an interesting question because for a long time, the
Speaker 11: test that everybody thought we were going to use for
Speaker 11: this was called the Turing test, and people who haven't
Speaker 11: heard of it, the Turing test is you put a
Speaker 11: human behind a computer and an AI behind a computer
Speaker 11: or in the computer, and then you have another human
Speaker 11: interview both of them, right, And if the human who's
Speaker 11: interviewing can't tell whether they're talking to the other human
Speaker 11: or to the AI, then the AI has passed the
Speaker 11: Turing test of intelligence. And these models pass that test now,
Speaker 11: the cutting edge models, right, and so by that define
Speaker 11: the definition that we had all used for literally decades,
Speaker 11: invented by Alan Turing.
Speaker 6: We've already gotten there.
Speaker 11: And yet these models are very bad at a lot
Speaker 11: of things that humans are good at. And I don't
Speaker 11: I think anybody is anybody of serious repute as saying
Speaker 11: we've actually hit AGI. So the goalposts are moving over time,
Speaker 11: I think the goalposts will keep moving.
Speaker 3: Yeah, the train of acceleration is just unbelievable. I was
Speaker 3: listening to an old through Line episode on Ralph Nader
Speaker 3: and thinking about this, actually, because that's from car accidents
Speaker 3: used to be like five times as high as they
Speaker 3: are now. It took us actually a really long time
Speaker 3: and a lot of tragedy to adapt our policies to
Speaker 3: make our roads relatively safe. I mean, relatively is an
Speaker 3: important word there. And I guess I'm just wondering how
Speaker 3: optimistic you are about the policy evolution meeting the moment,
Speaker 3: because right now it looks very bleak for some understandable reasons.
Speaker 3: I mean, it's hard to define, it's hard to see
Speaker 3: what the future looks like exactly. Things are moving very quick,
Speaker 3: but it just seems like the reaction is completely non
Speaker 3: existent here in DC.
Speaker 11: Yeah, I mean there's a lot of reasons to be pessimistic.
Speaker 11: I think the reason to be optimistic is sort of like,
Speaker 11: if you take a step back, humanity has faced a
Speaker 11: lot of threats in the past, and so far we've
Speaker 11: survived them all right, And so you know, humans are resilient,
Speaker 11: and we do live in an era when lots of
Speaker 11: people have agency.
Speaker 3: And.
Speaker 11: I hope, I mean, these are choices we are making right.
Speaker 11: These are not inevitable conclusions. These are choices that we
Speaker 11: as individuals and as society are making about how to
Speaker 11: respond to AI. And I hope we can rise to
Speaker 11: this challenge. I don't think it's impossible, but it is
Speaker 11: a huge challenge, there's no doubt about that.
Speaker 7: Karen.
Speaker 2: Thank you so much for joining us this morning. It's
Speaker 2: been great to chat with you. Let people know where
Speaker 2: they can find you and follow the work that you
Speaker 2: guys are doing.
Speaker 11: Thanks so much. Golden Gate Institute dot org. And we've
Speaker 11: got a newsletter that you can subscribe to where we
Speaker 11: try to make sense of what's happening in AI for
Speaker 11: folks who are outside of the Silicon Valley bubble.
Speaker 2: All right, well, I'm definitely going to subscribe to that.
Speaker 2: Thank you so much again, and we'll talk to you
Speaker 2: again soon.
Speaker 6: Thank you.
Speaker 3: All right.
Speaker 7: Really interesting talking to Tarin there.
Speaker 3: Huh, Emily, Christal, I feel like we are at a
Speaker 3: breaking point with regard to the end of the show. Okay,
Speaker 3: see you got me that I walked into it and
Speaker 3: I didn't expect it. But both of us should go
Speaker 3: to prison for what we just did.
Speaker 2: Indeed, all right, I'm sure Trump stormtroopers will be here
Speaker 2: to Russa shortly.
Speaker 7: Emily.
Speaker 2: Always great to see you guys. Thank you so much
Speaker 2: for watching the show. Let's see you today is Wednesday.
Speaker 2: Tomorrow I will be in with Sager, so we'll have
Speaker 2: all of the leadus for you guys. Then, thank you
Speaker 2: for subscribing over at Breaking Points. Make sure you use
Speaker 2: that free promo code BP free and there it is
Speaker 2: up on the screen BP free Breakingpoints dot Com. And
Speaker 2: we will see you guys tomorrow.
Speaker 3: See you then,