NYT's Mike Isaac reporting live from the Musk vs. OpenAI trial: distillation claims, jury dynamics, and what's next

Speaker 2: with kids in the car you drive by a big truck on a road trip, can go like this.

Speaker 1: Yes. And then That's another thing that they that they self

Speaker 2: computer drive could trucks. Never look out the windows It needs see some kids in the car and

Speaker 1: Yeah.

Speaker 2: And honk.

Speaker 1: But well, yeah. I mean, we'll we'll see. Anyway, we have Mike Isaac in the waiting room. Let's bring him in to the TBPN Ultradome. He's at the New York Times. Mike, how you doing?

Speaker 3: Yo. What's up?

Speaker 1: Good to see you.

Speaker 2: Great to see you. So Wait. So what's

Speaker 1: yeah. Up So so Four day work week.

Speaker 2: Are they living in the future?

Speaker 1: Yeah. Is this universal basic vacation days?

Speaker 3: It's court is incredible in that I got to sleep in till, 9AM today, which is which is great. But I made up for it because, like, literally every day this week, I've gotten up at 05:00 in the morning to get my cold ass down to the Oakland Courthouse and stand outside for two hours. So I don't know, but it's fun.

Speaker 2: How does it how does it work? Who gets priority? Is it first come first serve? Like if some random person if some random person shows up before you

Speaker 1: They can just get it and then you're just out?

Speaker 2: Or do you get to like show some sort of like press like how does it work?

Speaker 3: Yeah. I wish I was cool enough to like cut. Well, here's the thing.

Speaker 2: You should get an artist pass.

Speaker 1: VIP pass. Yeah. Right.

Speaker 2: No. Not VIP. Artist pass is

Speaker 4: a level

Speaker 1: of Okay. Artist pass.

Speaker 3: So there are 20 reserved seats in the front row for press, but the issue is only one person per outlet gets it, and we are doing, like, live blogging for, like, the big moments, like opening statements and for Elon. Yeah. And so myself and my colleague, Cade, came on the first the whole first week, and so so we've gotten trade off. He's gotten the, like, press skip the line thing, and I've been with the other folks in the 30 unreserved seats in the back.

Speaker 2: That are watching YouTube videos.

Speaker 3: Yeah. Yeah. Oh my god. Or literally

Speaker 2: Or strike sessions.

Speaker 3: Literally, one dude fell asleep. I was actually impressed.

Speaker 1: Fell asleep.

Speaker 2: Yeah. It seemed pretty entertaining. You didn't seem like you were falling asleep. I was keeping up on the through the live blog.

Speaker 3: You reading my nightmarish Twitter too? I it's been fun, honestly. Have you guys ever done like court case things or have you ever been sued or been in court?

Speaker 2: I've never been in court.

Speaker 1: I I went to a mock court in high school where Yeah. Everyone picks a role. I think I was Yeah.

Speaker 2: We LARPed in court.

Speaker 1: Literally LARPing. In high school. But other than that, I never

Speaker 2: I the whole This whole time, it seems it seems insane. Like, with with the with the recent NASA, the moon mission, I was like, this should be a livestream plus a pay per view for the key moments Yeah. For this trial. It's like we have huge budget deficits and we have these incredible media products. Why are we not doing pay per views? Right? But That that's the the

Speaker 3: funny thing oh, I was just gonna say that's the funny thing about like federal courthouse stuff. Like, there's a lot of different rules around filming and electronics. I covered some cases in DC, and I can't even bring a laptop or a phone in those courthouses. So, like, this is actually a very permissive judge just because she believes in, like, press access and stuff, and we've had there's way more access than you would normally get in federal court cases.

Speaker 1: Okay. So you you've been to these court cases before, but if I follow your Twitter, it feels like you're making a bunch of rookie mistakes. You you you you only had egg bites at 05:30AM. Your bite energy is wearing off. You forgot your butt pillow. You forgot to fill your water bottle. Like, is this amateur hour, or are you a professional? What's going on?

Speaker 3: I'd say I think that you you guys might know me well enough that that is kind of how I operate most of my life, like kind of chaotic, but it is on the important stuff. That's right. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. I mean, look, I can file. I may be like bleeding and hungry like limping across the finish line but we're getting I'm tweeting for you.

Speaker 2: What what is your what what is your what are some like high profile cases that that stand out that you've covered in the past?

Speaker 3: So I got to do let's see. My first one was insanely boring but important. The Apple versus Samsung thing back in the day and like them suing for Samsung copying like literally everything they do. I did Dallas. Actually, Zuckerberg's, like, I think maybe one of his first testimonies on the stand when Zenimax was suing Mehta for the Oculus acquisition. Remember that?

Speaker 1: Yeah. Palmer like And I

Speaker 3: was in Dallas. That was super fun. That I almost got kicked out of the courtroom for tweeting.

Speaker 1: Woah.

Speaker 3: And then I did the DC FTC Mehta one, and I almost got kicked out of the courtroom again. Actually, I did get kicked out of the courtroom for wearing the meta Ray Bans. These are not it. Interesting. But I wore the meta Ray and then they started putting I was I was fucking super stupid for doing it. But then they started putting signs up saying do not wear these glasses in car.

Speaker 2: But you weren't you you were just using them as glasses or you're being sneaky and you're recording?

Speaker 3: No. I was like, look, I can't record. I won't record. I was trying to play by the rules. And like, they were they are my prescription glasses. Yeah. But the bailiff the bailiff was like

Speaker 2: It's too much it's too high risk for them. Because you could just because you could have, like, turned off the the light or whatever. Yeah. Something like that.

Speaker 1: Talk about the the the fans. Are there really Elon Musk fans in the courtroom? Like, what what motivates someone to go and watch that live? Is this their UFC front row ticket? Like, why are they there?

Speaker 3: So you guys would have fun. Like, it actually is a lot of court cases are boring Yeah. To people who don't care about this stuff. Right? Like, you and I may be super into like, the FTC trial was super fun for me because it's like, oh my god. Mark Zuckerberg emailing Sheryl Sandberg and talking about Path. Like, this is incredible. Yeah. And, like, the average person has no idea what we're talking about. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. But this is, a circus. There are people who genuinely love Elon or are genuinely worried about the end of the world happening. And I think it's a really good thing that there's public access to these courts. Like, think, like, the average person can come in and show up, and that's what I think after the the buzz of Twitter and, people seeing that this is a event, we got a much longer lines and like folks who are local, like just like I know a PM in tech from Meta that came. I know like a guy from Box made it in. Just if you get a seat if you get there early enough, then you can get a seat and you can just hang out. It's like and I think it's really great. I think it's great that people are, yeah, are there for it,

Speaker 8: you know. It

Speaker 3: shouldn't just be me.

Speaker 2: Yeah. What about the what about the jury? Does the jury seem excited and and honored to have the opportunity to be to be a part of of a case like this or are they are they nodding off? It'd be so funny to be like so out of just like off the Internet.

Speaker 1: You can't be super biased. You're probably not a p s Sam

Speaker 2: this guy Sam and Greg and this guy who makes cars and I don't even know what they're talking about. Bunch of a whole bunch of mumbo jumbo. Like there's gotta be one person on the jury that was just so not tapped in that that they're just confused. I

Speaker 3: think jury selection was super interesting for that. I can't say it's actually interesting. I can't say too much about the jury right now because, like, there's all these rules about

Speaker 1: Oh, sure.

Speaker 3: Like some random person could go up to them if you identify them or try to

Speaker 2: Something alter

Speaker 3: like that. Yeah. Totally. But I will say like during jury selection on Monday, it is an incredible slice of life, and you get like how familiar or unfamiliar people are with the tech industry despite being here, you know? Like some folks are like, have no idea you're talking about. I don't know what AI is. I don't know what AGI stands for. So it really it really played and voir dire and jury selection is so important for cases like this. Just it makes the dynamic of the facts don't necessarily always matter, but the vibe can really matter, which I think is a benefit for Elon honestly.

Speaker 2: Yeah. Were they were they trying to weed out they're trying to weed out people that are a little bit too excited about the case. Right? You want the people that are like in order to have a but but then talk I I didn't understand why why is the jury just like giving like an advisory decision? What is the history of like Why do you why do you have a jury when the judge is ultimately gonna make the final call? It it feels like just kind of putting on like a show because like theoretically the judge could just sit through a bunch of depositions and make a call. Yeah.

Speaker 3: Sure. No. I I think so I do think they want more often than not want a jury of these CEOs and companies peers to be the deciding factor in what they feel like is good for a civil claim. Like that, I think is fairly standard. But to your point, the judge can throw out their verdict, which is like is and judges, I don't think, tend to want to do that because, like, they want to have reliance on this is the public. The public should have a say in what goes or whatever. But the judge can do that. I will say also she is responsible for if they're if Elon or sorry. If OpenAI is found liable, judge decides on remedies, damages, and things like that. So she still has an active role in that regard and in steering the case. But I really do think that full courts often prefer or often appreciate a peer a jury of your peers making some of these decisions. So I don't think it's gonna be like completely disregarded is what I would say.

Speaker 2: Yeah. How has judge Rogers done so far in your view? Just reading reading the live blog, she seemingly has like zingers and like pretty pretty like good like one liners the time. I'm just like kind of imagining what it's like in there because obviously I'm just reading text but she's had like seemingly like some pretty good comedic timing.

Speaker 3: Yeah. Oh my god. She's so funny. She's like real, like as you might imagine, there's like a number of different types of judges and how they handle their court or whatever, and she just takes no BS from anyone, including the lawyers. And like when they try to, like, tap dance or break the rules or whatever, she's like, no. Shut up. Or, like, get back on track. Or no. No. No. Actually, the best part or the most insane part so one woman in the overflow room who is just as not just, it was a civilian going to attend and watch it, started recording, which is, again, against the rules, if not the law in a federal courthouse. So the judge brings her in, and in front of a room of like a 100 people, just like dresses her down, yells at her saying, did you not see any of these signs? What are you doing? I will kick you out. I will it was like, I I would have, like, peed my pants and

Speaker 1: started

Speaker 3: crying if she had done that to me. It was deeply, deeply intense.

Speaker 1: It's it's teacher, you know, berating a student. Yeah. Glasses in session. Glasses in session here.

Speaker 3: It was brutal.

Speaker 1: How how how do you how have you been processing Elon's positioning? It feels like the two the two stories that I've heard him sort of telling are, one, about his commitment to technology, humanity Yeah. Saving the world through, you know, Tesla and the electrification of the internal combustion engine and SpaceX making, you know, humanity multiplanetary. And then and that's like a very high level, you know, high concept pitch. And then he also sort of brings it down and starts beating this drum on, like, you can't steal a charity. You can't steal a charity. Is that the correct framing that he's trying to go, like, high and low there? How much have he's been beating each of these drums, and how useful is that?

Speaker 3: So I I totally agree that's the framing, and I think this really goes to the point of a lot of these trials are pageantry is the wrong word, but let's say theater in that you are this is a jury trial, and it's a different thing than just convincing a judge who I would say is much more attuned to the facts and merit of the case

Speaker 1: Yep.

Speaker 3: And, like, hammering in on the evidence and, like, something that may be boring to you or me or whatever or the jury is gonna be more important to a judge. Elon, I think from day one has leaned into into the persona of Elon, and just from him being on the stand and saying, I care about humanity. I mean, he he says he does whatever he does or doesn't, but like just leaning into this, I'm a world changing entrepreneur, and this stuff is existential, and I'm the one who has cared about it. And, like, that may work on a jury. You know? Like, there are people who still love him, and, you know, OpenAI is really hammering the facts of what they feel are are their side of the case and saying Elon has known about Elon has never been in the dark. He quit in a huff. He he's made it very clear he hasn't been there. He's trying to sue now, or he's trying to file this claim now because he's catching up, because he's behind as an x AI competitor. But like, again, this is all stuff that maybe it doesn't play. Like, this is why jury trials are so risky for companies a lot of the time, you know. It's really it's fun for me. It's probably not fun for for everyone in there, but it's fun to see it play out, if that makes How

Speaker 2: did the distillation comments come up?

Speaker 3: That was like was the news of the day yesterday. You guys obviously were a Which

Speaker 2: you broke you it. Right?

Speaker 3: I think I did. Yeah. I think it was one of those things where I was like, holy shit. This is news. And I think like folks like started figuring it out, but I was like, gotta put it on Twitter. And so point so Bill Sabbat is lead counsel for OpenAI. He was sort of talking about the the point was made in the context of they want to hammer home. Elon is creating a competitive product, and also he keeps stressing that this is doom world ending technology, but at the same time, he's he's he's ripping off the toss and using the technology to improve his own technology in an explicitly for profit company. Yeah. And so the the point is like hammering him as a hypocrite. And I think look. Like, I think Elon has history in his businesses. It would not be controversial to say to to, like, say one thing and do the other. And I think he sees it as, like, rules of engagement. That's the game in the, you know, no holds capitalism land. But, like, that is how it came up and that they didn't go super deep into it, but they wanted to make the point. He's using OpenAI's tech. He's breaking the toss, and he's partly distilling it. And I wanna say also that Elon went out of his way to say everyone kinda does this. Mhmm. It's like an open secret in the industry, which I think is, like, also kinda true, but that doesn't make it there's like it's it's fraught, I guess, is what I would say.

Speaker 1: Yeah. Yeah. It's a there's obviously a continuum there, which is why he tried to hammer that it was, like, partly. I imagine most car companies have taken a rival car for a spin. Have they taken the car apart? You know, there's a line there and there are laws, but that's a separate issue, of course.

Speaker 2: Has anything come up with a jury around prediction markets? Because I was thinking we've now seen insider trading across every possible prediction market, right?

Speaker 3: Know, I'm sure

Speaker 1: from like That's very interesting.

Speaker 2: You know, even even the Maduro thing was was was

Speaker 1: Insider trading. Interesting

Speaker 2: because a lot of people were like, oh, he's just betting on himself. But then I saw that I was like, hey, that's sending a signal to the entire world that an attack could be happening which puts your entire team at risk. Right? Like very very clearly like US military personnel should not be able to trade against our own military's actions ever. Right? And that that they need to come down really hard on that.

Speaker 1: Are you just trading this? Are you just trading on this crazy? Are you are you gonna retire off

Speaker 2: of this? The reason the reason that the jury thing is is is bad is it creates a potentially an incentive for the jury to basically work together and say like, hey, like we all have to be here for like a month. Like we could at least make some money on it and then you only need to get like four or five of

Speaker 1: these The people that chat is saying monetize jury duty.

Speaker 3: Oh my god.

Speaker 2: No. But but but like it seems like very important that this does not happen. Right? Because Totally. Because there's very like they they tried to select a jury that just doesn't care about the AI race. They don't care about this or that. And if they are self interested in some capacity, they could be like, well, my my decision is not is not even really legally binding. It's just advisory. Like I may as well, you know, I don't know. Right?

Speaker 3: No. I I think that's a great point and like something that I imagine like court systems aren't even prepared for fully yet because like

Speaker 2: Well, there hasn't been a big trial like there's been I'm sure some like epic Apple stuff that was slightly big but but nothing where nothing nothing anything at this scale with this much even just this much volume already from people that are generally interested in in Mhmm. In the story.

Speaker 3: Yeah. The outcome and like I think the other thing you should know is like they're not sequestered. Like they show up kind of like before

Speaker 1: Like anyone else.

Speaker 3: Right before they yeah. Like they literally like we see them walking in and that the marshals there's, like, a ton of, like, US marshals there. They're like, is anyone a juror in this line? The juror gets to go in. So let and at the end of every day, the judge is, like goes back over the rules saying, do not discuss this case with anyone. Do not watch it on TV. Do not look at it on your phone, which is like a verbal command. Yeah.

Speaker 2: Don't go on your

Speaker 3: phone. Don't. Exactly.

Speaker 2: Hey. Don't use the most addictive thing that has ever been created in human history. Don't use the thing that you use for six hours a day.

Speaker 1: That you probably turn your lights on and adjust your thermostat.

Speaker 3: I mean, it's that's a it's something I had not thought of, Jordy, but it's a really good like, when does that come up at some point, you know? Like, that's very worried.

Speaker 9: Not not just seriously,

Speaker 3: but just ever.

Speaker 2: Yeah. It seem it seems like something that that that the court should be paying attention to heading into a decision from from the jury.

Speaker 1: Yeah.

Speaker 2: How much is the history between Opening Eyes counsel, Bill, who represented he represented Twitter when Elon was trying to get out of the the the the Twitter buyout? And ultimately, it feels like the X slash Twitter acquisition has worked out pretty well for Elon. He's made a number a number of plays. So hard to hard to imagine him like, you know, deeply regretting buying it even though at the time he was happy to get out until Bill said, no. We're we're doing this.

Speaker 3: I you know what's funny? He is I I can't underscore enough how different the tenor chain I mean, look. It's like it's opposing counsel, so it's always gonna be different. But Elon went from, like, I'm a entrepreneur sort of like Rosalie explaining to you what I think the future should look like and, like, very concerned for the future of the human race to, like, openly antagonistic to Sabbat's questioning. And, like and the the thing that I'm very curious how this plays with the jury is, like, Elon was very he's like, I'm a literal guy. Like, the questions they're asking me are, like, too complicated or, like, they're not yes or no questions, which is, like, fair, like, as a grievance, but also the thing he either doesn't understand or doesn't care about understanding is that that's just lawyers. Like that's the whole point of a cross examination is to ask these questions as reductively as possible to get as type of answer they're looking for, and his job or his, you know, pretrial sort of discussions with his own lawyers is to know how to navigate those essentially while also telling the truth. So I don't know. They're they just don't like each other, or at least Elon doesn't like Sabbat, and you can very it's very clear that he's just, like, mad at that. And whenever Elon gets sassy, I would hear, like, clearly people who are fans of of Musk, like, laughing behind me or being like, yeah. You got him. Like, blah. It's just it's very it's very funny. It's like kind of a it's different than the usual vibe is what I'd say.

Speaker 1: That's very interesting.

Speaker 2: Outlook, what's going on Monday? What's the outlook

Speaker 1: for This this week was the Elon side for the most part. Are we gonna flip to Sam and Greg and and some other OpenAI folks, or is there an intermediate step? Like, do you do you have a clear view of what the next couple weeks look like?

Speaker 3: Yeah. So it's a little rough because we we have witness lists in full that they presented and are in evidence, but they you don't really learn who's coming until, like, very soon that week. It's actually a giant pain in the ass for me and for reporters who are trying to schedule. But, like so we Jared Birchall

Speaker 2: Yeah.

Speaker 3: Who's, like, Musk's family office guy, just finished testifying. We're gonna get this guy Stuart

Speaker 2: Russell That's today.

Speaker 1: As No. No.

Speaker 3: That that was yesterday. That was yesterday.

Speaker 1: Right. And and you said Burchall was very dry. Like, was that intentional? That feels like that does not work in favor of, like, swinging a jury. Was that more for the judge? Like, what was the goal of that of that testimony?

Speaker 3: I think it was to really just sort of show how Musk was trying to set up this, like like structure things as a non nonprofit and like hammer home. Like he's always wanted it to be a nonprofit, and he's not sort of like so it was it was I believe it was Musk's witness who OpenAI then cross examined, and OpenAI used the occasion to show an email that had like a proposed equity structure

Speaker 1: Yeah.

Speaker 3: For Musk. And so like they both kind of used him differently, but I think like Bertrand's like a essentially an accountant, books guy, like, behind the scenes. So I think it was like, here's the beat behind the curtain. Here's how they were dealing with the finances. Here's how Mhmm. Musk was like, this is only a charity. And then OpenAI's lawyers were like, actually, check this shit out. So I but I think, like, I don't I honestly don't know. They also struck some of his testimony because is a little complicated, but if you remember last year, OpenAI or Musk made a bid with Ari Emanuel and some other buy companies

Speaker 1: the whole company.

Speaker 3: And that opened the door or that sort of complicates things from Musk's side because there might be some of those discussions around that bid admitted into evidence, and that may not be good from Musk because if there's, like, weird compromising emails in there. So, like, it's gotten complicated. But next week, we're getting Stuart Russell, safety researcher. We got Greg Brockman. Maybe Sam Altman. Maybe not. It's four days a week in court only, so we may not have time, but I gotta be ready. I'll be there most of the time, but I'll be there for Sam for sure, and then I don't know.

Speaker 2: Sorry. Rewinding a second. Did did they bid did they bid on the PVC, like, the the for profit arm? Yeah. That was the

Speaker 3: It was the yeah. And they they wanted to just sort of I I don't actually know what their plans were afterwards, but, like, it was like trying to take over the asset those assets basically, and then, you know, morph it into what they I mean, they knew that it wasn't gonna get accepted as a bid basically, but it was like and then Burchall sorry. Burchall in court was saying this was us trying to sort of establish a pricing mechanism to, like, value the actual entity itself, and that was gonna help them somehow. I actually am not quite sure how that would help them somehow, but someone in the chat is probably smarter than me on that. But, like, it was them trying to sort of take that over. And I think OpenAI said publicly at the time this is, a stalling tactic. They're trying to, like, slow us down while also using this in court in this concurrent lawsuit later, basically. So it's all, like, really messy, and I think even Musk's side took a risk there if those emails get into discovery, but it's unclear to me if that's gonna happen. If we if they are, then we may see them next week.

Speaker 1: Do you think

Speaker 2: Why would that that kind of discovery process around that bid be coming up now when everyone involved was well aware that it had happened quite a long time ago?

Speaker 3: So I think because of a line of questioning with Birchall yesterday about the bid that like, if that happens on the stand and again, like, a lawyer gut check me here because I'm a stupid tech reporter. But if that happens on the stand, then it gives an entry point for open eyes lawyers to be like, okay. Well, we need to, you know, now admit basically, the judge said to Musk's side, you open this line of questioning. Now it's fair game to go into this, and then you can start calling new evidence in around that, like, to open up discovery. It's like really like strategy, and, like, you have to be careful in your strategy when you're asking certain questions in court. I've been learning a lot about it. So maybe it's a strategic misstep by Tobaroff, Elon's lawyer, but it's not quite clear yet.

Speaker 1: Do you have a idea of the purpose of the AI safety researchers testifying what the goal is there? Like, does that align with one particular side? Like, if there's more nonprofits, like, you still probably wind up with Anthropic, DeepMind, x AI. Like, it it, like, having one, like, you know, more focused nonprofit going on for a long time doesn't necessarily lead me to, like, oh, then we wouldn't be in an AI race. Like, it's it's not a clear solve for me, but I imagine that there's that some one side is trying to position this as important. But do you have any predictions for what that goal is?

Speaker 3: Totally. So this is Musk's witness, and your point is well made, which is like, okay. If even if you kneecap one, like, good luck on literally everyone else.

Speaker 1: Yeah.

Speaker 3: And, like, there's been a lot of time spent Elon talking smack about Larry Page and how he, like, doesn't trust him anymore. That's actually been really fun to hear. But the the point I believe is this is actually a point of contention. So the judge does not the judge prohibited like going too far into like doomerism into the world stuff,

Speaker 1: and

Speaker 3: she's like, look, that's kind of a sideshow distraction, like extinction humanity stuff is not the point of this case.

Speaker 1: Yeah.

Speaker 3: But must side call this guy because they want someone, and this is my understanding is that Stuart is like very aligned with the idea that AI is super dangerous and gonna harm us all. And so if you get this How does guy

Speaker 1: in there

Speaker 3: make that point.

Speaker 2: How does that not like, if this guy's gonna come on and say that AI, like, the the most insane, like, doomer point of view, which I think is everyone's gonna have their own Sure. Opinion around this debate. Sure. It's worth completely worthy of of having and and talking about. But but how does Elon square that with like, I'm trying to build the biggest cluster possible and, you know, distill on the rest of the industry's model and, you know, create tens of of gigawatts of space compute and like how how does that how does that like can't this kind of witness potentially backfire in some capacity?

Speaker 3: No. Mean you're you're you're exactly right in that squaring that circle is pretty hard and like exactly what I should be I

Speaker 2: should be I I should be trusted with the, you know, all powerful

Speaker 1: We're gonna be in the Terminator situation no matter what. So you want me in charge of the Terminators, not some other guy, not some nonprofit, not some Well, well positioned. Shareholders.

Speaker 2: Is making he's he's he's pivoting Tesla production to Terminators. To Terminators basically. Yeah.

Speaker 3: No. I I and can I just make one last point is that I think he he misunderstood the Terminator because like we still survive and we fight back in that world?

Speaker 7: Do you

Speaker 3: do you remember this?

Speaker 1: I've been saying this. People haven't seen the movie. Jordy actually hasn't seen the Terminator. But in all of Are these movies

Speaker 3: kidding me, dude?

Speaker 1: Yeah. Yeah. In in in all of these movies, like, it completely leaves out that there is a problem and then humanity overcomes it. And so it's Yes. If there is a Terminator scenario, like, I just wanna know that you're on my side as the resistance fighting back. And like No. It's John Connor here.

Speaker 3: Yeah. You're John Connor.

Speaker 1: Hopefully. I mean, I I would yeah. It's don't know. I don't wanna get into the the the full Udkowski thing, but like like it is reasonable to be to to to to sort of steel man that like if it is bad, right now it's not.

Speaker 2: It's says I have to

Speaker 1: watch Terminator.

Speaker 2: I gotta watch Terminator tonight.

Speaker 1: You gotta watch Terminator.

Speaker 3: Okay. So just saw this on Twitter. Terminator two is coming back into IMAX pretty soon. You can go see it in the theater, so you have to go see it, Jordy. Like it's it's required viewing.

Speaker 2: Let's go together. Yeah.

Speaker 3: Yeah. I'm down. I'm down.

Speaker 2: Do you do you have any I would say that so far the trial is less. I mean it's hard for the trial to go very viral because there's no audio video and it's just like live blogging. You can imagine you can imagine some of these scenes like just the stuff that you're typing. I'm like if that was on video that gets like 50,000,000 views in like Oh, man. You know, in a few hours on on on x, you know Yeah. Across a bunch of these different aggregator accounts. But part is is maybe part of the like, my my feeling is like it's just so it's just so like, I feel like the entire tech industry is like, it's just kind of depressing to see to see these groups like fighting in this way when we have so much bigger problem. Like we have so many bigger problems as an industry. Right? The big problem being like public perception of AI is like already so bad. Like people, you know, don't don't like, you know No

Speaker 1: matter who wins, we all lose or something like that. There's some very negative stuff and

Speaker 3: I mean that so I totally agree and I do think actually everyone not everyone, but like many in the AI industry have started realizing, oh, we have like, not everyone loves us. Like, this is a perception problem in a lot of ways, which like to me is funny because like I I not that I'm smart, but I feel like I've known that for a little while. And but it's the the the issue is the the industry is coming around to that, or at least certain folks are, and know that they want to change that perception. Yeah. But this case has been in the system for like years now, and sort of like actually happening at a time where they wouldn't want it to necessarily happen if they're trying to change it. So the timing just sucks, honestly, for for folks who don't like that, if that makes sense.

Speaker 1: Yeah. There's so many different, like, little tidbits, and I don't know if they're gonna be exact quotes, but you can just imagine plenty of things that are gonna happen on the stand winding up on a Bernie Sanders postcard and being like, stop it. Paul's AIR. Oh my god. I guess, like, you know, it's always, like, give the tech people enough rope to hang themselves and like, there's a lot of rope going out the next couple of weeks.

Speaker 9: Oh my

Speaker 1: gosh. It's

Speaker 3: totally you gotta one of y'all both of y'all should just show up to the courtroom at some point Yeah. And like experience it because, I mean, you have an actual day job, but it's, like, literally

Speaker 2: Figure

Speaker 3: it out. It's really interesting and, like, an experience. So you

Speaker 1: you can't record video. You can't record audio. Is there a world where you have, like, five of your own stenographers there taking a perfect transcript? Would that be possible with enough resources?

Speaker 2: And then we could do a table reading on the

Speaker 3: show.

Speaker 1: That's what I'm thinking is that is that you could use voice cloning. I don't know if you noticed this. Tyler, what was it? Grok launched voice cloning today or something? Yep. Which is why is that controversial again?

Speaker 5: Well, for like I mean, we we've had this technology for like five years and then no one released it because like you don't want people to make deepfakes of other people's voices.

Speaker 1: Okay. Yeah. Because it's like textbook like I can

Speaker 5: It's like, oh, I I

Speaker 2: call you John. I need I need I need like Yeah. $500. Okay. Can you just give me your credit card

Speaker 1: for So a obviously, there's a bunch of risky uses of that. The good use is the comedic table read in the voice of Sam Baldwin, in the voice of Greg Brockman, in the voice of Eli Fox that we can all enjoy.

Speaker 2: Was thinking more of like doing like a Judge, judge,

Speaker 1: and TMJ's.

Speaker 2: End of the day. Yeah. There's like we do a play here.

Speaker 1: Yeah. That's probably best. Best. Full costume.

Speaker 3: You know, there are transcription services Okay. And even like

Speaker 2: You could do you could be Mike Isaac by like Oh, He's

Speaker 1: the one playing you for sure.

Speaker 3: No. No. They're pod tweeting.

Speaker 2: No. It's like it's a it's a cameo.

Speaker 1: He's playing himself. Good night. And then you gotta go full Nathan Field.

Speaker 2: And the whole the whole time just crashing out like I forgot my lunch. I forgot to fill up my water.

Speaker 1: I had a banana. I had a banana. Oh my god. Okay.

Speaker 3: Can I just say there is an attorney there that looks exactly like Nathan Fielder? Really? And I'm like, almost like

Speaker 2: Are you sure

Speaker 1: it's Nathan Fielder? Looks like Nathan Fielder. Okay.

Speaker 3: I I every time I see him, I'm like, is this, a bit? Like, I'm am I gonna be on TV in some way? It's very intense. I'm gonna ask him next year.

Speaker 1: I mean, Elon Musk says the funniest outcome is the most likely, and that might be Seriously. What what is the what is the funniest outcome? The funniest outcome is like Elon wins and the penalty is like is like $50 or something. Yes. Like that like that it's like Elon like you win. Here's here's a $150. Enjoy.

Speaker 3: It would be very hard. Oh my god.

Speaker 1: Just the most like inconsequential fine for the AI industry which is flush with cash at all times.

Speaker 2: Well, find that like Yeah. You're good. Fine like there's so many any anytime a company in tech gets that gets fined or not every time, but often it's like

Speaker 1: Sometimes it's a fine for ants.

Speaker 10: Yeah.

Speaker 2: Like, they they they did something that was bad. They generated a 100,000,000 of revenue and the fine is like $1,500,000. Yeah. It's like,

Speaker 1: did that I think the current meta YouTube lawsuit was like maybe a $10,000,000 settlement. Of course, there was like Oh, wow. Knock on of potential for

Speaker 2: that was for one individual.

Speaker 1: That was one individual. But still, it was you have this like landmark case, this big build and then you're like, oh, how how how damaging is it gonna be? It's gonna be like five minutes of revenue.

Speaker 3: But The stock actually in Meta earnings is as far I mean, there was a lot of shit that took the stock down. But like, I think one of them was them saying, like, this might have a material impact on like, these cases, like, may have a material impact in the future if it opens the door. So, like, yeah, I agree. Like, it's always remedies are always, like, it can be existential from a financial point of view, but also just from a guess what? This is about to become your whole fucking life for the next ten years or whatever, if that makes sense.

Speaker 1: Yeah. Yeah. We talked to a a a law professor who said, like, the question is, social media exist in the future? Like this is an existential moment. I'm not sure that we're quite there, but is it is there's definitely a risk and you need to consider that if you're an investor. Totally. Anyway Totally. What's the game plan for next week? What's going in? Are you doing trail mix? Are you doing protein bars? I want you fueled up, ready to go.

Speaker 3: Camelback? Blogging to be a Camelback.

Speaker 2: You you should be able to do like a sponsored Camelback. You know? Did

Speaker 3: you ever watch jury duty the show jury duty?

Speaker 1: Oh, yeah. Of course.

Speaker 3: I I wanna be the guy with, like, the chair pants Yep. And the, like, the water thing attached to my back. And, like, I need I'm gotta this is blogging. This is back in my blogging all things digital blog days, man. This is this is it. So

Speaker 1: I This will train weekend.

Speaker 3: More prepared. This weekend. That's right.

Speaker 1: You should go sit in a chair for eight hours straight. Are you are you

Speaker 2: gonna do all four days? Are you doing all four days?

Speaker 3: I think we're gonna switch off a little more. I I apologize. I will not be my, like, disastrous falling apart self every day of the week, just maybe two days of the week. So Kate you should follow Kate Metz, my other colleague who's Although he he is much more put together and does not tweet like a person off their meds like I do. So it'll be a different vibe each day, but I I will be there next week.

Speaker 1: Last question. Is this book material? Is it there's a rise to that quality, this drama?

Speaker 3: I do like the someone's gotta

Speaker 2: read it. I would I would write a book on your coverage of this trial.

Speaker 3: Yes. That's what I wanna

Speaker 1: read. This the my And that's I would

Speaker 3: do a podcast about it.

Speaker 2: I would do a podcast about it, and then someone would make a book about the book. Coverings.

Speaker 1: This is the covering. We'll create a content Ouroboros here.