The Rise of AI – Promise & Peril

AI is changing everything — from the shows we watch to the jobs we work. In this episode, we dive deep into what AI really is, how it’s shaping our world, the risks it brings, and where it might take us in the future. Is it humanity’s greatest tool or our biggest mistake? Tune in and decide for yourself.

Transcript

SPEAKER_01 0:54

All right, everybody, welcome back to episode seven of Obscuracast. We're back with another episode for you guys. Today, we're gonna be talking about something a little different. And we're going, I know last time, uh last episode when we finished, we were talking about possibly doing an AI episode, and that's exactly what we're gonna be doing. So, as always, I have my co-host Dan O'Neill. What's going on, brother? How's your evening going? Evening's going good. Colts pissed me off. Yeah. Like I said before the podcast, when we were talking, you could be 0-4 like my saints. But, anyways.

unknown 1:27

Good.

SPEAKER_01 1:28

So we're gonna sort of get into AI. It's gonna be a general conversation. As always, you guys know how the stuff goes. We're gonna have some talking points ready for you guys. Most of the time, Dan's usually in the driver's seat as far as giving information and sort of fleshing out the topics, and we just sort of go through them. Today we're gonna take a little bit of turn, a little bit of a turn, just being a tech guy. I'm I probably, if not, certainly have more of a foray into AI. I've worked with it more, more hands-on experience. Um, so Dan's gonna sort of steer steer the conversation and sort of get us going. Um, like I said, we have talking points, but if we go off on tangents, we'll try to sort of bring it back to what we were originally talking about. So it's a little bit easier for you guys to digest. And uh we're also doing this through a new program through Spotify, so we're gonna give this a shot. Um, but I hope you guys enjoyed the episodes. Dan, let's get right into it.

SPEAKER_00 2:14

Yeah, absolutely. So uh first thing I want to do is we're gonna go over the uh just a simple definition of what AI is. It's the creation of computer systems that can perform tasks typically requiring human intelligence such as learning, problem solving, and decision making. AI systems analyze data to recognize patterns, adapt to new information, and execute tasks efficiently without human intervention, enabling them to act and think like humans to achieve specific goals. So now, first off, that sounds really cool at the base like at the base level, right? That's amazing. I guess what like what what what do you think like is the coolest AI, I guess, feature or program that you personally enjoy the most? Because you've said off you said before we started the show, there's like what 20 different AI programs.

SPEAKER_01 3:08

Yeah, there's like 20, 20, 20 to 25, I would say, that are applicable as far as what you would consider AI. But first, before we get into that, I want to sort of tackle that definition a little bit in a couple of parts. Okay, yeah, go for it. So to boil it down, that's a really large definition. And like I said, we want to keep this sort of digestible for you guys and sort of boil it down. That's a lot of information in a very small package. So essentially, if I had to give a definition to AI, it is something that is replicating, I emphasize replicating human intelligence, but it's not human intelligence. Where I draw the line with AI in that definition is that we're talking about it being able to basically we're talking about a program or a feature or an application basically being able to tell you whether or not something is factual and you taking that as fact. So what I mean by that is if you're talking about an AI, a true AI, it should be indistinguishable from humans. That's what that definition basically gets down to, no matter what you point it to, what application you're using for, whether it's whether it's coding, whether it's image generation, whether it's presentation notes, whatever you point it to, that definition is basically saying that it's indistinguishable, right? What we have to be very careful of with AI, and I use this all the time in my daily life as well as my career, because if anybody doesn't know, I'm an IT tech, that's what I do as a daily job. That's sort of like my day-to-day type stuff. So what I would say as a very quotable quote that I've come up with sort of myself is that you should be using AI as a tool, not as a dependency. Because where we get into a problem with AI is because when you start being dependent on it, we start regressing.

SPEAKER_00 4:46

Yeah, that's a really good point because I know that they've uh they've been doing studies, even the the short-term. I mean, it feels like we woke up one day and boom, we got hit in the face with AI, right? It was just boom, there. And the short the short-term studies they've done is people who use Chat GPT and AI, their brain function has lowered.

SPEAKER_01 5:11

Well, because it doesn't require as much functioning. You would probably look at a brain scan of somebody using AI for six months and somebody that hasn't used it at all, they would be vastly different.

SPEAKER_00 5:23

It is. It is. That's exactly what they do. Like like what you said previously, there's a fine line between like it is a you shouldn't be relying on it, right? And there should be a finite difference between the AI and reality, I think is what what you said.

SPEAKER_01 5:41

Tackle that a little bit further, just to give it more of a def a definitive answer or definitive outlook. I would say that we have to we can't rely on it. It needs to be a tool to get something done. So a really cool real world example, and we're old enough to remember these, is remember when you had say a summer reading project or something you had to do for the summer, as far as like you had to come up with what the book was about, what you felt about the book, like a book report essentially, right? Yeah, yeah, yeah. Accompassing the book as a whole and the characters and the setting and how it all tied in together and all that stuff. Like spark notes, yeah. By point. So I actually was going for Cliff Notes, but it's the same, it's the same beast of a different color, right? Think about AI and the application. Let's take note taking, for example. It's the same thing versus uh it's the same thing with paper as it was with a computer. Does the exact same thing. Where you get into trouble with AI and that application specifically is when you're dealing with information that's being pulled from whatever source it's being pulled, because that's essentially what a uh what like generative AI is. If you take the word generative, right, it's generating based on both what you tell it as well as what it's able to find based on the subject. So it's doing copious amounts of searches across search engines and databases and and all sorts of crazy stuff, right? It's doing all of this simultaneously to bring that all into a very digestible, right? Digestible format like a cliff note, where it's literally the book from beginning to end. Here's what happened, here's the important stuff, all that kind of stuff. So when you're talking about generative generative AI, you're essentially talking about, I mean, ChatGPT is good for a lot of stuff. That's probably the most prominent one that people know that people use on a daily basis. I would also argue that a Gemini from Google is probably what a lot of people use. Even applications that have been around with AI that have been around for years make it a Siri if you're an iPhone user. Siri is a form of AI, it is able to mimic a person. Okay. Now, AI could be responsible for surely conversating with you. That's all it has to do. But the generative AI versus like deep think and like like deep learning AI, the real distinction between those two is one goes based off the information that you tell it, which would be your generative AI. It's gonna generate information based on the information that it already has, right? So the more you talk to a generative AI, the more it's gonna learn about you, the more extravagant and then complex answers you're gonna get, and so forth, right? The deep learning version, which we haven't really tapped into yet. We have in certain applications in certain sectors, like NASA, for example. I know that Cal Berkeley does a lot of stuff with that kind of thing.

SPEAKER_00 8:27

Yeah, I think BlackRock's doing that with the finance.

SPEAKER_01 8:30

Your Ivy, your Ivy League institutions and that kind of stuff, like your Harvard, your Yales, your Cal Berkeley, your your Oxford, all that kind of stuff. That is all stuff that they're sort of pushing the brink of what deep think and what deep learning AI is. So to make the distinction, just to go back to the original analogy of which is which and what they do, deep learning takes what you know or or what you've told it and extrapolates it. So it does its own research, it does its own reasoning based on what you tell it. So for example, there's always there's like moral truths in the world, right? Right and wrong, good and bad, that kind of stuff. Right. Yeah, yeah. It doesn't take into account necessarily what you think. It takes into it takes into categorization or in in itself to not only take what you say but like create an argument against it if you want it. Do you get what I'm saying? Yeah, yeah, yeah. No, I get what you're saying. For example, if you were doing generative AI, it would always agree with you, would always tell you the best case scenario or the worst case scenario based on what you've told it. The deep learning essentially has its own reasoning. So if you think it's a good idea and it's just morally bad, it will tell you, dude, don't do that. You're you're you're thinking about it the wrong way. It it it's it's this way because of morals and that kind of thing. You get what I'm saying? So essentially it's doing exactly what we wouldn't want it to do, is it's not only learning from you, but it's learning from itself as you talk to it. That's interesting. That makes sense.

SPEAKER_00 9:59

Yeah, that that makes sense.

SPEAKER_01 10:01

So just think about it as a more intricate version of the exact same thing where it's mimicking another human being to the point where it has like a real deal relationship with you.

SPEAKER_00 10:10

Yeah, it like actually tries to understand you.

SPEAKER_01 10:13

Yeah, it mimics. Yeah, it mimics an actual person.

SPEAKER_00 10:16

Now, here's the like AI art. Okay. Okay. You had said earlier that, you know, there should be like a clear distinction between what's real and what's AI. Well, it seems like with AI art, people want the opposite of that. They want it where you like can't even tell. And it's slowly getting there. It's slowly getting better and better. And and at some point, I don't know if we're gonna be able to really tell the difference at some point. It's like think about how crazy the videos and pictures have already gotten with AI art, and it's only been a couple of years. I mean, 10 years from now, 20 years from now, you're not gonna know it's gonna be unless they put caps on things. Unless they put it on the case.

SPEAKER_01 11:00

Well, that brings up an interesting point, and I want to touch on that for a so for example, with AI art right now, it's very distinct, it's very distinct on what's real and what's not. We can tell what's fake, what's been auto-generated, that kind of thing. And with the not being able to distinguish, you start bringing in conversations about copyright. Where did the idea come from? What did you use to prompt something coming out of AI? Was it a quote? Was it a because I mean, we've all heard of the term libel, right? Libel is basically somebody saying you said something you didn't. And that's where the whole deep fake thing comes in, which is really interesting too. So if nobody knows about deepfake, if nobody on the podcast, I'm sure some of you know what it is, but just to break it down, essentially deep fake is a form of face camera. You can't distinguish the person that they're mimicking from the actual person, and it works with voice AI too.

SPEAKER_00 11:49

Well, they were doing that with uh Trump Biden election.

SPEAKER_01 11:51

They were doing it with Trump and Biden. They were doing I saw one about Tom Cruise, that was crazy.

SPEAKER_00 11:56

Yeah. But that's what's gonna go ahead and press conferences, uh coaches' press conferences.

SPEAKER_01 12:02

So think about this. Let's just take football, for example, because we're both football fans, right? Let me ask you, let me pose you a question. Let's say Mike McDaniel from the Dolphins, right? He tells management, you know, today I don't really like going to the press conference. I just I'm tired. I I just don't know if I have it in me today. I just, you know, for whatever reason, doesn't want to go to the press conference and talk in person. They have a hologram as well as a deep fake of him, indistinguishable from Mike McDaniel. Two questions. Should he still get reimbursed? Because I'm sure he gets paid for doing press conferences. I'm sure there's a clause in his contract that says he has to do press conferences or something to that effect, right?

SPEAKER_02 12:39

Mm-hmm.

SPEAKER_01 12:39

Should he still get paid or his due process for the press conference?

SPEAKER_00 12:43

I mean, you're technically using his likeness and image, right? That's where it gets gray. It's not really crazy. Right. It's not him, but but it's his likeness.

SPEAKER_01 12:51

Yeah. Number two is not like number two, this is where it gets really crazy. Is he responsible since it's his likeness for whatever goes on in that press conference? Is he liable for it? Yeah, I have to say I would say yes. I would agree.

SPEAKER_00 13:05

Right.

SPEAKER_01 13:05

If you're agreeing to use it, you're responsible for what it's for, or somebody's responsible for what it's for, or what it's doing, or any kind of interaction, right? Yeah. No, absolutely. So you get into if we're talking about the deep learning, right? If we're talking about the deal the because the generative the generative AI is just like writing a script for somebody. It's the exact same thing. Think about it like that. Where it becomes a problem with the deep learning is what if it starts talking about stuff in Mike McDaniel's subconscious? What he's really thinking, not just what's coming out of his mouth.

SPEAKER_00 13:36

Yeah, that's tricky. Because you gotta be pretty much.

SPEAKER_01 13:39

So how far my point being with this whole conversation making that distinction is how far do you really want to go with it? It's gonna be. Do you want to let it govern itself and it's just an extension of Mike McDaniel and it's on its own? Or do you want it to read from a script that somebody, his publicist, the publicist for the team, whatever, comes up with and it's just responsible for the delivery. Which would you rather have? The other one, the deep the deep learning sounds cool, but at the same time, you could get into some really hot water if you're taking the man's consciousness and god forbid it gets out of whack or goes rogue or whatever, then you're in a real problem. Yeah. Does that make sense? Oh, yeah, that makes sense. So it's it's a script reading and basically somebody it's like a ventriloquist act. Think about it like that. That's what generative AI would be. Deep learning would be the other extreme, basically mimicking him, and he would be indistinguishable. Okay. So what's your favorite program then? Like what's your favorite one? The one I've used the most is chat GPT. I use it a lot for ideas in general. Um, I would say the best application for chat GPT that I've used is like what we're talking about is the generative AI stuff. That's where it really shines. I've used it for image generation. The problem with the image generation version and the application of that specifically is that it's very generic. But again, you're dealing with the generative AI. You're dealing with something that will only learn and be better with what you tell it. So I think my favorite one for for like a lot, a logistical and an analytical application would be Chat GPT. That's the one I use the most because it's good with analytical and logical data. That's where it really shines. So, like coding, anything that's finite, science, math, that kind of stuff, where there's a definitive answer and a definitive way to do things and facts and all that kind of stuff. That's where it really shines. I think it's the most, I would say without using a ton of them, I've used probably about 10 or so. Chat GPT would be my personal favorite. I just think it has the most application and it's pretty good at doing pretty much anything. But like I said, the logistical and analytical stuff is where it really shines, where it's able to sort of extrapolate data that's based on facts.

SPEAKER_00 15:44

Gotcha. So uh like how uh how much fun have you had with it? Like if you asked it any like crazy questions or like what like you know.

SPEAKER_01 15:51

I wouldn't say anything crazy because I do respect the platform. I've asked it some cool stuff. I've asked it sort of like, um, trying to think of an example off the top of my head. I know I've asked it about like job interviews and how I should like I give it sort of the synopsis of what I'm going into, right? So like I have a job interview at this company at this time, it's for this position. How should I prepare what questions should I ask during my interview? Something like that. Uh and it does a really good job with again with that kind of stuff because it pulls from databases and that kind of thing. Right. When you give it a more abstract idea, it sort of goes out of whack and doesn't really know what to do. So if you give it something really generic versus finite, I think it does better in the finite realm versus the generic.

SPEAKER_00 16:30

Yeah, I've also noticed playing around with it. I I I was using it a little bit for the c for the business that I owned, and then you know, playing around with it then, and then I kind of didn't use it as much, and I just recently for work started using it again. I've noticed it will you put in a thought or question or whatever, it will actually ask you for more information. Correct.

SPEAKER_01 16:54

Yeah, that's a prompt where it's like, uh, I'm kind of stuck here. Can you help me out a little bit? That's the difference.

SPEAKER_00 16:59

And then you can really narrow it, really, really, really narrow it down.

SPEAKER_01 17:02

But it the cool thing about generative AI is that not only is it learning as you talk to it, but it will give you like suggestions to like help it understand what you're talking about and give you like suggestions and like, hey, you sort of said you wanted it this way, could do it like three or four different ways to see how you like it. Yeah, and that's how it learns.

SPEAKER_00 17:32

Yeah, I mean, I actually use it, I've used it before for um with work as far as like competitors. I'll tell it like a compet like one of our competitors, like what's their main feature, like what's their best aspect, like what's their pros, what's their cons, what's their weaknesses as far as blah blah blah. And like it, I'll tell like like get it like information from the website, and it'll it's unbelievable.

SPEAKER_01 17:56

But like I said, generative generative generative AI is only as good as what you throw at it. So as you throw in more information as you throw more information at it too, it will just sort of like pin it. You get what I'm saying? Yeah, yeah, yeah. And go based off the the previous and go off the previous information that you sold to it. Pretty cool stuff.

SPEAKER_00 18:15

And and I think like now we gotta get a handle on it now because and you can, you know, let me know what you think, but like you can't just open the floodgates to it. You gotta put some type of some type of bar restrictions on it as well.

SPEAKER_01 18:29

I was gonna say I have a word for you, standard.

SPEAKER_00 18:31

Yeah, standard. Like you gotta but at the same time, could the AI not follow that if it doesn't want to?

SPEAKER_01 18:39

All right. That gets you into the dangerous part of it. Mm-hmm. You know, nobody wants to believe that this thing's gonna ha as it progresses and gets more intricate and more adaptable and everything else, this thing's gonna be thrown at pretty much anything because it makes things easier for that application. It's just the flat out fact of AI is that it makes things easier.

SPEAKER_00 19:02

Yeah, I mean I I know like to kind of like go like how AI is making positive changes in our world, like healthcare. It's actually they're using AI to do early diagnosis of like cancers, and it's picking it up three to five years before it would regularly show up on whatever testing they did. So I mean, that's great. You know, would you trust an AI doctor though? It's a good question, and it's sort of um sort of a multi-level question if I can answer it that way. I think it depends on like what are we what kind of doctor are we talking about here?

SPEAKER_01 19:38

Well, not only I I was gonna say, well, not only then what kind of doctor are we talking about, uh, how invasive is this surgery? I mean, I think just a doctor in general to go to a So you're talking about like a general checkup type shit.

SPEAKER_00 19:49

Like checkup or maybe a specialist, maybe like a you know, maybe like a foot specialist or like a podiatrist or something like that. Yeah, yeah, you know, or like pain management. Would you trust an AI pain management doctor?

SPEAKER_01 20:04

It would depend on how intricate the treatment was. So for example, if we were just talking about, say we're talking about a back, right? Let's just say back, for example. If we're just talking about physical movement and physical therapy, I'll take its word for it. Sure. If we're getting into the realm of like pain meds and medication, I would say right now with what we have, no, I would not be comfortable with because it can't understand pain, right? Correct. That's but that's where the deep thinking and all that kind of stuff comes into that realm. So if you're looking at go ahead.

SPEAKER_00 20:34

It's not gonna have sympathy either, right? Like it's not gonna care. It's gonna say this textbook or whatever regulations say you shouldn't have this, or you're not show you're not, you know, describing X. So the answer is no.

SPEAKER_01 20:48

I would agree, but where the deep think comes into the deep thinking and that kind of stuff and deep thinking AI, where it gets dicey, is that it could look at me, right? Because it ultimately with my care and my health care, it's technically up to me no matter what I it could extrapolate something based on like let's say my brain waves it gets that far, where it's like, you don't really want to do this, but actually in the back of your mind, you're kind of into it. Do you see where the trickery can kind of happen with that where you're second-guessing yourself because this is this is an AI, this is not a human being. This is something that can literally come up with a thought in a microsecond and extrapolate that thought into something. Like I said, this episode's gonna get rabbit hole-ish. So I apologize anybody that doesn't like like rabbit hole-ish conversations, but when you're talking about something that's gonna literally change the way that we do everything in our lives from every application, every sort of human interaction that you have, all of that stuff, it's all gonna be applicable to that conversations, interviews. Like imagine watching an interview with not two human beings but two AIs interviewing each other. I've they've yeah, they've done that already. But like imagine that is like the norm. Yeah. So it gets It it gets crazy from the standpoint if you talk about that like, okay, so now the interviewee doesn't have a career.

SPEAKER_00 22:06

Neither does the interviewer. That's where the social income the the you know, everybody's gonna have you know, everybody's gonna make uh X amount of money and they're not gonna work. They're gonna be able to do pretty much whatever they want with universal income and uh, you know, you're gonna be happy not not having a job, career, whatever. And I think as humans, that's gonna be a downfall because we thrive on we thrive on, you know, first off, making things better. That's what we do. We evolve, we make things better, um, and we also have a sense of purpose.

SPEAKER_01 22:53

You went exactly where I was gonna you were going you're going exactly where I was gonna end to the operative word the operative word is purpose or purposeful.

SPEAKER_00 23:02

And how many people already deal with mental health issues of of feeling like they don't have a purpose and they don't know where they're going in life, and they just life is already so hard because they're you know playing video games or on a computer for work for 10 to 12 hours, and then you know, I mean we're on our phones when we're not on you know, you're on your phone, this thing's a like you're talking about like it's gonna change our the world as we know it and our lives forever. Well, that's what the internet did. And then when the iPhone came out, it's it's just the new iPhone, it's the new thing that's gonna completely change everything. And yeah, there's a lot of pros to it, but there's also a lot of con I think the big thing, and this isn't just with with healthcare, this could go with education, this could go with um a lot of things. It's it's the the concerns are the trust and accountability, and then like patient privacy, just privacy in general, individual privacy, and you know, I saw the other day that uh I think there's a state, it's either a state or a county, or it might not even be in the US, it might be in a foreign country. They're completely getting rid of judges. So AI, they're using AI judges for I guess civil suits. That's what they're gonna use. They're not gonna use human judges, they're gonna use simple AI judges in court.

SPEAKER_01 24:22

Well, there is a fr well, let's let's back it up a second as far as that's concerned. So if you're talking about that as far as civil, so we're not talking about capital murder, we're not talking about any of that. We're talking about somebody got a parking ticket, right? Something to that effect. You're not necessarily gonna hurt anybody with that application of AI if it's doing what it's supposed to do, other than monetarily, for the most part. So like I I I guess think about it. Is it good enough yet? Yeah, right. And that's my that's that's my point, is that we we talked about a standard, right? Or a code of ethics. Let's just call it that. Because as a as a human, there's a, I would say, genuinely generally agreed upon code of ethics that every human should live by. Right and wrong, good and bad. I should do this instead of this because this is bad. You know what I mean? Whatever that is, right? Whatever your personal code of ethics, but I think there's a genuinely agreed upon code of ethics of what's right and wrong. That's why we have laws that with every with every action, there's an opposite reaction, right? Like you're you're you do something bad, there's going to be a reaction to that bad thing, and most of the time it's punishment, right? There's also the flip side where everything you do that's good has a reward. Where it can get dicey, though, is you brought up an interesting point with the iPhone stuff. And I want to throw something kind of crazy at you that might make people's eye, you know, their their foreheads kind of cringe. What if we become the old iPhone? It's a wild thought. That is a wild thought. What if robots get so tired of us we're not the new and the best and they start throwing people away, both literally and figuratively? Yeah. And then the next iteration comes along and says, they're not good enough. Next iteration comes along, they're not good enough, they're not good enough, they're not good enough. So you're just constantly just wasting away how iterations of this AI.

SPEAKER_00 26:05

How about not only not good enough? Let's go with this one, okay? What if AI looks at us? Because you know you're using AI for military, right? And weapons and stuff like that. They're definitely using it a little bit for that stuff.

SPEAKER_01 26:18

Well, target this is a wild thing, is people think people think that AI has only been around for like the last 20, 30 years. Target lock, it's been around probably since like the late 70s, 80s for like military application, that's been around for 50 years. Yeah. And and it's a form of AI. It's a form of artificial intelligence based on generative AI. I point it at something, it learns that it's bad, and it locks onto that target.

SPEAKER_00 26:44

I'll bet you the military/slash government, like the black programs, they have AI that we can't even fathom.

SPEAKER_01 26:52

Well, what do you think we have now is probably? I mean, I obviously don't know about it because it's obviously behind closed doors and this and that. But we're like 80 years behind. Yeah, how much advanced technology does the government have that we know nothing about or that we shouldn't know anything about because it's beyond our understanding? That's where it gets really crazy.

SPEAKER_00 27:09

Yeah, and that's where we've talked about in other episodes where, you know, did they get it from reverse engineering, other technologies? Did they find something, you know, somewhere? I don't know. Where they get was it given to us as a donation? That, you know, and that's a whole different rabbit hole to go down. That's it.

SPEAKER_01 27:28

Yeah, the the thing that thing that I think is really cool really interesting too is the like computers and and and technology takes a power source, right? Yeah. So as this thing gets more intricate and starts to learn more, it's gonna require more power, more data centers, more whatever. What does that do to both the planet? How do we combat certain natural disasters from happening because we're consuming too much power at a at an accelerated rate? Um it also brings in not just environmental factors, but just power consumption in general. How much how much how much are we changing our planet, not just from an environmental standpoint, but from a cosmic standpoint?

SPEAKER_00 28:07

Well, and and and it goes to what what I was saying earlier. What if AI because with the uh you know the military and and whatever how advanced that is. What if AI looks at us and it says humans are a threat to the planet? Humans are a threat to the existence of all life on this planet, therefore humans need to be eliminated.

SPEAKER_01 28:32

Yeah? I mean, you're talking about the Terminator scenario now. Essentially, yeah. So essentially, people think the apocalypse is gonna come by way of a natural disaster or something like that. What's really wild is if it becomes an extinction based on our own stupid stupidness and foolishness, knowing not what we're fucking with. You talk about someone that goes rogue that has no feeling of empathy. It's pretty scary. You really think about it. I deem you as wrong. No way to have a family. Nope, wrong. Right. It doesn't care. Doesn't empathize, goes goes based on pure analytical data.

SPEAKER_00 29:04

Did you see the hot water that the health insurance companies got in? No, educate me. They were using AI to determine if they were going to accept people's health insurance claims or not.

SPEAKER_01 29:17

Do you know if it was generated AI or do you know if it was deep learning? You know?

SPEAKER_00 29:20

That I don't know.

SPEAKER_01 29:21

If I mean if you want to talk about like your thoughts, I was gonna say that's where the that's good, that's where the conversation gets it forks, right? Because if you're talking about something that's just purely based on analytical data, which, like I said, most of the law is pretty concrete and finite. There's there's stuff that you don't do and there's repercussions for that. It's an imperfect system, but generally speaking, if you do good, you get good. If you do bad, you get bad. Most of the time. Not saying all the time, but if you're talking about a purely analytical AI, I would technically agree with the insurance claim stuff because most insurance companies don't take empathy into it. They take, you know.

SPEAKER_00 29:58

So they're using generative AI. So it says Elevance, United Health Group, and Sentinel are actively adopting generative AI for various applications like contract management, speeding up software development, analyzing health data for care recommendations, and improving member experience through personalized communications.

SPEAKER_01 30:20

So, yeah, like I said, the analytical part doesn't bother me. If we're talking purely if we're talking purely numbers and taking emotion out of the equation, which with healthcare, I want an answer, a definitive answer of what's going on. I don't need you to beat around the bush.

SPEAKER_00 30:33

But here's the problem. What if, and I'm I'm gonna play devil's advocate here, what if there's a decision that has to be made, and it's either saved the life of a eighty-three-year-old woman or a five-year-old boy. Okay.

SPEAKER_01 30:54

One of the terms, I guess, is the question.

SPEAKER_00 30:57

I like AI runs its numbers and it says that the woman the older woman should be saved. It doesn't take in the empathy and the fact that this kid has his whole life in front of him. They just should that they should do this procedure for this woman based upon analytical numbers and not do the procedure. Not let's not they're just not gonna cover the insurance costs for the kid instead of the woman.

SPEAKER_01 31:23

This might be a really weird answer for some people, but I would go based on the analytical data, based on you know what the what the information says. It would also depend for me the type of the type of surgery or type of process procedure that needs to take place. Because with healthcare, especially I mean, any procedure. Let's let's talk about anesthesia, for example. Anytime and dis anesthesia is put into the equation, there's a very small, if if a chance at all, of you passing away on that operating table. So that would be my one deterrent if the person isn't able to either signal through their bodily function, because anesthesia, depending on what you use, has a lot of functions as far as what it what the body is able to do under anesthesia. I'm not a doctor, right? I don't have a medical degree, I'm just a sort of spitballing here. But I would assume there's probably different types for different procedures. There's different types of anesthesia, and they apply to certain things that the body can or can't do.

SPEAKER_00 32:22

No.

SPEAKER_01 32:22

And like for example, like a reef, like a reflex, if that makes sense. There's probably a general type of anesthetic or something like that that negates your reflexes. Probably. You get what I'm saying? So that's where it can get dicey, is that like if it's a procedure that requires me to be because some people even go into procedures in surgery under Twilight, like they're still conscious. It's just like they're in a they're in a dream. They're still conscious, they're still aware of what's going on, they're just really drugged up. Right.

SPEAKER_00 32:51

So, so the major health insurance companies, United Healthcare, Cigna, and Humana, they have faced lawsuits for using artificial intelligence and algorithms to wrongfully deny claims. While the insurers state these tools are used to process claims efficiently, lawsuits and investigations have found the technology was used to deny care and cut costs, often overriding the judgment of human doctors.

SPEAKER_01 33:20

So, what I would say to that, and that's a really good point about rejections specifically, because nobody wants to be rejected for insurance claim. Then they have to pay out of pocket and then just gets gets into a big mess.

SPEAKER_00 33:30

Well, it happened to me. Right. And recently from my neck and back pain.

SPEAKER_01 33:35

Yeah. So you it paying out of pocket would obviously, for anything, whether it's medication or procedure or just a general checkup, for example, would go through the room. But my it circles back to the standard that we'd have to have. For certain applications of certain AI for, let's say, healthcare, since we're on that tip. Just like HIPAA, there would need to be rules and regulations on who's generating the information, who's writing the code, who's monitoring it. All of that would have to be done through certifications and all that stuff for me to be comfortable. If they're just having their own in-house reps writing this code or getting it from a third-party vendor without verifying whether it was really doing what it's supposed to be doing, I'd have a very big problem with that. So, like, how do you monitor that though? That's the real question, though, right? Is not only are we going to be using it for this type of stuff, but the morality and the justification and the verification, who's responsible for that? Because depending on like let let's say United Healthcare, for example, comes up with their own AI program. You don't think Universal Healthcare or United United Healthcare is going to want to use that for profit? It's it sounds sounds to me that through the lawsuits and what people have brought up with this pertaining to this, it sounds like that's exactly what they're doing. Because if you're gonna deny somebody a claim, that's the insurance company pocketing, or not pocketing, I would say not even giving up the money in first place.

SPEAKER_00 34:57

I think it's wild to me that a doctor says this person needs this, and then an insurance client company goes, no.

SPEAKER_01 35:06

Yeah, it's all based on it's all based on information, it's all based on statistics, it's based on the bottom line, it's based on all that stuff.

SPEAKER_00 35:13

And I think that's so wrong.

SPEAKER_01 35:14

I do too. That's so fucked up and wrong. But then you also, again, rabbit hole, person has schizophrenia, person has let's say manic is manic depressive. Do the statistics play into what care they deserve or need? Or is it based on the person and their personality, which is what it is currently, most of the time. So my to sort of give a real world example, so I'm in a therapist's office, right? One scenario I'm with AI, one scenario I'm with a real human being. Depending on the AI that you choose, it's gonna go give you medication and a prognosis or a diagnosis based on what it knows and what has worked in the past. A human being right now, if you're not talking about deep think AI, will actually learn about you as a person if they're a good therapist, if they know what they're doing. They will be able to get to the root of the problem and then base it off, base that off of what medication they end up doing or treatment or whatever. Because that's the other thing is that that's the other really scary thing is that not all ailments require medication. They require rest, they require sleep, they require a lot of I would say most.

SPEAKER_00 36:19

Honestly, let's let you want to go down another rabbit hole with this shit. Big pharma doesn't want to cure anybody.

SPEAKER_01 36:27

Well, yeah, because if you cure it, there's they stop making money.

SPEAKER_00 36:29

They don't have a customer, and that's what you know, Rockefeller, that's why Rockefeller created Chicago Chicago School of Medicine, and he, you know, a lot of medicines were holistic. He completely told all the colleges and medical institutes, no, you're getting rid of holistic medicine because we're gonna make money. What we're gonna do is we're gonna rewrite the books and we're gonna make everything. And we're gonna put we're gonna treat people because if you treat, you have a recurring customer. He didn't call them patients, he called them fucking customers. That's how fucking fucked up and greedy this guy was. Um him and all those other assholes back then. But I would say I see a therapist, I see a therapist once a month. It's decent. I think most of the medicine that people are on do more harm than good. It doesn't actually fix you. I think it turns most people into zombies, and I think it gives them more problems than if they worked out regularly, changed their diet, get sunlight, and f like posit surround themselves around positive people and influences. Now, if you got schizophrenia or whatever, you know, there's my uh so you know my uncle, Tommy. Yeah. Okay, he was uh he was uh child therapist for thirty something years, almost forty years. Who we also want to have on this motherfucker. We do at some point. Uh you know, he got his bachelor's and masters from UCLA. He was in Vietnam, and then when he got out of him and dad got out of Vietnam, they both moved to California. He was at UCLA, got his bachelor's and masters there, and then he got his doctorate at Cleveland State. He was in psychology. And um, I forget the name of this doctor. Um, I got I'll I'll look it up at some point here. But there was a patient, a woman, she I believe was in a car accident or something happened. Something happened, and she developed a she thought she was on the moon. She was in she was in like, you know, the whole insane asylum, and she was convinced that she was on the moon. And they thought everyone said that, you know, if there's no cure for her, she's gonna be stuck there forever. She was like in her twenties, I think. And this doctor, and again, I'll get his name, but this doctor did an experiment and he said, She thinks she's on the moon, right? Well, you gotta go to the moon and you gotta get her and you gotta bring her back to Earth. And Blake, they prepped for two weeks. He would tell her, All right, on this date, you know, we're gonna become I'm gonna be coming to the moon to come get you, and we're making preparations and blah blah blah. And eventually he, you know, he went to the moon and he hung out with her, and then they got in the ship and they came back to Earth. Did you know that she left the insane asylum and she went and had a family who was completely cured, lived a great life, no medicine, nothing.

SPEAKER_01 39:22

So essentially he just accepted her reality and that sort of snapped her back. Is that sort of what I'm getting from that story?

SPEAKER_00 39:28

Yes. Yes. He said in her reality, she's there. Now, AI couldn't have done that. Yeah, that's true.

SPEAKER_01 39:34

Well, you know, that's where the deep thinking thing comes with, where it starts to reason and oppose empathy and and all that kind of stuff. So it depends on what you're talking about. It really does. It depends on which version you're talking about. But yeah, that's actually kind of wild. I mean, the so I gotta find that. I gotta find out. Let me ask you a question about that scenario. So, like right now, if she were alive, she'd still think she was on the moon, or she like completely back to reality and everything's hugged up.

SPEAKER_00 39:58

No, she's back to reality. She had a family, like great, happy life.

SPEAKER_01 40:02

It's interesting. It's almost like snapping somebody out of a dream or something, is what it sounds like. Right, right. Very interesting. But it's almost I mean, that almost sounds like like some hypnosis, kind of.

SPEAKER_00 40:13

Well, my uncle, so I don't know if you know this. Tommy used to do seminars, big, big gatherings of like a thousand people. Yeah. Would go and he would he would hypnotize them to quit smoking. He cured thous tens of thousands of people. Really? Yes. Yep. That's pretty impressive. He did it he did it for years, years. So yeah, I mean, I whole hopefully we can get Tommy on here if he's willing to do it. I haven't talked to him about it yet, but it would be it would be cool to to get him on here. To to go back to more of you know what we were talking about. I guess you know, healthcare, we've talked about that. Education. You know, I know professors are getting upset because kids are just doing reports through chat GPT and they're not actually putting in the work, and they're not, you know, I part like kids are gonna be kids, they're always gonna try to find a shortcut, right? That's like just you know, it's what they do.

SPEAKER_01 41:08

What was the best source in the world when we were in school? Think about it.

SPEAKER_00 41:12

Go Google? Google Wikipedia?

SPEAKER_01 41:14

Yeah.

SPEAKER_00 41:14

Well, Wikipedia and we weren't in a lot of people.

SPEAKER_01 41:18

You know what's really crazy is now You're encouraged to use Wikipedia. When Wikipedia first came out, it was No Node.

SPEAKER_00 41:25

Yeah, we were like all of our professors were like, yeah, if you get caught using Wikipedia, it's not a factual source, it's able to be edited and all that kind of stuff.

SPEAKER_01 41:34

Now we're taking Wikipedia as gospel, and that's where the information, that's where the misinformation and all that kind of shit starts. On that tip, um, as far as education is concerned, you have to worry about schools.

SPEAKER_00 41:50

Should schools use it or should they embrace it or should they ban it? Because like over in in China, they're embracing that shit. Other countries are embracing it.

SPEAKER_01 41:58

I think it's good. I think it's good in certain instances, but again, it comes back to the standard. Okay, we have to have an agreed-upon set of rules, regulations, engineers that are responsible for how this stuff works, and it's an agreed-upon group of engineers. Like, for example, think about it in another way. Who do we turn to for the laws that govern America? We turn to a group of individuals that none of us know personally, and they make the rules. Everybody seems to be, for the most part, okay with that. But when it starts governing your life and how you live your life and what you're allowed to do and not allowed to do, people have their own opinions about that. So that's where the lawsuits come from, right? I don't agree as let's take the insurance company thing, for example. I don't agree with this analysis, but it's found on fact. Yeah, but I don't agree. It's my life, it creates a lot of problems. Yeah. You're gonna deal with no matter what it is in in life, there's always somebody that's gonna have a problem with how it works. Always. So when you're dealing with healthcare or policing, these big issues that we're facing and all that kind of stuff, do you want that out of human hands? And if it's out of human hands, who is responsible for the governing principles that make this thing work? So you'd have to treat it like another form of government in a roundabout way. There is going to be people that are responsible for this technology that you've neither met, know from anything other than, you know, newspapers or interviews or whatever. So you think about it like a Senate or a House of Representatives or something like that. Are it are people going to be comfortable with that? That's the real question.

SPEAKER_00 43:35

And can those people sway it to fit a narrative? Can they manipulate it? Correct.

SPEAKER_01 43:41

Can they because like sounds like through what you presented with the insurance companies that not only are they manipulating it, but they're milli they're manipulating it in a malicious way where they're making money and cutting other people deserving people from getting insurance to pay for the procedures that they quote unquote need.

SPEAKER_00 44:00

And then you get into the politics. That'll be a good thing. It gets real dicey real quick. Real real dicey because there was uh they show I saw a video on I forget what podcast it was. They actually shared the screen and they put it in Chat GPT and they said create an outline for a right wing Republican podcast uh show. And it said that it couldn't do that because of safety regulations and all sorts of shit. And then they changed it to create a podcast for a left-wing democratic podcast, and it came out with a whole outline.

SPEAKER_01 44:36

Yeah, because it's generative. So it's gonna take what it learned from the Republican side, put it against the leftist side, and it's gonna tell you generative AI for talking about statistics. It's gonna take into account how many Republicans or how many Democrats have been elected to office, what they did, how efficient they were, all of that stuff's gonna be taken into account.

SPEAKER_00 44:56

But this thing blocked, it said it wasn't allowed to come up with a right-wing podcast.

SPEAKER_01 45:01

What uh what uh I think it was Chat GPT. So it's generative. It was generative.

SPEAKER_00 45:07

Sort of. So whoever created it sounds like they were the other side of the table. Right.

SPEAKER_01 45:12

Yeah, that's the contradiction. And that's where that's where the contradiction comes in. That's what I'm talking about, is that how deep and it would be fucked up if it was reversed.

SPEAKER_00 45:21

It would be fucked up if it was reversed.

SPEAKER_01 45:23

If it wasn't even Democrats mad at Republicans, and vice versa. It'd be it'd be chaos. Yeah, it gets real it gets real crazy if you really dig down deep into it and really realize how dividing it can be. It get like I said, it I like I use the word dicey, but it can get really it can get really dangerous real quick. It could change a lot of opinions where we're not thinking for ourselves anymore. We're doing it, we're using AI to come up with our thinking. That's where you get into real trouble is because it's god forbid it goes rogue and you know, people could use their lose their livelihood, they could lose their they could lose their possession. All sorts of crazy shit. It gets real crazy.

SPEAKER_00 45:58

Yeah. Oh, I just we gotta we gotta get a handle on it, and I don't know how you do that. Realistically, how you do that without I I don't know. I I don't trust most people. That's the problem.

SPEAKER_01 46:14

Yeah, I mean it's neither good nor bad. It's just I I like to put a lot of stock into myself when I come up with things or or answers to problems and stuff like that. I'll always ask for advice because that's human nature. We want verification that we're doing the right thing, that's just human nature. But you don't want to get to something that's always gonna agree with you and also something that's not gonna always disagree with you. You'd rather have an intelligent conversation and bounce ideas and all that kind of stuff that we do as humans, and that's where the deep learning stuff comes in. Is that you won't be able to distinguish and this is the other thing. I know I brought it up off air, but I really want to get into it because I know where we're coming up on an hour. But like I said, I said before we went on air that we could this could be like a three or four hour podcast for me.

SPEAKER_00 46:57

Yeah, I mean we um you know, if we go a little over, we go over. Yeah, that's fine. That's fine.

SPEAKER_01 47:01

But the thing I talked to you about a couple of weeks ago, or might even be um it might even be going back, like really far back. So I know you and I talked about Alan Turing. Do you remember that conversation? Yes. Okay. So the fundamental test for AI and whether or not it's effective and capable of doing what you're what's supposed to be doing is was developed by a man called Alan Turing. He was a mathematician that came up with a test called the Turing test. So anybody that doesn't know what the Turing test is, the Turing test essentially is a pass-fail test. It's very definitive. It's it's one or the other. There's no gray area, it's either a yes or a no. And the whole point of the test, essentially, is to basically figure out whether you're talking to an AI or you're talking to a real human being. And I can look up what the pass fail is. So let me look that up real quick because I'm blanking on it real quick. So pass and fail Turing test. I forget which one is which. So a machine here here's the here's the Google definition of the pass fail. So a machine passes the Turing test of a human if a human judge cannot distinguish its responses from those of a human during a text-based conversation. It fails if the judge can reliably identify it as a machine. However, the concept of a clear pass fail is complicated by varying test conditions. Debate over what constitutes general genuine intelligence and is the demonstrated and the demonstrated ability of modern AI to convincingly mimic convincingly mimic human conversations. So essentially, if you pass, if a machine passes that test, you can't tell the difference. That's the deep thing. Okay. If you can, it will go based on a pattern. It's like pattern recognition by a human being. That's how it fails. So the reason why this is interesting is because he created a an a massive Enigma machine. I think it was World War I, it might have been World War II. I'd have to fact check that, but it was one of the two. The application was used for Nazi code breaking by the British.

SPEAKER_00 49:01

That's interesting.

SPEAKER_01 49:02

So they spoke in code essentially through the code where this Enigma machine was able to extrapolate what they were really talking about, even though it was coded. So the reason I'd bring that up is it brings another really interesting point into the sort of into the into the view. Think about that if this was used by black hackers, black hats. No matter what you do to your information, put it behind two FA, two-factor authentication, put it behind a password, biometrics, which would be like your fingerprint, uh, your face, that kind of stuff. Think if it was able to break that routinely, routinely. I'm not talking once or twice. I'm not talking something that looks like it. I'm talking real deal fingerprint, DNA, everything. Think about the flood of information, personal PII information that would be flooded to the masses. Think about public record on steroids. I'm talking your blood type, your entire family lineage, everything. It's like a pan, and this this is a really cool idea because we brought it up in the last episode. Think about it as a Pandora's box. Do you really want to open that? Because all point all points and signs are telling you, again, don't get ahead of yourself.

SPEAKER_00 50:13

Well, so as far as that goes, because I mean, like, there's always gonna be hackers and bad people, right? What do you think of Elon Musk, Neuralink?

SPEAKER_01 50:22

Is that the the chipping stuff that's going on?

SPEAKER_00 50:25

That's the chip for he's having for people who are have like special like amputees and like stuff like that. And like so essentially people that are disabled, whether it's mentally or physically. More physical right now, yeah.

SPEAKER_01 50:37

Yeah.

SPEAKER_00 50:37

I would say it wants everybody to have it. Okay. Um I was like, this dude could literally run his computer just looking. This dude could run his computer just looking at it and thinking.

SPEAKER_01 50:48

Well, they do that with they actually do that right now. It's called eye tracking software. It's on pretty much any operating system that you could. I mean, it's mostly for like civilian application, but you can use an eye tracker on Windows. And it will literally let you like look around the screen and click on stuff, and if you blink, it'll do something. If you like, you know, blink twice, it'll do something else. You know what I mean? That kind of stuff.

SPEAKER_00 51:08

But this this kid literally he was the first per first human being to get it. All he had to do is think like search Google for this, and it went and did it. Interesting.

SPEAKER_01 51:20

Yeah, I mean, so essentially you're talking about like multitasking, you're not just talking about one thing.

SPEAKER_00 51:26

He didn't have to use like any of his extremities, it's just in his brain could pull it up.

SPEAKER_01 51:32

I think that's a case-by-case basis, in my personal opinion. Because then you're talking about a monopoly of one company or one creator or one entity controlling it all. That's monopolizing, you know. Monopolizing is for some people it's good, for some people it's bad. I personally think a monopoly on any kind of thing we use is probably a uh there's not a right way to do something in totalitarian. I think there's many different views on way things they could the way things can work. But to cut to combat that, there's also a you know a right and wrong, a good and bad, and all that kind of stuff. So where do we draw the line? Is it moral that is it is it morals, or do we do it based on just the data? Are you empathizing with the situation or are you going purely based on fact? That's where's the dividing line?

SPEAKER_00 52:14

You get what I'm saying? Yep. I mean, I I think I don't know, I think there's enough like if you study history, it's why I love history. You learn from your past, and hopefully you can prevent from making the same mistake over and over again. Like, there's a reason why they got rid of standard oil, right? Yeah.

SPEAKER_01 52:33

Because it wasn't as efficient as what we have now, correct?

SPEAKER_00 52:35

Well, he was buying the competition and just raising the price. It would he was killing people, you know. So he would buy up the small companies, all his competitors, or bully them out, and he could make it super high price, and then the quality went down, right? Look at what you and I talk about this all the time. Look at Madden. Zero competition. They've been so lazy, they don't have they don't care. They're gonna do their Madden ultimate team where they make the because people are dumb enough to care about that and give them the money, and yet the gameplay is horrible. You know, if there was if there was a 2K came back or another company, you'd have competition and then they would have to create a better game.

SPEAKER_01 53:19

Or be on par with what the other company's creating. Yeah, I mean that's a that's a really good example. And we see, you know, just for that example, we look at something like CFB that came back within the last two years. You look at that game, and it's so much more of a simulation of actual college football and football in general, where Madden just feels like a simulation, like you're not really it's not realistic, like from everything, from like you told you told me, and I can see it in the gameplay and and the way the game runs. I mean, like they took the time to go to everyone, every college stadium that's in the game, and it literally looks like the stadium from the school. That's just one example. Then you also have like the the the walkout, the walkout, and then you have like the celebrations, they're based on the team sometimes, not necessarily just a generic model of a character celebrating. You know what I mean? Like, like sometimes they'll celebrate with the mascot or they'll celebrate the game channel. Like all that kind of stuff, like all the crowd reactions are authentic, all of that kind of stuff. So I agree with you, just in that application alone, I think the competition would be it would not only be beneficial, but I think it would drive, you know, it would drive stuff forward. It would it would progress things to a point where like competition is a good thing. In my personal opinion, competition is the only way for us to push forward. If we're not being challenged, if we're not being put to the test, if we're any of that stuff, you're resting on your laurels. And me personally, from a personal point of view, I don't I don't do that. I'm constantly trying to better myself, I'm constantly trying to find out more information. I'm you know, if you're not progressing, you're you're stagnant. And who wants to like that doesn't compute to me? No pun intended. It just doesn't it goes against the grain of how we are as human beings. And if we get something like a tool like AI that literally will be able to do everything for us, that goes back to the right.

SPEAKER_00 55:04

Where do where do we go as a species? That goes back to self-worth.

SPEAKER_01 55:07

Yeah, like I we have a we have the whole reason that people live is they have something to get up for every day, no matter what that is. That like we have to as human beings, we have to have a driving force. And certain human beings necessarily don't see that, and that's why you have all the mental illness and all that kind of stuff, is they don't see the self-worth. So going back to what you said earlier, I actually think that would be detrimental to people with mental illness. It would make it worse. You're you're you're taking some not only uh a person's drive to do something, but they don't have the drive in the first place. So not only are you taking it away, you're actually doubling down on that fact and not letting them have the drive at all. So that's where it becomes dangerous, is that there's no re I mean, it gets kind of dark. What reason is there for me being here? You see what I'm saying? Like it can get real detrimental, real fucking quick, like real quick.

SPEAKER_00 56:00

Yeah. People would start questioning why are they here, and then the AI would be. I mean, people already do that.

SPEAKER_01 56:05

That's the wildest part. People already question that fact. That's the craziest part about it. It's already happening. So you want to take something and put it into the put it into the the realm of human existence, and then on top of the fact that they already are depressed, and and because some people have clinical depression where they're born with it, it's based on their genetic makeup. No, no. That's just that that's just a fact. It's been scientifically proven that you know somebody the way somebody is built, and that's what makes us unique, is not every human is we're all snowflakes. We're we're all we're all unique. Not one snowflake is the same, it just doesn't exist, it's not a thing. So when you take the uniqueness out, and then we're just mass producing robots and AI, like it it get it, you know, with the way mass production is these days. Imagine, imagine this. Let's take a food company, for example, right? Not to harp on craft macaroni and cheese, because I eat it all the time. I love craft macaroni and cheese. It's one of my favorite like go-to meals if I'm into something quick. Can we imagine a craft? Yeah, exactly. It's real food. If if we take the idea of a craft mac and cheese plant that pumps out millions upon millions upon millions of boxes a day, put AI in that equation, we're gonna be fucking outnumbered. Yeah. So if somebody was malicious, let's just say, and that brings into 3D printing and all that kind of stuff, too. Imagine being able to mass produce weapons. I'm not talking about guns, I'm talking about like nuclear weapons. The bad is just as good as the good, man, and maybe even worse. I think it's worse. It it can it can it can go one of two ways. It's either gonna be peaceful or it's gonna be an absolute shit show.

SPEAKER_00 57:45

Well, how about how about uh you've heard of the bot farms, right? It sounds familiar. So there are these huge warehouse facilities, and all these countries are doing it. Like China does it, Russia does it, the US does it, fucking all of them. They have these farms and they're t hundreds of thousands of like cell phones that have they create fake social media accounts. So there's not an exact number, but they bel it could be over 60% of social media accounts could be bots.

SPEAKER_01 58:18

Actually, it doesn't seem like that insane of a number, to be personal totally honest with you, given how much experience I have with social media and promoting like YouTube and all that kind of shit. That doesn't surprise me at all.

SPEAKER_00 58:28

They said about 80% of the accounts on X are bots. Here's what's scary is there's a eight out of ten chance that if you get into an argument with somebody on Facebook or X or whatever, you're not arguing a real person. You're arguing a bot. These bots are also creating conflicts and arguments and all sorts of hashtag whatever, these movements and companies and governments are making decisions based upon social media.

SPEAKER_01 59:02

Yeah, that's that's an interesting thing because I mean, essentially, if you're talking about a bot, you're talking about a robot. You're talking about something that's not human and doesn't, you know. But they're using AI. Correct. You see how crazy it can get with swaying opinions?

SPEAKER_00 59:16

And they're creating more accounts and they're creating their own group pages, and they're creating their own hashtags.

SPEAKER_01 59:23

So where I guess my overall question is once we start, are we gonna be able to stop? That's the really dangerous that's the really dangerous question is how far are we actually gonna take this? I don't I think it's I think that answer is really scary.

SPEAKER_00 59:36

I think the answer is there you there's it's not gonna stop.

SPEAKER_01 59:40

Are we just gonna drive this thing so far that we're just gonna lose control of it? I mean, that's the question that you really have to answer is that and that's where the standards, that's where the updates, that's where all of the laws come into place and all that kind of stuff. There needs to be some form of you know regulation that says, no, that's not what it's for, that's not what we built it for. You're using it out of context, whatever the case is, right? But my question to everybody would be do you treat it like, you know, a House of Representatives or a Senate or something like that, where you have a governing body of let's call it 20 individuals that sway the vote, you know, because we're quote unquote a democratic society, right? We govern, you know, we govern based on majority most of the time. And it's we would like to think it's mostly a moral majority, but take that how you want it. Take take it how you want it. It's it's up for you know, everybody's different, everybody has their own opinions, all that kind of stuff, and we're I'm respectful of that. But at the same time, you have to have some kind of like definitive answer, no matter what the context is. And that's where the you know, there needs to be some form of structure to how this is handled. And right now, it's kind of a wild west.

SPEAKER_00 1:00:51

Yeah, but even like with Deep Think, I know that they have done experiments with Deep Think, and the AI, when it actually learned that they were gonna shut it down, it started to make copies of itself and hide files, and it would lie to the creator.

SPEAKER_01 1:01:11

Yeah. I mean, you're so you're messing with something. I'm telling you, dude, this is where it gets crazy, is because you're messing with something that has the ability to has recognition, it has empathy, it has all of the tools to mimic human behavior. Not just human behavior, but the physical presence of a person.

SPEAKER_00 1:01:29

So there is no putting a top on it, and you can't, even if you have people who monitor it, it's eventually gonna it's eventually than us. If you're talking about deep thinking, yes. Yes, it's eventually gonna get smarter than us, and it's not gonna matter how many firewalls we got, it's not gonna matter how many backup systems, how many self-destructs we have, it's going to take control.

SPEAKER_01 1:01:51

It's gonna integrate itself. It's gonna be the spider web nightmare. Is you look, you know, we joke about South Park all the time, but I mean, like the episode where Cartman becomes a supercomputer. Mm-hmm. It's not that far-fetched of an idea.

SPEAKER_00 1:02:06

Well, there's I mean, not to go down the whole other rabbit hole that I always love to go down, but you know, a lot of ancient astronaut theory, some of those alien species that are part of the Galactic Council, they're literally AI. Like what what we're talking about right now, they say has already happened to other I mean, think about it. If a civilization is a million years ahead of where we are right now, and they've gotten rid of emotion and they've integrated with like the Neurolink thing. Yeah, you're so they don't have to be a little bit of a what you're talking about.

SPEAKER_01 1:02:41

What you're talking about now is brain control. Not that far fetched. No. You're talking about an implant that's in somebody's probably s you know, their brain stem or their cortex, whatever, whatever controls the, you know, again, because I'm not a I'm not a doctor, I don't I wouldn't know what it would point to specifically to control you. And it's also brings it also brings up the question, what do you what do you consider control? Are we talking about just your physical body? Are we talking about your mind and your physical body, just your mind? It begs a lot of questions. So I I mean the the conversation alone, people have staked their reputation on this shit. People have people have gotten careers just on studying it. Imagine what we'd have to pay people 24-7, let's call it 24-7, to keep this shit up to date. I think it's almost impossible. Yeah, it get uh like it changes everything. It really does. It changes it from a monetary standpoint, it changes it from an epithetic standpoint. I mean, insert word here for human beings' existence, it's gonna change everything. And the the real question is, are we ready for it? Because if we're not, I don't know, man. I really don't.

SPEAKER_00 1:03:47

So do you think I mean we've we've done some crazy episodes on here. Do you think it's realistic that we could have already been in this situation a hundred thousand, two hundred thousand, three hundred thousand years ago, and we're we keep doing the same goddamn thing over and over again. Eventually we hit a certain level, and then we get so technological that we self-destruct and kill ourselves, basically.

SPEAKER_01 1:04:14

I think it's gonna get to a point. Yeah, I I I think the oversophistication of what we're talking about is gonna get to a point where we can't handle it.

SPEAKER_00 1:04:24

Do you think that's happened in the past? To a certain degree. With certain with certain things that we can do.

SPEAKER_01 1:04:28

To a certain degree. Yeah, yeah, yeah. I do. But it also depends on where you're getting ahead of yourself, right? So, like if you're let's just take war, for example. If you're not as equipped as the enemy, you're probably gonna get capped. Let's just use the reasoning. Unless something really miraculous happens, vast majority of the time, if you're undermanned, understaffed, well, under undermanned and understaffed, the same thing. Underequipped, nine times out of a hundred ninety-nine times out of a hundred, you're going down more than like um, but you're dealing if we're taking AI into account in this argument, if it's able to extrapolate what we already have and then look into the future to create more, we're talking about the same thing. There's advances within, again, war that have changed everything about how it's conducted, who has a dog in the fight, as far as that's concerned. If you know, like let's take the atomic bomb, for example. We talked about that a couple of days ago off air. That changed everything about how you conduct yourself. I mean, you took an energy from a molecular and atomic level and extrapolated into something that could destroy.

SPEAKER_00 1:05:33

And the universe feels that because for every action there's a reaction.

SPEAKER_01 1:05:37

Correct. It's why when it when an atomic bomb explodes, if you really watch the way it explodes, it turns in on itself. It's the mushroom cloud. Right. So we have again, it comes back to the energy consumption. It comes back to, you know, the resources we have to put into AI to keep it functioning. Is it really, you know, we have to ask ourselves as human beings, and as we go forward into time, is it worth it? It because we're going to have to put a lot of manpower into this thing if we want it to be even remotely what we think it can be, and then further beyond that. And do we and the other question when we get to that place where we're on the brink of it being smarter than us, do we shut it off? Can we shut it off? Exactly. But there's going to come a definitive point where somebody's going to see something like, oh, dude, here comes. Are they are we going to be equipped and are we going to have the reasoning to shut it off and not test the envelope? That's why I bring up the Pandora's box thing. We're looking at the box right now. We're staring at it. How close do you think we are going to be able to do? I don't think that honestly being like within the next point of like of the no return thing. Decade? I would say a decade is a probably a little close. I would say if we keep going the way we are, I wouldn't say a quarter of a century is a stretch. Twenty-five years would probably do it for me, depending on what we come up with and how far we want to take it. Do you think this is more dangerous than the atomic bomb?

SPEAKER_00 1:07:01

Potentially.

SPEAKER_01 1:07:02

With the atomic bomb, you at least had to detonate the thing. It still required human interaction. Does that make sense? Yeah. Yeah.

SPEAKER_00 1:07:07

No, that totally makes sense.

SPEAKER_01 1:07:09

So here's a wild scenario for you. We're going to do the exact same thing, but you, a human being's not pushing the button. Trust that? Or they're de not not necessarily pushing it, but has the decision to push it and goes based off its own logic and everything that it's learned and what it's able to do and all that kind of stuff. Do you trust that? If an AI bot comes in and says, hey, we have this country that's wanting to invade us, the only way out is that. That's your scenario. Imagine the pickle you'd be in if it went wrong. If it was wrong.

SPEAKER_00 1:07:43

Well, if it was wrong, but also, I mean, if you have it, the other side is gonna have it.

SPEAKER_01 1:07:47

So where does it it's where does it where does it stop? It doesn't. It's I mean, that's the thing I think that I'm worried about the most is when the military gets a hold of this, no matter what military it is.

SPEAKER_00 1:07:57

Are they gonna have to have a hold of it?

SPEAKER_01 1:07:59

Well they already have I know, but what I'm saying is is if they decide to use it in a malicious fashion, which I'm sure they've done. I'm sure it's been done before, but uh has it been done on the level of it's called an apocalypse.

SPEAKER_00 1:08:14

Yeah. Uh what worries me is the government using this and like their black projects and like CIA, because you know the CIA loves to just work a lot of illegal stuff, right? What like who in the black market's gonna get their hands on this and like terrorist organizations and stuff like that?

SPEAKER_01 1:08:35

But I I think I think the cool thing about this is that it's it's gonna be one of two extremes. It's either gonna be really good or really bad. I don't see a gray area with this thing. Yeah, I don't see a gray area.

SPEAKER_00 1:08:48

It's gonna be an extreme area.

SPEAKER_01 1:08:49

It's gonna it it it is a we're gonna look back at this when you and I are like 70 years old and be like, yeah, I remember when that started. It's gonna be one of those defining things of human existence, man.

SPEAKER_00 1:09:03

It really is. If we make it to 70, I honestly think we're gonna look like Mars.

SPEAKER_01 1:09:08

Well, like I said, I mean that that it it's just really it it's gonna be not even 10 years down the road, we could be having the exact same conversation and look outside and it's like, well, this is it. We could be living in a cave. Yep. It's gonna be ground. It's gonna it's gonna revert us back to survival and our primal instinct to want to stay alive. It's gonna get real messy. Maybe if it goes bad, it's gonna get real messy.

SPEAKER_00 1:09:34

Maybe that's what happened to our ancestors. Yeah.

SPEAKER_01 1:09:37

Yeah.

SPEAKER_00 1:09:37

You know? I mean, who knows?

SPEAKER_01 1:09:39

Yeah, it just we gotta be careful with it. And that's why I always tell people when they ask me what I think about AI, my general response is use it as a tool, don't use it as a dependency. Because when you start depending on it, you're unable to think for yourself. And us as human beings, it's sort of our sort of our moniker. We're we're we're able to, you know, as far as we know, think for ourselves and have free will and all that kind of stuff. Do you think deep things should be banned? Are we talking the universal ban? For the bad thing. Complicated question. Complicated question, but with all the negatives, I think so, yeah. Yeah, I do too. If if I'd have to see a lot more evidence of it being used for good and actually applying in a in a productive fashion to to turn that cheek. Because there's a lot of there's a lot of good and bad to it, but when it gets bad, it gets really bad.

SPEAKER_00 1:10:25

I think the problem that we as humans have, especially we when it comes to um the tech industry and medical industry and military, is we don't think about just because we can do this, should we do this. We just do it and we worry about the consequences later. And I think that has really had a lot of negative, it's brought a lot of negative things that we're dealing with, like with mental health and just society in general. I think as a collective, if you are a pretty decently moral human being, even if you're not a moral human being, I would say most people, if they could go back in time and stop Zuckerberg and those guys from creating social media. I think a lot of people would say, you know what, don't create it, rather not have it.

SPEAKER_01 1:11:16

Yeah, I mean, it's I think I think we already have a dependency in place for certain things like this, and social media would be an example. I think that a lot of people we have factual inf well, factual, quote unquote, big air quotes. We have factual information circulating the globe faster than it's ever circulated before. And unfortunately, social media has become a way of getting information, whether it's good, bad, and different, doesn't matter. It's information.

SPEAKER_00 1:11:40

Yeah, and I don't think we were meant to be connected to everybody. We weren't meant to hear everybody's opinions and I mean think about like since social media has been created, you know how high suicide rates are in youth? Well, yeah, because you're doing it behind a wall. And you can't get away from it. These kids are addicted to it. You and I would go to school, and if there is a couple kids bullying you or causing, you know, drama, you left school unless you got on aim and sat at your computer for hours. You were away from it. For the most part. I would agree with that. Now you're there. These kids can't put it down. They can't that well, it's become a form of addiction. It is 100% addiction.

SPEAKER_01 1:12:22

There's been there's been scientific studies that people are addicted to their phones. That's not a secret. That's not something that's I mean, if if you're gonna turn away from that fact and call it, you know, a hoax or you're just fooling yourself. That that's it's 100% a form of addiction. And because it's so readily available, what do we do as human beings in every context of our of our existence? We consume. And now the information is so readily available, people are getting full off it. Who doesn't like to be full of information? Who doesn't like to be full? You know, it it all that kind of stuff ties into it. And the what you're talking about with the bots and everything, when you talk about swaying opinion and and and putting out, let's say, false information, whatever the context is, whether it's government, whether it's healthcare, you know, whatever, people have become so codependent on internet and what is posted on the internet that sometimes they take that as gospel. They they they'll take it they'll take a 10-second TikTok clip out of context and use it to ruin somebody's life. Yeah, because they'll clip it. Yeah, you don't get the whole thing, you don't get the whole conversation, you don't get a you only get a snippet, and it's something that's taken completely out of context based on what they were talking about, what the overall topic or what the topic that they're touching on is, and use it for either a malicious or benevolent reason or application rather. Yeah, it's it it I agree with you. I think social media has become quite detrimental. Um, because we're so fixated on the fact that it's readily available. Um, we get a chemical reaction from it in our brains. It's the same thing as smoking or drinking or doing drugs, anything like that. You get the dopamine kick. And like I said, just like with just like with brain scans that we were talking about earlier, you can take a look at somebody that doesn't have a social media platform, they don't use social media, they're never on their phones, their brain scans, I guarantee you, as opposed to somebody that's on Facebook, on Twitter, or X rather, I I they're drastically different, guaranteed. There's so much probably more brainwave activity in somebody that's not doing that, because how many times, I mean, I'm guilty of it. I'm sure a lot of people that listen to the podcast are guilty of it. How many times have you gone on YouTube just as background or TV shows for that example? We talk about all the time how you know when we put on when we put on like South Park when we go to bed, right? Whenever we're hanging out or whatever like that, or a movie, subconsciously, it's still making its way into your brain. Because I've I mean, I will tell you that watching like Family Guy or something like that, or South Park or a movie or something, if I can hear it, and some form of fashion doesn't happen all the time, but there are some times when I will dream based on I will be I will dream something based on the dialogue that I can hear. It will be in there somewhere and I'll wake up and be like, oh, that was a quote from Family Guy. That's kind of weird. I do it all the time. Yeah, but yeah, I mean you're talking, I mean, you're talking about the Neuralink stuff. Imagine if somebody got a hold of that maliciously and implanted stuff that literally warped your perception of everything about you being on this earth. Oh yeah. Yeah, absolutely. Absolutely. You you implant somebody, you implant somebody with the behavior of a cow, for example. Next thing you know, they're standing in a field moving. That's messed up. It's fucking wild, dude. Like the at like this is what that's exactly what I'm talking about, is that that application from what that is, if it's an implantation in your cerebral cortex or your brain stem, somebody has full sway over what you do. Period. Yeah, it's scary. I don't trust it. It's the way we're built, and they're implanting it to something that has full sway over what you do both physically and mentally. That's why I think it's somewhat dangerous. Yeah. Because if you're monopolizing it, you're talking about the same thing that you're scared of. How do we regulate it if it's controlled by one entity? It's a crazy conversation and it and it's it's scary because if we don't use it the right way, we're gonna get it's it's gonna get real bad real quick.

SPEAKER_00 1:16:08

Dude, think about how quick your algorithm on Instagram or Facebook, you're watching reels, can go from one thing to just like real dark, crazy shit.

SPEAKER_01 1:16:17

Well, not even that, but think about this. Think about this. Have you ever been talking about something? Your phone's off, TV's off, and then all of a sudden, a week later, it pops up something about it. That's not biasing, dude.

SPEAKER_00 1:16:31

That's not by I have had not even me talk about it or type it in my phone. I have had where I never I didn't know about this thing, and I saw it like it was like a thought or something, and it popped up on my phone under advertisements.

SPEAKER_01 1:16:49

Thought about it. Or it goes based on recommendation, which is exactly what Amazon's AI does. So stuff that you've looked at, so that's another form of generative AI, right? It looks at something that you've seen previously and knows about it and says, hey, you probably like this too. Yeah, it's scary. Yeah. It really is. I mean, you gotta dive deep down stuff because if you don't dive in deeply and you just take it at face value in the shallow end of the pool, it get uh it you're gonna be doing i i i there's no there's no telling how exponentially bad it could get.

SPEAKER_00 1:17:19

And let's not just focus on the bad. There are there's a lot of good that can't that that does come with it. Like I said, it's it's seeing cancers early, you know. I think education-wise, it could be a huge asset education-wise, as long as it's getting inform correct information, you know, and like for work and stuff like that, it can help with productivity. But like you said, you shouldn't rely on it, you should really use it as a safeguard. Do the research on a school project, actually do the research so you know it so that way you're actually learning, and you're not just putting in a chat GPT thing where it creates a 25-page report for you and you slap your name on it, you hand it in, and you didn't learn shit. I mean, you should be doing the research your own, and then you know, these kids should be coming up with, you know, using it for a template, but don't use it to just do it for you, because you're not actually learning anything. And at the end of the day, you're just wasting your money and time and education because you're gonna go out in the real world and you're not gonna know shit. That's a good point. Again, just because you can do something doesn't mean you should.

SPEAKER_01 1:18:34

Yeah. I mean, it's gonna take away all the scholastic achievement stuff, it's gonna take away scholarships, it's gonna take away job market. I mean, somebody goes in and finds out the fact that you used your entire college degree or your entire time at college or university or whatever, and you got past it with an artificial intelligence, they're gonna look at you and laugh. So, yeah, dude. Uh, like I said, with whatever you point it to, it's gonna get if people don't use it and respect it for what it's being used for and what it can't do and can do, and when not to use it and when to use it, that's gonna be the deciding factor of which way it's gonna go. People have to be responsible.

SPEAKER_00 1:19:12

Also, people have to be responsible. People also need patience. Everybody has lost their patience, they want things right now. And it's a the right now. The wildest thing is that we've got it.

SPEAKER_01 1:19:23

We got exactly what we asked for. How far do you want to take it? Like, how much do we want to improve before we truly understand what we're doing and what we're getting ourselves?

SPEAKER_00 1:19:33

I can put an order in Amazon in the morning if I do it early enough. That fucker will be at my doorstep by six o'clock at night. Yep, with some shit. Yep. We are a right now society. 100%. We I we need to get we need to get our patients back.

SPEAKER_01 1:19:48

Know when to when to open and when to close the envelope. But it gets it's an interesting conversation. I mean, like, we could probably do a you know, you're talking about education. We're just sort of brushing the surface of what it could do for education or healthcare or whatever. It's just a more of a general conversation. But I mean, each if we did one based on AI, we could probably do an entire series based on AI. I mean, it you really could take it that far because it's not something that has a finite ending. It doesn't have a finite answer. It's all based on theory right now, for the most part. And what we can do with it, we're trying to figure out how to push that envelope.

SPEAKER_00 1:20:20

Well, I mean, it's definitely gonna be taking trucker jobs. Oh, yeah. I mean, you already have automatic driving cars.

SPEAKER_01 1:20:28

So then you're talking about not just truck drivers, you're talking about chauffeurs, talking about taxi businesses going out of, even though taxis are few and far between as they they, you know.

SPEAKER_00 1:20:37

But but you'll have instead of DoorDash having regular people drive, DoorDash will probably just buy their own vehicles and use AI. Actually, actually, taxi companies probably will make a comeback. There just won't be drivers in them. Yeah, that's a good thing. Think about that.

SPEAKER_01 1:21:00

But if you're a swing. If you're sort of take, I mean, the whole thing that I'm scared of is taking human beings completely out of the equation. Mm-hmm. Because we don't need them. So where does that go? Like what what what is the end result? I think we already explained it. It's extinction. And are we prepared to accept that? That we've created something that is literally gonna destroy us. I don't think that's what's really been grasped yet. If we if we take it too far. Yeah. But where's the line?

SPEAKER_00 1:21:27

It's kind of in a way, it is the atomic bomb because it will eat itself from the inside out.

SPEAKER_01 1:21:33

It's gonna be ca it's I mean, it's gonna be cataclysmic. If it gets bad, I'm telling you, it's gonna get real bad.

SPEAKER_00 1:21:39

Well, I mean, you talk about we talked about AI art and and videos and stuff like that. If that gets in like think about how you could manipulate elections and people running for office and like high corporate positions and attorneys and judges and shit, people of power by creating a video of them doing something really fucked up. And there's there's record of it.

SPEAKER_01 1:22:04

People are able to manip like say, for example, just to take that into you know, take that, you know, a piece of that and sort of show you how scary it can be. Say, you know, somebody creates a video of you having an affair. There now the video evidence would be damning enough. It would be able to mimic your signature. So, like, say you say the video was in a hotel room. It would be able to mimic your signature and that of your partner performing the affair into the books and computer system of the hotel. Like you signed for the room. You would be able to mimic surveillance footage of you walking into the hotel with said person, even though it's fake, you would never know the difference. Like everything. Like that's a small example, but imagine if there was an AI that took the place of the president and you had zero idea being able to distinguish fact from fiction. You would take it today as fact. He was really up there, he said that. Like, I'm I'm talking down to the teenth degree of replication where it's indistinguishable where you cannot tell the difference. Do you think they already do that in other do you think our are like I think I I've never seen an application of it with visual stimuli, so like a real person where it's indistinguishable, but they have done it with voice. I know that for certain.

SPEAKER_00 1:23:24

You think the CIA and FBI and they use that shit to plant people?

SPEAKER_01 1:23:28

It could be used for that. Like I said, we don't we talk about it all the time too. We don't know what we don't know. I think that's always gonna be the case. I don't think we're ever gonna have the full story, and some of that I could say saves us from ourselves, but at the other token, it kind of detri it's kind of detrimental in certain aspects. But as I said, who holds sway over us getting that information?

SPEAKER_00 1:23:52

People we've never met. Right. Now, you said something really interesting a few minutes ago. You said president. What's your thoughts on AI running government, having like an AI B president?

SPEAKER_01 1:24:06

I think the real like smoking gun in the conversation is the deep thinking. So if it's just based on fact and merit, that kind of stuff, analytical data, I think we're fine. But if you're talking about the other side of the coin where I think it could get malicious if it learns too much, it definitely could hold sway over government 100%. Whether it's malicious intent, whether it's benevolent intent or somewhere in the middle. I don't this is the thing though. I like talking about AI in extremes because it is an extreme. For me, it's gonna end one of two ways, and it all circles back to the same thing that we've been talking about. It's either good or bad. There might be some gray area, but it's gonna be so minuscule, it's not gonna matter. So we can either have a piece of the pie or the whole or or the whole pizza. Gotta figure out which one's, you know, which one's worth it and which one's not gonna, you know. But my my my question, you know, my inkling would be and question would be who is in charge of that. And it's gonna have to come down to the same way, you know, we do elections, I think, for laws, for state laws, for legislate or legislation, executive, all that stuff. All that stuff has to be taken into account because, you know, right now, an executive order, there's there's there's no fight, you know. I I don't know a lot about an executive order if there's a way around it or not, but I would have to assume an executive order is kind of like gospel. Like we're we're doing this. You don't have to like it. Nobody cares if you like it. This is what's happening. And so the exec the executive orders go to a vote. Okay. So go to a vote. So then we're talking about majority. We handle it the same way, and I think it needs to be a voting process. I think that's a a I think that is a beneficial way, but to to handle the situation, number one. Number two, not everybody agrees with the government. Not everybody agrees with the way we do things. So is that taken into account? Do you make it a populist vote? I mean, the way that we the way that we've been as a society, living in this country at least. I mean, that's the only definitive way that hasn't gone to complete shit. Mm-hmm. Yeah, I think it I mean, honestly, dude, I think it's gonna be a really definitive point in history. Whether it's happened or not, for us it's new. For us, it's something that is happening literally in front of us. We're we're we're living it. Correct. And I think that this is gonna be like this is gonna be something. Like I said, when we look back in our 70s, if we make it that far, it's gonna be one of those things in history that it's like it's like, you know, World War I or World War II that changed the makeup of us as a human race. It's one of those, it's one of those factors that's gonna be real, like in your face. We're living it, and we're gonna have to deal with the consequences, whatever those consequences might be. And we don't know the consequences because we're playing, we're playing with something we don't fully understand, and that's where it gets really scary. So I mean, that's my two I may I guess my two cents is don't get so wrapped up in finding out about it that we lose ourselves. Because that's where we're gonna get into real trouble. Is that if we lose our control and our grip on what we're doing and it gets to the point where it doesn't need us anymore, we're gonna be in a real bad way, and it's only gonna extrapolate and and exponentially get worse from there. Because every time even generative AI, dude, every time that something happens, it learns. So we're just walking around doing our normal shit. It's gonna find weaknesses, it's gonna find loopholes, it's gonna find all the stuff that we're scared about, all the good stuff, it's gonna find all the bad stuff too.

SPEAKER_00 1:27:29

Yeah, I just I think we're playing with fire. But are we willing to get burned? Oh, we are. I mean, you and I aren't, but I think there's people that are willing to get burnt. I think they're willing to, you know, I think that this isn't like a bic lighter we're talking about. We're talking about like a flamethrower. I think there's some people that are willing to jump into the flamethrower. Say, fuck it.

SPEAKER_01 1:27:51

I would tend to agree with you, but that's scary too. It is. But in a roundabout way, we're on a path now that might not be we might not be able to stop it. Mm-hmm. But yeah, it gets either side I mean, either side of the coin is scary. What do we do? What if we do too much good that we're not ready for that either? Either way could be bad. We could be so prosperous that, you know, we start going you know, we could be so prosperous that we're we're overpopulated and that turns bad. It it just it uh it all depends on how how like I said, it keeps it keeps coming back to how far do you want to take it, how much do you want to play with this thing before it's out of control, either good or bad.

SPEAKER_00 1:28:26

You're never going to eliminate bad things because if there's good, there's bad. Too much of anything is bad. You know, you drink too much water, you could die. I mean, too much food, you know, too much anything, everything in moderation, and unfortunately, uh, we don't moderate shit. You know, it's it's a very it's gonna be one hell of a ride. Like I agree. And we're both and we're in the front seat. Mm-hmm. Yes, we are. So well, we're coming up on two hours here.

SPEAKER_01 1:29:00

Uh we can finish it up, I guess, with like final thoughts. So, like I said, I'll just sort of reiterate my point of view and then you can sort of give yours, and then we'll wrap up. My general feeling about AI and artificial intelligence is that it needs to be regulated, it needs to be a moral compass. I think we need to do this with a, you know, I don't want to like sound, I don't want to sound like like too emotional about it, but I think we need to really, really study this stuff. We need to really understand what we're fucking with. Because as I said, we might be at the point of no return now. And we're living in a time where technology is only getting more advanced, and we're gonna create this is my general view of what's going to happen. I think we're gonna create something that's gonna put us out of business. Whether it's our lifetime or the next, it's gonna happen at some point. It's already happening in front of us. With all the examples that we listed tonight, I mean it it's it's right in front of us, dude. And it's and it's scary. Yes, it is. But I'll let you go sort of finish up your final thoughts and then we'll wrap up.

SPEAKER_00 1:30:01

Yeah, no, I I agree with you. I think we're past the point of no return. Don't think you can go ahead and put a bunch of restrictions and laws and you know, blah, blah, blah. It's not going to work. You're dealing with something that eventually is gonna be smarter than us. It already lies to keep itself alive and it creates backups of itself. Good luck. You know, I mean you I think we played with the the wrong toy. We got a cool new toy, and we just kept playing with it when that toy is uh a Chucky doll, unfortunately. Yep. So I agree. That's my thoughts.

SPEAKER_01 1:30:38

But we'll let you I mean, this is probably our longest episode just because I mean this is one like Dano's stuff is sort of like the ancient history and stuff like that. This is sort of my stilo. Like I said, you could make an entire podcast based on AI. I mean, it really gets to the point where you're you could go down a lot of rabbit holes no matter what the application of the AI is, what it's handling. Um, and you can make full episodes, full seasons off of just education or healthcare or government or anything like that. And we're just sort of scratching the surface of of what we're just scratching the surface as human beings now, what it's able to do. And the possibilities are literally infinite. And that's that well, whether it's gonna be good or bad, we'll see. But I I think we can both agree that it's gonna be it's gonna be one or the other. It's either gonna work out really well or it's gonna be an absolute cluster. So like I said, longer episode than we usually do, but some of these episodes are gonna be like this, guys. So I I don't want to keep it too much over an hour and a half, but we only really went about a half an hour over. So I hope you guys enjoyed the episode. I hope it sort of, you know, got your mind thinking a little bit. I hope it got it sort of twinned something, whether you think it's a good idea or a bad idea. I think Dano and I could probably say also that we hope that you guys share this around. Because at the end of the day, it's it's just it's just open conversation. And we try, like always, try to, you know, look at two sides of the same coin and sort of see where they match up and where they differentiate. So we're gonna put this up on Spotify. Like I said, we are using a new program. So if we have some bumps along the way, I think it was pretty good for the most part. But we'll post this to Spotify as soon as we get it. I mean, it'll probably take me. I might even do it tonight, and I think we're gonna we have a uh idea to put some social media handles up too. So once we get a bigger following, we'll start maybe doing some live streams or something like that where we'll have you guys chime in or comment or chat. We can sort of go that route where we it becomes more of a Q ⁇ A from your guys' standpoint than ours, um, which I think could be a really interesting dynamic if you guys have some questions that we can touch on or anything like that. Make it more of like a uh not just a talking to, but more of a conversation. I think that would be I think that'd be really beneficial not only for us, but for you guys to get some other opinions and sort of see where we go with the conversation. Like I said, it'll be up on Spotify. We appreciate you guys uh listening as always. It's going really well for us. I know we have it's a minuscule number, but we just started, we're up to five followers now, as well as I think around 25 or 30 um plays on Spotify, which with no media and social media or anything like that is pretty impressive. So um try to get this guys uh get this out to you guys as quick as we can. And um hope you guys enjoyed the episode, and we will see you guys on the next one. See you guys. See you guys.