All-In with Chamath, Jason, Sacks & Friedberg: E124: AutoGPT's massive potential and risk, AI regulation, Bob Lee/SF update

00:00:00 - 00:30:00

* AutoGPT is an AI tool that can take on complicated tasks and recursively update its task list based on what it learns from its own previous prompt. * The tool can be used to plan events, search for venues, create schedules, budgets, and checklists for event planners. * The podcast discusses the rapid advancements in AI and its implications for startups and venture capitalists. * The podcast also touches on the need for regulation in light of these advancements. * The podcast discusses the potential for AI to replace visual effects people in the film industry, and how AI-generated content could be used to create movies and TV shows.

Show more

00:30:00 - 01:00:00

* AI can be used to create multi-dimensional content that can be personalized and enjoyed in different ways. * The need for government oversight of new technologies and the potential pitfalls of regulation. * Regulating software development is a near-impossible task, and creating a new organization like the FDA to oversee the development of AI is necessary. * The potential dangers of unregulated AI models, particularly GPT, and the need for oversight to prevent malicious use. * The need for regulation in the AI industry to prevent potential harm caused by the rapid pace of technological advancement.

Show more

01:00:00 - 01:30:00

* The podcast discusses the potential dangers of AI technology and the need for self-regulation. * The guest proposes a middle ground of self-regulation and thoughtfulness to prevent bad actors from using AI tools for malicious purposes. * The podcast discusses the potential benefits and drawbacks of regulating AI tools and platforms. * The guest argues that self-regulation by major AI platform companies, combined with new AI tools to combat nefarious uses, may be a better approach than immediate regulation. * The podcast discusses the recent crime in San Francisco, the media's portrayal of it, and the role of bias and logic in making assumptions about crimes.

Show more

01:30:00 - 01:33:21

There is no clear central theme or topic discussed in this episode. The hosts talk about various topics, including movies, endangered animals, and fan meetups. The conversation is not focused on any particular subject matter and does not provide any significant insights or takeaways. The episode may be enjoyable for fans of the hosts, but it is not likely to be of interest to those seeking informative or educational content.

Show more

Welcome to episode 124 of the all in podcast. My understanding is there's going to be a bunch of global

fan meetups for episode 125. If you go to Twitter and you search for

all-in fan meetups, you might be able to find the link.

But just to be clear, they're not official all-in. They're fans that's self-organized,

which is pretty mind-blowing, but we can't vouch for any particular organization, right?

Nobody knows what's going to happen at these things. You can get robbed. It could be a setup.

I don't know. But I retweeted it anyway because there are 31 cities where you lunatics are getting

together to celebrate the world's number one business technology podcast.

It is pretty crazy. You know what this reminds me of is in the early 90s,

when Rush Limbaugh became a phenomenon, there used to be these things called rush rooms where

like restaurants and bars would literally broadcast Rush over their speakers during,

I don't know, like for the morning through lunch broadcast, and people would go to these rush rooms

and listen together. What was it like, Sax, when you were about 16, 17 years old at the time?

What was it like when you hosted this? It was a phenomenon, but I mean, it's kind of crazy.

We've got like a phenomenon going here where people are self-organizing.

You've said phenomenon three times. Instead of phenomenon, he said phenomenon.

Phenomenal? Why Sax in a good mooch, Ma? What's going on?

There's a specific secret toe tap that you do under the bathroom stalls when you go to a rush room.

You're already off the rails. I think you're getting confused about a different event you went to.

It's a lot of actual news in the world, and generative AI is taking over the dialogue,

and it's moving at a pace that none of us have ever seen in the technology industry.

I think we'd all agree. The number of companies releasing product,

and the compounding effect of this technology is phenomenal. I think we would all agree.

A product came out this week called AutoGPT, and people are losing their mind over it.

Basically, what this does is it lets different GPTs talk to each other, and so you can have agents

working in the background, and we've talked about this on previous podcasts,

but they could be talking to each other essentially, and then completing tasks

without much intervention. If, let's say, you had a sales team and you said to the sales team,

hey, look for leads that have these characteristics for our sales software,

put them into our database, find out if they're already in the database, alert a sales person to

it, compose a message based on that person's profile on LinkedIn or Twitter or wherever,

and then compose an email, send it to them if they reply, offer them to do a demo,

and then put that demo on the calendar of the sales person, thus limiting a bunch of jobs,

and you could run these, what would essentially be, cron jobs in the background forever,

and they can interact with other LLMs in real time.

Saks, I've just gave but one example here, but when you see this happening,

give us your perspective on what this tipping point means.

Let me take a shot at explaining it in a slightly different way.

Not that your explanation was wrong, but I just think that maybe explain it in terms of

something more tangible. So I had a friend who's a developer who's been playing with AutoGPT,

by the way, so you can see it's on GitHub. It's kind of an open source project. It was sort of

a hobby project. It looks like that somebody put up there. It's been out for about two weeks.

It's already got 45,000 stars on GitHub, which is a huge number.

Explain what GitHub is for the audience. It's just a code repository and you can create

repos of code for open source projects. That's where all the developers check in their code.

For open source projects like this, anyone can go see it and play with it.

It's like Pornhub, but for developers. It would be more like amateur Pornhub because

you're contributing your scenes, as it were, your code. But this thing has a ton of stars,

and apparently just last night, I got another 10,000 stars overnight. This thing is like

exploding in terms of popularity. But anyway, what you do is you give it an assignment,

and what AutoGPT can do that's different is it can string together prompts. If you go to chat

GPT, you prompt it one at a time, and what the human does is you get your answer and then you

think of your next prompt, and then you kind of go from there and you end up in a long conversation

that gets you to where you want to go. The question is, what if the AI could basically

prompt itself, then you've got the basis for autonomy, and that's what this project is designed

to do. What you'll do is, when my friend did it, he said, okay, you're an event planner AI,

and what I would like you to do is plan a trip for me for a wine tasting in Heelsburg this weekend.

I want you to find the best place I should go, and it's got to be kid-friendly. Not everyone's

going to drink, not have kids there, and I'd like to be able to have other people there, and so I'd

like you to plan this for me. What AutoGPT did is it broke that down into a task list, and every

time it completed a task, it would add a new task to the bottom of that list. The output of this

is that it searched a bunch of different wine tasting venues. It found a venue that had a

botchy ball and lawn area for kids. It came up with a schedule. It created a budget. It created

a checklist for an event planner. It did all these things. My friend says he's actually going to book

the venue this weekend and use it. We're going beyond the ability for a human to just prompt

the AI, where now the AI can take on complicated tasks, and again, it can recursively update its

task list based on what it learns from its own previous prompt. What you're seeing now is the

basis for a personal digital assistant. This is really where it's all headed, is that you can

just tell the AI to do something for you pretty complicated, and it will be able to do it. It

will be able to create its own task list and get the job done in quite complicated jobs,

so that's why everyone's losing their shit over this.

Freeberg, your thoughts on automating these tasks and having them run and add tasks to the list.

This does seem like a sort of seminal moment in time that this is actually working.

I think we've been seeing seminal moments over the last couple of weeks and months

kind of continuously. Every time we chat about stuff or every day, there's new releases that

are paradigm shifting and kind of reveal new applications and perhaps concepts structurally

that we didn't really have a good grasp of before some demonstration came across.

ChatGPT was kind of the seed of that and then all of this evolution since has really,

I think, changed the landscape for really how we think about our interaction with the digital world

and where the digital world can go and how it can interact with the physical world. It's just

really profound. One of the interesting aspects that I think I saw with some of the applications

of AutoGPT were these almost like autonomous characters in a game simulation that could

interact with each other or these autonomous characters that would speak back and forth to

one another, where each instance has its own kind of predefined role and then it explores

some set of discovery or application or prompt back and forth with the other agent and that the

kind of recursive outcomes with this agent-to-agent interaction model and perhaps multi-agent

interaction model again reveals an entirely new paradigm for how things can be done,

simulation-wise, discovery-wise, engagement-wise, where each agent can be a different character

in a room and you can almost see how a team might resolve to create a new product collaboratively

by telling each of those agents to have a different character background or different

set of data or a different set of experiences or different set of personality traits and the

evolution of that multi-agent system outputs something that's very novel that perhaps any

of the agents operating independently were not able to kind of reveal themselves. So again,

like another kind of dimension of interaction with these models and it again like every week it's a

whole another layer to the onion, it's super exciting and compelling and the rate of change and the

pace of kind of you know new paths being defined here really I think makes it difficult to catch up

and particularly it highlights why it's going to be so difficult I think for regulators to come in

and try and set a set of standards and a set of rules at this stage because we don't even know

what we have here yet and it's going to be very hard to kind of put the genie back in the box.

Yeah and you're also referring I think to the Stanford and Google paper that was published

this week they did a research paper where they created essentially the Sims if you remember

that video game put a bunch of what you might consider NPCs non-playable characters you know

the merchant or the whoever in a in a video game and they said each of these agents should talk to

each other put them in a simulation one of them decided to have a birthday party they decided

to invite other people and then they have memories and so then over time they would generate responses

like I can't go to your birthday party but happy birthday and then they would follow up with each

player and seemingly emergent behaviors came out of this sort of simulation which of course now

has everybody thinking well of course we as humans and this is simulation theory are living in a

simulation we've all just been put into this. Tramot is what we're experiencing right now

now how impressive this technology is or is it oh wow human cognition maybe we thought was

incredibly special but we can actually simulate a significant portion of what we do as humans so

we're kind of taking the shine off of consciousness. I'm not sure it's that but I would make two

comments I think this is a really important week because it starts to show how fast the recursion

is with AI so in other technologies and in other breakthroughs the recursive iterations took years

right if you think about how long did we wait for from iPhone one to iPhone two it was a year

right we'd waited two years for the app store everything was measured in years maybe things

when they were really really aggressive and really disruptive were measured in months

except now these incredibly innovative breakthroughs are being measured in days

and weeks that's incredibly profound and I think it has some really important implications

to like the three big actors in this play right so it has I think huge implications to these

companies it's not clear to me how you start a company anymore I don't understand why

you would have a 40 or 50 person company to try to get to an MVP I think you can do that

with three or four people and that has huge implications then to the second actor in this

play which are the investors and venture capitalists that typically fund this stuff because all of our

capital allocation models were always around writing 10 and 15 and 20 million dollar checks

and 100 million dollar checks then 500 million dollar checks into these businesses that absorbed

tons of money but the reality is like you know you're looking at things like mid-journey and others

that can scale to enormous size with very little capital many of which can now be bootstrapped

so it takes really really small amounts of money and so I think that's a huge implication so for

me personally I am looking at company formation being done in a totally different way and our

capital allocation model is totally wrong size look fund four for me was one billion dollars

does that make sense nope for the next three or four years no the right number may actually be

50 million dollars invested over the next four years I think the VC job is changing I think

companies startups are changing I want to remind you guys of one quick thing as a tangent I had

this meeting with Andre Carpathy I talked about this on the pod where I said I challenged him I

said listen the real goal should be to go and disrupt existing businesses using these tools

cutting out all the sales and marketing right and just delivering something and I use the example

of Stripe disrupting Stripe by going to market with an equivalent product with one tenth the

number of employees at one tenth the cost what's incredible is that this auto GPT is the answer

to that exact problem why because now if you are a young industrious entrepreneur if you look at any

bloated organization that's building enterprise class software you can string together a bunch of

agents that will auto construct everything you need to build a much much cheaper product that

then you can deploy for other agents to consume so you don't even need a sales team anymore

this is what I mean by this crazy recursion that's possible yeah so I'm really curious to see how

this actually affects like all of this all of these you know singular product companies yeah I mean

it's a continuation Chamath of and then the last thing I just want to say is related to my tweet

I think this is exactly the moment where we now have to have a real conversation about regulation

and I think it has to happen otherwise it's going to be a shit show let's put a pin in that for a

second but I want to get sax's response to some of this so sax we saw this before it used to

take two or three million dollars to commercialize a web based software product app and then it went

down to 500k then 250 I don't know if you saw this story but if you remember the hit game on your

iphone flappy birds flappy birds uh you know was a phenomenon at you know hundreds of millions of

people played this game over some period of time somebody made it by talking to chat gbt4 and mid

journey in an hour so the perfect example and listen it's a game so it's something silly but I was

talking to two developers this weekend and one of them was an okay developer and the other one was

an actual 10x developer who's built you know very significant companies and they were coding together

last week and because of how fast chat gbt and other services were writing code for them he looked

over at her and said you know you're basically a 10x developer now my superpower is gone so

where does this lead you to believe company formation is going to go is this going to be

you know massively deflationary companies like stripe we're going to have a hundred competitors

in a very short period of time or are we just going to go down the long tail of ideas and

solve everything with software how's this going to play out in the in the startup space david sacks

well i think it's true that developers and especially junior developers get a lot more

leverage on their time and so it is going to be easier for small teams to get to an mvp

which is something they always should have done anyway with their seed round you shouldn't have

needed you know 50 developers to build your v1 it should be you know this the founders really

so that that i think is already happening and that trend will continue i think we're still

a ways away from startups being able to replace entire teams of people i just you know i think

right now we're at the phase of this final ways months years decade well it's in the years i think

for sure we don't know how many years and the reason i say that it's just very hard to replace

you know 100 of what any of these particular job functions do 100 of what a sales rep does 100

of what a marketing rep does or even what a coder does so right now i think we're still at the phase

of this where it's a tool that gives a human leverage and i think we're still a ways away

from the you know human being completely out of the loop i think right now i see it mostly as a

force for good as opposed to something that's creating okay a ton of dislocation freedberg

your thoughts if we follow the trend line you know to make that video game that you shared

took probably a few hundred human years then a few dozen human years then you know with other

toolkits coming out maybe a few human months and now this person did it in one human day

using this tooling so if you think about the implication for that i mentioned this probably

last year i really do believe that at some point the whole concept of publishers and publishing

maybe goes away where you know much like we saw so much of the content on the internet today being

user generated you know most of the content is made by individuals posted on youtube or twitter

that's most of what we consume nowadays or instagram or tiktok in terms of video content

we could see the same in terms of software itself where you no longer need a software startup or a

software company to render or generate a set of tools for a particular user but that the user may

be able to define to their agent their ai agent the set of tools that they would individually

like to use or to create for them to do something interesting and so the idea of buying or subscribing

to software or even buying or subscribing to a video game or to a movie or to some other form of

content starts to diminish as the leverage goes up with these tools the accessibility goes up

you no longer need a computer engineering degree or computer science degree to be able to harness

them or use them and individuals may be able to speak in simple and plain english that they would

like a book or a movie that does that looks and feels like the following or a video game

that feels like the following and so when i open up my iphone maybe it's not a screen with dozens

of video games but it's one interface and the interface says what do you feel like playing

today and then i can very clearly and succinctly state what i feel like playing and it can render

that game and render the code render the engine render the graphics and everything on the fly for

me and i can use that and so you know i kind of think about this as being a bit of a leveling up

that the idea that all technology again starts central and moves to kind of the edge of the

network over time that may be what's going on with computer programming itself now

where the toolkit to actually use computers to generate stuff for us is no longer a toolkit

that's harnessed and controlled and utilized by a set of centralized publishers but it becomes

distributed and used to the edge of the network by users like anyone and then the edge of the

network technology can render the software for you and it really creates a profound change in

the entire business landscape of software and the internet and i think it's uh you know it's

it's really like we're just starting to kind of see have our heads unravel around this notion

and we're sort of trying to link it to the old paradigm which is all startups are going to get

cheaper smaller teams but it may be that you don't even need startups for a lot of stuff anymore

you don't even need teams and you don't even need companies to generate and render software to do

stuff for you anymore. Chamath when we look at this it it's kind of a pattern of augmentation

as we've been talking about here we're augmenting human intelligence then replacing this replication

or this automation i guess might be a nice way to say it so it's augmentation then automation

and then perhaps deprecation where do you sit on this it seems like sacks feels it's going to take

years and a free break things say maybe startups and content are over where do you sit on this

augmentation automation deprecation journey we're on i think that humans have judgment and i think

it's going to take decades for agents to replace good judgment i think that's where we have some

defensible ground and i'm going to say something controversial i don't think developers anymore

have good judgment developers get to the answer or they don't get to the answer and that's what

agents have done because the the 10x engineer had better judgment than the 1x engineer

but by making everybody a 10x engineer you're taking judgment away

you're taking code paths that are now obvious and making it available to everybody it's

effectively like what you did in chess an ai created a solver so everybody understood

the most efficient path in every single spot to do the most ev positive thing the most expected

value positive thing coding is very similar that way you can reduce it and view it very very

reductively so there is no differentiation in code and so i think free berg is right so for

example let's say you're going to start a company today why do you even care what database you use

why do you even care which cloud you're built on to free berg's point why do any of these things

matter they don't matter they were decisions that used to matter when people had a job to do

and you paid them for their judgment oh well we think gcp is better for this specific workload

and we think that this database architecture is better for that specific workload and we're

going to run this on aws but that on major and do you think an agent cares if you tell an agent

find me the cheapest way to execute this thing and if it ever gets not you know cheaper to go

someplace else do that for me as well and you know etl all the data and put it in the other thing

and i don't really care so you're saying you will it will swap out stripe for ad yen or it doesn't

for amazon web services it's going to be ruthless it's going to be ruthless and i think that the

point of that that and that's the exact perfect word jason ai is ruthless because it's emotionless it

was not taken to a steak dinner it was not brought to a basketball game it was not sold into a ceo

it's an agent that looked at a bunch of api endpoints figured out how to write code to it

to get done the job at hand that was tasked to it within a budget right the other thing that's

important is these agents execute within budgets so another good example was and this is a much

simpler one but a guy said i would like seven days worth of meals here are my constraints

from a dietary perspective here are also my budgetary constraints and then what this agent did was

figured out how to go and use the instacarp plug-in at the time and then these other things and

execute within the budget how is that different when you're a person that raises five hundred

thousand dollars and says i need a full stack solution that does x y and z for two hundred

thousand dollars it's the exact same problem so i think it's just a matter of time until we start

to cannibalize these extremely expensive ossified large organizations that have relied on a very

complicated go-to-market in sales and marketing motion i don't think you need it anymore in a

world of agents and auto gpt's and i think that to me is quite interesting because a it creates an

obvious set of public company shorts and then b you actually want to arm the rebels and arming

the rebels to use the toby loot key analogy here would mean to seed hundreds of one person teams

hundreds and just say go and build this entire stack all over again using a bunch of agents

yeah i have recursively you'll get to that answer in in less than a year interestingly

when you talk about the emotion of making these decisions if you look at hollywood

i just interviewed on my other podcast the founder of you have another podcast i do it's

cool this big startups thank you send him to success episodes you've been on her four times

please don't give him an excuse to plug it but i said i'm not going to plug this week in startups

available on spotify and itunes and youtube.com slash this weekend runway is the name of this

company i interviewed and what's fascinating about this is he told me on everything everywhere all

at once the award-winning film they had seven visual effects people on it and they were using

his software the late night shows like colbert and stuff like that are using it they are ruthless

in terms of creating crazy visual effects now without and you can do text prompt to get video

output and it is quite reasonable what's coming out of it but you can also train it on existing

data sets so they're going to be able to take something sacks like the simpsons or south park

or star wars or marvel take the entire corpus of the comic books and the movies and the tv shows

and then have people type in have iron man do this have luke skywalker do that and it's going

to output stuff and i said hey when would this reach the the level that the mandalorian tv show

is and he said within two years now he's talking his own book but it's quite possible but that

all these visual effects people from industrial light magic on down are going to be replaced

with directors sacks who are currently using this technology to do what do they call the images like

that go with the script storyboards storyboards thank you they're doing storyboards in this right

now right the difference between the storyboard sacks and the output is closing in the next 30

months i would say right i mean maybe you could speak to a little bit about the pace here because

that is the perfect ruthless example of ruthless ai i mean you could have the entire team at industrial

light magics or pics are the unnecessary this decade well i mean you see a bunch of the pieces

are already there so you have stable diffusion you have the ability to type in the image that you

want and it spits out you know a version of it or 10 different versions of it and you can pick

which one you want to go with you have the ability to create characters you have the ability to create

voices you have the ability to replicate a celebrity voice the only thing that's not there yet as far as

i know is the ability to take static images and string them together into a motion picture but

that seems like it's coming really soon so yeah in theory you should be able to train the model

where you just give it a screenplay and it outputs essentially an animated movie and then

you should be able to fine tune it by choosing the voices that you want and the characters that

you want and you know and that kind of stuff so yeah i think we're close to it now i think that

the question though is you know every nine let's call it a reliability is a big advancement so yeah

it might be easy to get to 90 percent within two years but it might take another two years to go from

90 to 99 percent and then it might take another two years to get to 99.9 and so on and so to

actually get to the point where you're at this stage where you can release a theatrical quality

movie i'm sure it will take a lot longer than two years well but look at this x i'm just going to

show you one image this is the input was aerial drone footage of a mountain range and this is

what it came up with now if you were watching tv in the 80s or 90s on a non-hd tv this would look

indistinguishable from anything you've seen and so this is at a pace that's kind of crazy there's

also opportunity here right freedberg i mean if we were to look at something like the simpsons

which has gone on for 30 years if young people watching the simpsons could create their own

scenarios or with auto gpt imagine you told the simpsons stable diffusion instance read what's

happening in the news have bart simpson respond to it have the south park characters parody

whatever happened in the news today you could have automated real-time episodes of south park

just being published onto some website before you move on did you see the the wonder studio

demo we can pull this one up it's really cool yeah please this is a startup that's using this type

of technology and the way it works is you film a live action scene with a regular actor but then

you can just drag and drop an animated character onto it and it then converts that scene into a

movie with that character like plan of the apes or lord of the rings right yeah so daikis you see

the person who kept winning all the oscars so there it goes after the robot is replaced the human

wow you can imagine like every piece of this just eventually gets swapped out with ai right

like you should be able to tell the ai give me a picture of a human leaving a building like a

victorian era building in new york and certainly can give you a static image of that so it's not

that far to then give you a video of that right and so yeah i think we're we're pretty close for

let's call it hobbyists or amateurs to be able to create pretty nice looking movies using these

types of tools but again i think there's a jump to get to the point where you're just all together

replacing one of the things i'll say on this is we still keep trying to relate it back to the way

media narrative has been explored and written by humans in the past very kind of linear storytelling

you know it's a two hour movie 30 minute tv segment eight minute youtube clip 30 second

instagram clip whatever but one of the enabling capabilities with this set of tools is that

these stories the way that they're rendered and the way that they're explored by individuals

can be fairly dynamic you could watch a movie with the same story all four of us could watch a movie

with the same story but from totally different vantage points and some of us could watch it in

an 18 minute version or a two hour version or a you know three season episode episodic version

where the the way that this opens up the potential for creators and also so now i'm kind of saying

before i was saying hey individuals can make their own movies and videos that's going to be

incredible there's a separate i think creative output here which is the leveling up that happens

with creators that maybe wasn't possible to them before so perhaps a creator writes a short book

a short story and then that short story gets rendered into a system that can allow each one

of us to explore it and enjoy it in different ways and i as the creator can define those different

vantage points i as the creator can say here's a little bit of this fascinating personality

this character trait and so what i can now do as a creator is stuff that i never imagined i could

do before think about old school photographers doing black and white photography with pinhole

cameras and then they come across adobe photoshop what they can do with adobe photoshop was stuff

that they could never conceptualize of in those old days i think what's going to happen for creators

going forward and this is going back to that point that we had last week or two weeks ago

about the guy that was like hey i'm out of a job i actually think that the opportunity for creating

new stuff in new ways is so profoundly expanding that individuals can now write entire universes

that can then be enjoyed by millions of people from completely different lengths and viewpoints and

models they can be interactive they can be static they can be dynamic and that the personalized

personalized but the tooling that you as a creator now have you could choose which characters you

want to define you could choose which content you want to write you could choose which content you

want the ai to fill in for you and say hey create 50 other characters in the village and then when

the viewer reads the book or watches the movie let them explore or have a different interaction

with a set of of those villagers in that village or you could say hey here's the one character

everyone has to meet here's what i want them to say and you can define the dialogue and so the way

the creators can start to kind of harness their creative chops and create new kinds of modalities

for content and for exploration i think is going to be so beautiful and incredible i mean frayberg

yeah you can choose the limits of how much you want the individual to enjoy from your content

versus how narrowly you want to define it and my guess is that the creators that are going to win

are going to be the ones that are going to create more dynamic range and the creative output and

then individuals are going to kind of be stuck they're going to be more into that than they will

with the static everyone watches the same thing over and over so there will be a whole new world

of creators that you know maybe have a different set of tools than just just to build on what you're

saying for your brothers who thinks incredibly insightful just think about the controversy

around two aspects of a franchise like james bond number one who's your favorite bond we grew up

with roger more we lean towards that then we discover strong connery then all of a sudden you see

you know the latest one he's just extraordinary and daniel craig you're like you know what that's

the one that i love most but what if you could take any of the films you could say let me get you

know give me the spy who loved me but put daniel craig in it etc and that would be available to you

and then think about the next controversy which is oh my god does daniel does james bond need to

be a white guy from the uk of course not you can release it around the world and each region could

get their own celebrity their number one celebrity to play the lead and controversy over you know

the old story the epic of gilgamesh right so like that story was retold in dozens of different languages

and it was told through the oral tradition it was like you know spoken by bards around a fire pit

and whatnot and all of those stories were told with different characters and different names and

different experiences some of them were 10 minutes long some of them were multi hour sagas explained

through the story but ultimately the morality of the story the storyline the intentionality of the

original creator of that story yes came through the the bible is another good example of this

where much of the underlying morality and ethics and the bible comes through in different stories

read by different people in different languages every i think that that may be where we go like

my kids want to have a 10 minute bedtime story well let me give them peter pan at 10 minutes

i want to do you know a chapter a night for my older daughter for a week long of peter pan

now i can do that and so the way that i can kind of consume content becomes different

so i guess what i'm saying is there's two aspects to the way that i think the entire content the

realm of content can be rewritten through ai the first is like individual personalized creation

of content where i as a user can render content that of my liking in my interest the second is

that i can engage with content that is being created that is so much more multi-dimensional

than anything we conceive of today where current centralized content creators now have a whole

set of tools now from a business model perspective i don't think that platform publishers are really

the play anymore but i do think that platforms are going to be the play and the platform tooling

that enables the individuals to do this stuff and the platform tooling that enables the content

creators to do this stuff are definitely entirely new industries and models that can

create multi hundred billion dollar outcomes let me hand this off to sax because there has

been the dream for everybody especially in the bay area of a hero coming and saving gotham city

and this has finally been realized david sax i did my own little twitter ai hashtag and i said

uh-huh to twitter ai if only please generate a picture of david sax's batman crouched down on

the peak of the gay bridge the amount of creativity sax that came from this and this is something that

you know if we were talking about just five years ago this would be like a ten thousand dollar image

you could create for you as a birthday these were not these were not professional quote-unquote

artists these were individuals individuals that were able to harness a set of platform tools

to generate this incredible new content and i think it speaks to the opportunity ahead and by the

way we're in inning one right so saxman you see yourself as batman do you ever think you should

take your enormous wealth and resources and put it towards building a cave under your

mansion that lets you out underneath the golden gate bridge and you could go fight crime so good

sax do you want to go fight this crime in gotham i think in san francisco has a lot of gotham

like qualities i think the villains are more real than the heroes unfortunately we don't have a lot of

heroes but yeah we got a lot of jokers we got a lot of jokers yeah that's a whole separate topic i'm

sure a separate topic we'll get to at some point today you guys are talking about all this stupid

bullshit like there are trillions of dollars of software companies that could get disrupted and

you're talking about making fucking children's books and fat pictures of sax it's so dumb no

no it nobody cares about entertainment anymore because it's so okay so one of the biggest

industries where the money is why don't you teach people where there's going to be actual

economic destruction at a grand scale amazing economic destruction and opportunity you spent

all this time on the most stupidest fucking topics listen it's an illustrative example no it's an

elitist example that you know it's not your list it's batman's not nobody nobody cares about movies

let's bring nobody a loading tweet over everybody about how i mean i think i think us box office is

something like 20 billion a year i remember when like people got to like a hundred billion a year

of payment volume and now it's like hundreds of billions so add in and strike we're going to

process two trillion dollars almost why don't you talk about that disruption you nitty market

size of us median entertainment industry seven hundred seventeen billion okay it's not insignificant

video games are nearly half a trillion a year yeah i mean this is not insignificant but let's pull up

chamat's tweet of course the dictator wants to dictate here all this incredible innovation

is being made and a new hero has been born chamath polyhopitia a tweet that went viral over 1.2 million

views already i'll read your tweet for the audience if you invent a novel drug you need the government

to vet and approve it fda before you can commercialize it if you invent a new mode of air travel you

need the government to vet and improve it faa i'm just going to edit this down a little bit if you

create new security you need the government to vet and approve it sec more generally when you

create things with broad societal impact positive and negative the government creates a layer to

review and approve it a i will need such an oversight body the fda approval process seems

of the most credible and adaptable into a framework to understand how a model behaves and it's

counterfactual our political leaders need to get in front of this sooner rather than later and

create some oversight before the eventual big avoidable mistakes happen and genius are let

out of the bottle chamath you really want the government to come in and then when people build

these tools they have to submit them to the government to approve them that's what you're

saying here and you want that to start now here's the alternative the alternative is going to be

the debacle that we know as section 230 so if you try to write a brittle piece of legislation

or try to use old legislation to deal with something new it's not going to do a good job

because technology advances way too quickly and so if you look at the section 230 example where

have we left ourselves the politicians have a complete inability to pass a new framework to

deal with social media to deal with misinformation and so now we're all kind of guessing what

a bunch of 70 and 80 year old supreme court justices will do in trying to rewrite technology law

when they have to apply on section 230 so the point of that tweet was to lay the alternatives

there is no world in which this will be unregulated and so I think the question to ask ourselves is

do we want a chance for a new body so the FDA is a perfect example why even though the FDA

commissioner is appointed by the president this is a quasi organization it's still arms length away

it has subject matter experts that they hire and they have many pathways to approval some pathways

take days some pathways are months and years some pathways are for breakthrough innovations

some pathways are for devices so they have a broad spectrum of ways of of arbitrating

what can be commercialized and what cannot otherwise my prediction is we will have a very

brittle law that will not work it'll be like the commerce department and the FTC

trying to gerrymander some old piece of legislation and then what will happen is it'll get escalated

to the supreme court and I think they are the last group of people who should be deciding on this

incredibly important topic for society so what I have been advocating our leaders and I will

continue to do so is don't try to ram this into an existing body it is so important it is worth

creating a new organization like the FDA and having a framework that allows you to look at a model

and look at the counterfactual judge how good how important how disruptive it is and then release

it in the wild appropriately otherwise I think you'll have these chaos GPT things scale infinitely

because again as freeberg said in a sec said you're talking about one person that can create this chaos

multiply that by every person that is an anarchist or every person that just wants to sow seeds of

chaos and I think it's going to be all avoidable I think regulating what software people can write

is a near impossible task number one I think you can probably put rules and restrictions around

commerce right that that's certainly feasible in terms of how people can monetize but in terms of

writing and utilizing software it's going to be as challenged as trying to monitor and demand

oversight and regulation around how people write and use tools for for genome and biology

exploration certainly if you want to take a product to market and sell a drug to people that can

influence their body you have to go get that approved but in terms of you know doing your work in a

lab it's very difficult I think the other challenge here is software can be written anywhere

it can be executed anywhere and so if the US does try to regulate or does try to put the

brakes on the development of tools where the US can have kind of a great economic benefit and a

great economic benefit and a great economic interest there will be advances made elsewhere

without a doubt and those markets and those those places will benefit in an extraordinarily out

outpace way as we just mentioned there's such extraordinary kind of economic gain to be realized

here that if we're not if the United States is not leading the world we are going to be

following and we are going to get disrupted we are going to lose an incredible amount of value

and talent and so any attempt at regulation or slowing down or telling people that they cannot

do things when they can easily hop on a plane and go do it elsewhere I think is is fraught with

peril so you don't agree with regulation sacks are you on board with the Chamath plan are you

on board with the free bird I'll say I think I think just like with computer hacking it's

illegal to break into someone else's computer it is illegal to steal someone's personal information

there are laws that are absolutely simple and obvious and you know no nonsense laws those

not illegal to get rid of a hundred thousand jobs by making a piece of software though that's

right and so I think trying to intentionalize how we do things versus intentionalizing the things

that we want to prohibit happening as an outcome we can certainly try and prohibit the things that

we want to happen up as an outcome and pass laws and institute governing bodies with authority to

oversee those laws with respect to things like stealing data but you can jump on a plane and go

do it in Mexico Canada or whatever region you get to sacks where do you stand on this debate

yeah I'm saying like there are ways to protect people there's ways to protect society about

passing laws that make it illegal to do things as the output as the outcome what law do you pass on

chaos gpt explain chaos gpt give an example please yeah do you want to talk about it real quick

it's a recursive agent that basically is trying to destroy itself trying to destroy humanity

yeah but I guess by first becoming all powerful and destroying humanity and then destroying itself

yeah it's a tongue-in-cheek auto gpt but it's not it's not it's not a tongue-in-cheek auto gpt

the guy that created it you know put it out there and said like he's trying to show everyone

to your point what intentionality could arise here which is negative intentionality I think it's

very naive for anybody to think that this is not equivalent to something that could cause harm to

you so for example if the prompt is hey here is a security leak that we figured out in windows and

so why don't you exploit it so look a hacker now has to be very technical today with with these auto

gpt is a hacker does not need to be technical exploit the zero-day exploit in windows hack

into this plane and bring it down okay the gpt will do it so who's going to tell you that those

things are not allowed who's going to actually vet that that wasn't allowed to be released in the

wild so for example if you worked with amazon and google and microsoft and said you're going to have

to run these things in a sandbox and we're going to have to observe the output before we allow it

to run on actual bare metal in the wild again that seems like a reasonable thing and it's

super naive for people to think it's a free market so we should just be able to do what we

want this will end badly quickly and when the first plane goes down and when the first fucking

thing gets blown up all of you guys will be like oh sorry sacks a pretty compelling example here by

chamath somebody puts out into the wild chaos gpt you can go do a google search for it and says

hey what are the vulnerabilities to the electrical grid compile those and automate a series of attacks

and write some code to probe those until we and success in this mission you get a hundred

points and stars every time you do this such a it's such a beautiful example but it's even

more nefarious it is hey this is an enemy that's trying to hack our system so you need to hack

theirs and bring it down you know like you can easily trick these gpt's right yes they have no

judgment they have no judgment and as you said they're ruthless in in getting to the outcome right

so why why do we think all of a sudden this is not going to happen i mean it's literally the

science fiction example you say hey listen make sure no humans get cancer and like okay well the

logical way to make sure no humans get cancer is to kill all the humans but chamath can you just

address the point so what do you think you're regulating are you regulating the code that

here's what i'm saying if you look at the fda no you're allowed to make any chemical drug you want

but if you want to commercialize it you need to run a series of trials with highly qualified

measurable data and you submit it to like-minded experts that are trained as you are to evaluate

the viability of that and there are pathways that allow you to get that done in days under

emergency use and then there are pathways that can take years depending on how gargantuan the

task is at hand and all i'm suggesting is having some amount of oversight is not bad in this specific

example i get what you're saying but i'm asking tactically how what are you overseeing you're

overseeing chat gpt you're overseeing the model you're doing exactly what happens okay look i used

to run the facebook platform we used to create sandboxes if you submit code to us you would we

would run it in the sandbox we would observe it we would figure out what it was trying to do and we

would tell you this is allowed to run in the wild there's a version of that that apple does when

you submit an app for review and approval google does it as well in this case all the bare metal

providers all the people that provide gpu's will be forced by the government in my opinion to implement

something and all i'm suggesting is that it should be a new kind of body that essentially

observes that has phds that has people who are trained in this stuff to develop the kind of

testing and the output that you need to figure out whether it should even be allowed to run in

the wild on bare metal sorry but you're saying that the mod the model sorry i'm just trying to

understand shaman's points you're saying that the models need to be reviewed by this body and those

models if they're run on a third party set of servers if they're running in the wild right so

outside of your computer on the open internet you cannot run an app on your computer you know that

right it needs to be connected to the internet right like if you wanted to run an auto gpt it

actually crawls the internet it actually touches other apis it tries to then basically send a push

request sees what it gets back parses the json figures out what it needs to do all of that is

allowed because it's hosted by somebody right that code is running not locally but so the host

becomes sure if you want to run it locally you can do whatever you want to do but evil agents

are going to do that right so if i'm an evil agent i'm not going to go use aws to run my evil

agent i'm going to set up a bunch of servers and connect to the internet how i could use vpns i

the internet is open there's open talking about people who are in another rogue country they can

do whatever i think that what you're going to see is that if you for example try to vpn and run it out

of like to jikistan back to the united states it's not going to take years for us to figure out that

we need to ip block rando shit coming in push and pull requests from all kinds of ip's that we don't

trust anymore because we don't now trust the regulatory oversight that they have for code

that's running from those ip's that are not us domesticated let me steal man chumat's position

for a second jason hold on i think the ultimate if what chumat is saying is the point of view

of congress and if chumat has this point of view then there will certainly be people in congress

that will adopt this point of view the only way to ultimately do that degree of regulation and

restriction is going to be to restrict the open internet it is going to be to have monitoring

and firewall safety protocols across the open internet because you can have a set of models

running on any set of servers sitting in any physical location and as long as they can move

data packets around they're going to be able to get up to their nefarious activities uh let me

still man that for you freberg i think yes you're correct the internet has existed in a very open

way but there are organizations and there are places like the national highway traffic safety

administration if i were to steal man chumat's position if you want to manufacture a car and

you want to make one in your backyard and put it on your track and on your land up in napas

somewhere and you don't want to have brakes on the car and you don't want to have you know a speed

limiter or airbags or seatbelts and you want to drive on the hood of the car you can do that but

once you want it to go on the open road the open internet you need to get you need to submit it for

some safety standards like n h t s a like tesla has to afford has to so sacks where do you sit on

this or is let's assume that people are going to do very bad things with very powerful models that

are becoming available amazon today said they'll be switched around they're going to put a bunch of

llms and other models available on aws bloomberg's llm facebook's google barred and of course chat

gpt open ai and bing all this stuff's available to have access to that do you need to have some

regulation of who has access to those at scale powerful tools should there be some fda or n htsa

i don't think we know how to regulate it yet i think it's too early and i think the harms that

we're speculating about we're making the ai more powerful than it is and i believe it will be that

powerful but i think that it's premature to be talking about regulating something that doesn't

really exist yet take the the chaos gpt scenario the way that would play out would be you've got

some future incarnation of auto gpt and somebody says okay auto gpt i want you to be you know wmd

ai and figure out how to cause like a mass destruction event you know and then it creates

like a planning checklist and that kind of stuff so that's basically the the type of

scenario we're we're talking about we're not anywhere close to that yet i mean the chaos gpt

is kind of a joke it doesn't produce it doesn't produce a checklist i can give an example that

would actually be completely plausible one of the first things on the chaos gpt's checklist was

to stay within the boundaries of the law because it didn't want to get prosecuted got it so the

person who did that had some sort of good intent but i can give you an example right now that could

be done by chat gpt and auto gpt that could take down large swaths of society and cause massive

destruction i'm almost reticent to say it here say it well i'll say it and then maybe we'll have to

delete this but if somebody created this and they said uh figure out a way to compromise as many

powerful peoples and as many systems passwords then go in there and delete all their files

and turn off as many systems as you can chat gpt and auto gpt could very easily

create phishing accounts create billions of websites to create billions of logins have

people log into them get their passwords log into whatever they do and then delete everything in

their accounts which would cause chaos you're right it could be done today i don't think it

could be done today simpler than this how about how about you phishing phishing website yeah pieces

of it can be created today but you're you're accelerating the progress yeah but you can

automate what phishing days 30 days yeah exactly and by the way i'm accelerating it in weeks why

don't you just spoof the bank accounts and just steal the money like that's even simpler like

people will do this stuff because they're trying to do it today holy cow they just have a more

efficient way to solve the problem think about bank accounts so look so number one this is a tool

and if people use a tool in various ways you prosecute them number two the platforms that

are commercializing these tools do have trust and safety teams now in the past trust and safety

has been a euphemism for censorship which it shouldn't be but you know open ai has a safety

team and they try to detect when people are using their tech in a nefarious way and they

try to prevent it do you trust that game well no not on censorship but i think that they're

probably a million people are using chat you think they're policing it are you willing to

abdicate your or societal responsibility to to open ai to do the trust and what i'm what i'm

saying is i'd like to see how far we get in terms of the system yeah you want to see the

mistakes you want to see where the mistakes are and how bad the mistakes are i'm saying it's

still very early to be imposing regulation we don't even know what to regulate so i think we

have to keep tracking this to develop some understanding of how it might be misused how

the industry is going to develop safety guardrails okay and then you can talk about regulation look

you create some new fda right now okay first of all we know what would happen look at the drug

process as soon as the fda got involved it slowed down massively now it takes years

many years to get a drug approved appropriately so yes but at least with a drug we know what the

gold standard is you run a double blind study to see whether it causes harm or whether it's

beneficial we don't know what that standard is for ai yet we have no idea you can absolutely

want a double blind study in ai what no we don't have somebody review the code you have two instances

in a sandbox use the code to do what no sax listen let me finish my point auto gpt it's benign i mean

my friend used it to book a wine tasting so who's going to review that code and then speculate

say oh well 99.9% of cases it's perfectly benevolent and fine and innocuous there's

you know i can fantasize about some cases someone might do how hold on how are you supposed to

resolve that very simple there are two types of regulation that are concurring in any industry

you can do what the movie industry did which is they self-regulate and they came up with

their own rating system or you can do what happens with the fda and what happens with cars which is

an external government-based body i think now is the time for self-regulation so that we avoid

the massive heavy hand of government having to come in here but these tools can be used today

to create massive harm they're moving at a pace we just said in the first half of the show that

none of us have ever seen every 48 hours something drops that is mind-blowing that's never happened

before and you can take these tools and in the one example that chmoth and i came up with the top

of our head in 30 seconds you could create phishing sites compromise people's bank accounts take all

the money out delete all the files and cause chaos on a scale that has never been possible by a series

of russian hackers or chinese hackers working in a boiler room this can scale and that is the

the fundamental difference here and i didn't think i would be sitting here steel manning

chmoth's argument i think humans have a horrible ability to compound i think people do not understand

compound interest and this is a perfect example where when you start to compound technology at the

rate of 24 hours or 48 hours which we've never really had to acknowledge most people's brains

break and they don't understand what six months from now looks like and six months from now when

you're compounding at 48 or 72 hours is like 10 to 12 years in other technology solutions this is

compounding this is this is different because of the compounding i agree with that the pace of

evolution is very fast we are on a bullet train to something and we don't know exactly what it is

and that's disconcerting however let me tell you what would happen if we create a new regulatory

body like the fda to regulate this they would have no idea how to arbitrate whether a technology

should be approved or not development will basically slow to a crawl just like drug development

there is no double blind standard i agree what self-regulation can we do what soft regulation

can we do there is no double blind standard in ai that everyone can agree on right now to know

whether something should be approved and what's going to happen is the thing that's made software

development so magical and allowed all this innovation over the last 25 years is permissionless

innovation any developer any dropout from a university can go create their own project

which turns into a company and that is what has driven all the innovation progress in our economy

over the last 25 years so you're going to replace permissionless innovation with going to washington

to go through some approval process and it will be the politically connected it'll be the big

donors who get their projects approved and the next mark zuckerberg who's trying to do his little

project in a dormant somewhere will not know how to do that will not know how to compete

in that highly political process i think you're mixing a bunch of things together so first of all

permissionless innovation happens today in biotech as well it's just that it's what jason

said when you want to put it on the rails of society and make it available to everybody

you you actually have to go and do something substantive in the negotiation of these drug

approvals it's not some standardized thing you actually sit with the fda and you have to decide

what are our endpoints what is the mechanism of action and how will we measure the efficacy of this

thing the idea that you can't do this today and ai is laughable yes you can and i think that smart

people so for example if you pit deep minds team versus open ai's team to both agree that a model

is good and correct i bet you they would find a systematic way to test that it's fine i just want

to point out okay so basically in order to do what you're saying okay this entrepreneur who just

dropped out of college to do their project they're gonna have to learn how to go sit with regulators

have a conversation with them go through some complicated approval process and you're trying

to say that that won't turn into a game of political connections of course it will of course it will

of course it will but there is a step between it which is self regulation yeah well let's get to

that hold on a second and let's look at the drug approval process if you want to create a drug company

you need to raise hundreds of millions of dollars it's incredibly expensive it's incredibly capital

intensive there is no drug company that is two guys in their garage like many of the biggest

companies like many of the biggest companies this local valley started that is because you're talking

about taking a chemical or biological compound and an injecting into some hundreds or thousands of

people who are both racially gender-based age-based highly stratified all around the world or at a

minimum all around the country you're not talking about that here David I think that you could have

a much simpler and cheaper way where you have a version of the internet that's running in a

huge sandbox someplace that's closed off from the rest of the internet and another version of the

internet that's closed off from everything else as well and you can run on a parallel path as it is

with this agent and you can easily in my opinion actually figure out whether this agent is good

or bad and you can probably do it in weeks so I actually think the approvals are actually not that

complicated and the reason to do it here is because I get that it may cause a little bit more friction

for some of these mom and pops but if you think about what's the societal and consequences of

letting the worst case outcomes happen the AGI type outcomes happen I think those are so bad

they're worth slowing some folks down and I think like just because you want to you know buy

groceries for a hundred dollars you should be able to do it I get it but if people don't realize

and connect the dots between that and bringing airplanes down then that's because they don't

understand what this is capable of I'm not saying we're never going to need regulation

what I'm saying is it's way too early we don't even know what we're relating we don't know what

the standard would be and what we will do by racing to create a new FDA is destroying American

innovation in the sector and other countries will not slow down they will beat us to the puncher

got it I think there's a middle ground here of self-regulation and thoughtfulness on the part of

the people who are providing these tools at scale to give just but one example here and this tweet

is from five minutes ago so to look at the pace of this five minutes ago this tweet came out

a developer who's an AI developer says AI agents continue to amaze my GPT for coding

assist and learn how to build apps with authenticated users that can build and design a web app

create a backend handle off logins upload code to github and deploy he literally while we were

talking is deploying websites now if this website was a phishing app or the one that

Chamath is talking about he could make a gazillion different versions of bank and of America

Wells Fargo etc then find everybody on the internet's email then start sending different

spoofing emails determine which spoofing emails work iterate on those and create a global financial

collapse now this sounds insane but it's happening right now people get hacked every day at one two

three percent sacks fraud is occurring right now in the low single digit percentages identity

theft is happening in the low single identity percentages this technology is moving so fast

that bad actors could 10x that relatively easy and so if 10 percent of us want to be hacked and

have our credit cards hacked this could create chaos i think self-regulation is the solution

i'm the one who brought up self-regulation what i said i brought it up first i brought it up first

i get credit no good i'm not sorry about credit i'm no self-regulation i never got to finish my

point about it because you interrupt but you talked for eight minutes so if you have a point

to make you should have got in the eight minutes oh my god you guys kept interrupting me go ahead

what i said is that there are trust and safety teams at these big ai companies these big foundation

model companies like open ai like i said in the past trust and safety has been a euphemism for

censorship and that's why people don't trust it but i think it would be appropriate for these

platform companies to apply some guardrails on how their tools can be used and based on everything

i know they're doing that so you guys just released websites to the open web with chat gp4 and he's

going to have it do it automated you're basically postulating capabilities that don't yet exist

i just tweeted the guy he's doing it he's got a video of himself doing it on the web what do

you think freberg that's a far cry from basically running like some phishing expedition that's

going to bring down the entire banking system a literally a phishing a phishing site and a site

with oauth are the same thing go ahead freberg i think that that guy is doing something illegal

if he's hacking into computers uh into people's emails and bank accounts that's illegal you're

not allowed to do that and so that action breaks the law that person can be prosecuted for doing

that the tooling that one might use to do that can be used in a lot of different ways just like you

could use microsoft word to forge letters just like you could use microsoft excel to create

fraudulent financial statements i think that the application of a platform technology needs to be

distinguished from the technology itself and while we all feel extraordinarily fearful because the

unbelievable leverage that these ai tools provide again i'll remind you that this chat gpt4 or this

gpt4 model by some estimates is call it a few terabytes you could store it on a hard drive

or you could store it on your iphone and you could then go run it on any set of servers

that you could go set up physically anywhere so you know it's a little bit naive to say we can go

ahead and you know regulate platforms and we can go regulate the tools certainly we should

continue to enforce and protect ourselves against nefarious actors using you know new tools in

inappropriate and illegal ways you know i also think that there's a moment here that we should all

kind of observe just how quickly we want to shut things down when you know they take away what feels

like the the control that we all have from one day to the next and you know that the the real

kind of sense of fear that seems to be quite contagious for a large number of people that have

significant assets or significant things to lose is that you know tooling that's that's you know

creating entirely newly disruptive systems and models for business and and economics

and opportunity for so many needs to be regulated away to minimize you know what we claim to be

some potential downside when we already have laws that protect us on the other side so you know i

just kind of want to also consider that this set of tools creates extraordinary opportunity we gave

one sort of simple example about the opportunity for creators but we talked about how new business

models new businesses can be started with one or two people you know entirely new tools can be built

with a handful of people entirely new businesses this is an incredible economic opportunity and

again if the u.s tries to regulate it or the u.s tries to come in and stop the application of models

in general or regulate models in general you're certainly going to see those models of continue

to evolve and continue to be utilized in very powerful ways they're going to be advantageous

to places outside the u.s there's over 180 countries on earth they're not all going to regulate

together it's been hard enough to get any sort of coordination around financial systems to get

coordination around climate change to get coordination around anything on a global basis

to try and get coordination around the software models that are being developed i think is is

pretty naive you don't want to have a global organization i think you need to have a domestic

organization that protects us and i think europe will have their own they again fda versus emma

canada has its own japan has its own china has its own and they they have a lot of overlap and a

lot of commonality in the guardrails they use and i think that's what's going to happen here this

will be beneficial only for political insiders who will basically be able to get their projects and

their apps approved with a huge deadweight loss for the system because innovation will completely

slow down but let me build on freeberg's point which is that we have to remember that ai won't

just be used by nefarious actors it'll be used by positive actors so there will be new tools that

law enforcement will be able to use and if somebody's creating phishing sites at scale they're going

to be probably pretty easy for you know law enforcement ai's to detect so let's not forget

that there'll be co-pilots written for our law enforcement authorities they'll be able to use

that to basically detect and fight crime and a really good example this was in the crypto space

we saw this article over the past week that chain analysis has figured out how to basically track

you know elicit bitcoin transactions and there's now a huge number of prosecutions that are happening

of illegal use of bitcoin and if you go back to when bitcoin first took off there was a lot of

conversations around silk road and the only thing that bitcoin was good for was basically

illegal transactions blackmailing drug trafficking and therefore we had to stop bitcoin remember

that was the main argument and the counter argument was that well no bitcoin like any technology

can be used for good or bad however there will be technologies that spring up to combat those

nefarious or illicit use cases and sure enough you had a company like chain analysis come along

and now it's been used by law enforcement to basically crack down on the illicit use of bitcoin

and if anything it's cleaned up the bitcoin community tremendously and I think it's dispelled

this idea that the only thing you'd use bitcoin for is black market transactions quite the contrary

I think you'd be really stupid now to use bitcoin in that way it's actually turned bitcoin is

something of a honeypot now because if you used it for nefarious transactions your transactions

record in the blockchain forever just waiting for chain analysis to find it so again using bitcoin

to do something illegal would be really stupid I think in a similar way you're going to see

self-regulation by these major AI platform companies combined with new tools that are used

new AI tools that spring up to help combat the nefarious uses and until we let those forces play

out I'm not saying regulate never I'm just saying we need to let those forces play out

before we leap to creating some new regulatory body that doesn't even understand what its mandate

admission is supposed to be the bitcoin story is hilarious by the way

unbelievable pretty epic it took years but basically this guy was buying below on silk road

and he deposited his bitcoin and then when he withdrew it he there was a bug that gave him

twice as many bitcoin so he kept creating more accounts putting more money into silk road and

getting more bitcoin out and then years later the authorities figured this out again with you

know chain analysis type things look at james zong over there look at james zong he accused

had a Lamborghini a tesla a lake house and was living his best life apparently when the feds

knocked on his door and found the digital keys to his crypto fortune in a popcorn tin in his

bathroom and in his safe in his basement floor so there you have it well the reason the reason I

posted this was I was like what if this claim that you can have all these anonymous transactions

actually fooled an entire market because it looks like that this anonymity has effectively been

reverse engineered and there's no anonymity at all and so what bitcoin is quickly becoming is like

the most singular honeypot of transactional information that's complete and available in

public and I think what this article talks about is how companies like chain analysis

and others have worked now for years almost a decade with law enforcement to be able to

map all of it and so now every time money goes from one bitcoin wallet to another they effectively

know the sender and the recipient and I just want to make one quick correction here it wasn't

actually exactly popcorn it was Cheetos spicy flavored popcorn and there's the tin of it where

you had a motherboard of a computer that held is a chance that that this project was actually

introduced by the government I mean there's been reports of tour the anonymous or network

that the CIA had their hands all over tour to our if you don't know it which is an anonymous like

multi relay peer-to-peer web browsing system and people believe it's a CIA honeypot an intentional

trap for criminals to get themselves caught up in all right as we wrap here what an amazing

discussion my lord I didn't I never thought I would be I want to say one thing yes we saw that

someone was arrested for the murder of Bob Lee that's what it was about this morning yeah which

turns out that the report of the SFPD's arrest is that it's someone that he knew that also works in

the tech industry someone that I know right so still breaking news yeah yes possibly but I want

to say two things one obviously based on this arrest and the storyline it's quite different

than what we all assumed it to be which was some sort of homeless robbery type moment that

has become all too commonplace in SF it's a commentary for me on two things one

one is how quick we all were to kind of judge and assume that you know a homeless

robber type person would do this in SF which I think speaks to the condition in SF right now

also speaks to our conditioning that that we all kind of lacked or didn't even want to engage in

a conversation that maybe this person was murdered by someone that they knew because we wanted to

kind of very quickly fill our own narrative about how bad SF is and that's just something that I

really felt when I read this this morning I was like man like I didn't even consider the possibility

that this guy was murdered by someone that he knew because I am so enthralled right now by this

narrative that SF is so bad and it must be another data point that validates my point of view on SF

so you know I kind of want to just acknowledge that acknowledge that we all kind of do that right

now but I do think it also does in fact unfortunately speak to how bad things are in SF because we all

are we've all have these experiences of feeling like we're in danger and under threat all the time

we're walking around in SF in so many parts of San Francisco I should say where things feel like

they've gotten really bad I think both things can be true that we can kind of feel biased and

fill our own narrative by kind of latching on to our assumption about what something tells us

but but it also tells us quite a lot about what is going on in SF so I just wanted to make that

point in fairness and I think it's fine for you to make that point I am extremely vigilant on

this program to always say when something is breaking news withhold judgment whether it's

the Trump case or Jesse Smollett or anything in between January 6th let's wait until we get all

the facts and in fact quote from sacks we don't know exactly what happened yet correct literally

sacks started with that yes we do that every fucking time on this program we know when there's

breaking news to withhold judgment but you can also know two things can be true a tolerance for

ambiguity is necessary but I'm saying I didn't even do that I as soon as I heard this I was like

I was like oh I was like that's a fine assumption but you know but David let's say fine assumption

to make that's a fine assumption to make it's a logical assumption listen you make that assumption

for your own protection we got all these reporters who are basically propaganda is trying to claim

that crime is down in San Francisco they're all basically seeking comment from me this morning

sending emails they're trying to dunk on us because we basically talked about the bobbly case in that

way listen we said that we didn't know what happened but if we were to bet at least what I said is

I bet this case it looks like a lot like the Brianna Cupfer case that was logical that's

not conditioning or bias that's logic and you need to look at what else happened that week

okay so just the same week that bobbly was killed let me give you three other examples

of things that happened in Gotham City aka San Francisco so number one former fire commissioner

Don Carmignani was beaten within an inch of his life by a group of homeless addicts in the marina

and one of them was interviewed in terms of why it happened and basically Don came down

from his mother's house and told them to move off his mother's front porch because they were

obstructing her ability to get in and out of her apartment they interpreted that as disrespect

and they beat him with a tire iron or a metal pipe and one of the hoodlums who was involved in

this apparently admitted this yeah play the video somebody over the head like that and attack him

because he was he was disrespectful we who was disrespectful that was a big old kind of bald

haired old man Don Don so he was being disrespectful and then but is that enough to beat him up yeah

sometimes oh my lord I mean so this is case number one and apparently in the reporting on that person

who was just interviewed he's been in the marina kind of terrorizing people maybe not physically but

verbally so you have you know bands of homeless people encamped in front of people's houses

Don Carmignani gets beaten within an inch of his life you then had the case of the Whole Foods store

on Market Street shut down in San Francisco and this was not a case of shoplifting like some of

the other store closings we've seen they said they were closing the store because they could not

protect their employees the bathrooms were filled with needles and pipes that were drug paraphernalia

you had drug addicts going in there using it they were engaging in altercations with store

employees and Whole Foods felt like that to close the store because again they could not protect

their employees third example board of supervisors had to disband their own meeting because their

internet connection got vandalized the fiber for the cable connection to provide their internet

got vandalized to that to basically disband their meeting Aaron Preskin was the one who announced

this and you saw in the response to this yeah my retweeting him went viral there were lots of

people said yeah I've got a small business and the fiber the copper wire whatever was vandalized

and in a lot of cases I think it's basically drug addicts stealing whatever they can they steal

ten dollars of copper wire sell that to get a hit and it causes forty thousand dollars of property

damage here's the insincerity sacks literally the proper response when there's violence in San

Francisco is hey we need to make this place less violent is there a chance that it could be people

who know each other of course that's inherent in any crime that occurs that there'll be time to

investigate it but literally the press is now using this as a moment to say there's no crime in

San Francisco or that we're reacting and like I just have the New York Times email me during the

podcast had their night from the Chronicle San Francisco Chronicle in light of the Bob Lee

killing appearing to be an interpersonal dispute she still doesn't know right we don't have all

the facts with another tech leader do you think the tech community jumped to conclusions why are

so many tech leaders painting San Francisco as a dystopian hellscape with the reality with the

reality is more nuanced I think it's a little typo there well yeah yes I mean it's like of

course the reality is nuanced of course it's a hellscape walk down the street Heather can I

give you a theory please I think it was most evident in the way that Elon dismantled and

manhandled the BBC reporter oh my god that was brutal this is a small microcosm of what I think

media is so I used to think that media had an agenda I actually now think that they

don't particularly have an agenda other than to be relevant because they see waning relevance

and so I think what happens is whenever there are a bunch of articles that tilt a pendulum into a

narrative they all of a sudden become very focused on refuting that narrative and even if it means

they have to lie they'll do it right so you know I think for months and months I think people have

seen that the quality of the discourse on Twitter became better and better Elon was doing a lot

with bots and all of this stuff cleaning it up and this guy had to try to establish the counter

narrative and was willing to lie in order to do it then he was dismantled here you guys I don't

have a bone to pick so much with San Francisco I think I've been relatively silent on this topic

but you guys as residents and former residents I think have a vested interest in the quality of

that city and you guys have been very vocal but I think that you're not the only ones Michelle

Tandler you know Schellenberger there's a bunch of smart thoughtful people who've been beating

this drum Gary Tan and so now I think reporters don't want to write the n-plus first article

saying that San Francisco is a hellscape so they have to take the other side and so now they're

going to go and kick up the counter narrative and they'll probably dismantle the truth and kind of

redirect it in order to do it so I think that what you're seeing is they'll initially tell a story

about what then there's too much of the truth they'll go to the other side because that's the only

way to get clicks and be seen so I think that that's what you guys are a part of right now

they are in the business of protecting the narrative but I do think there's a huge ideological

component to the narrative both in the Elon case where they're trying to claim that there was a huge

rise in hate speech on Twitter the reason they're saying that is because they want Twitter to engage

in more censorship that's the ideological agenda here the agenda is this radical agenda of

decarceration they actually believe that more and more people should be let out of prison and

so therefore they have an incentive to deny the existence of crime in San Francisco and the rise

in crime in San Francisco if you poll most people in San Francisco large majority of San

Francisco believe that crime is on the rise because they can see it they hear it and what I

would say is look I think there's a pyramid of activity a pyramid of criminal or anti-social

behavior in San Francisco that we can all see the base level is you've got a level of chaos on

the streets where you have open-air drug markets people doing drugs sometimes you'll see you know

a person doing something disgusting you know like people defecating on the streets or even worse

then there's like a level up where they're chasing after you or you know harassing you people have

experienced that I've experienced that then there's a level up where there's petty crime your car

gets broken into or something like that then there's the level where you get mugged and then

finally the top of the pyramid is that there's a murder and it's true that most of the time the

issues don't go all the way to the top of the pyramid where someone is murdered okay but that

doesn't mean there's not a vast pyramid underneath that of basically quality of life issues and I

think this term quality of life was originally used as some sort of way to minimize the behavior

that was going on saying that they weren't really crimes we shouldn't worry about them

but if anything what we've seen in San Francisco is that when you ignore quality of life crimes

you will actually see a huge diminishment in what it's like to live in these cities like

quality of life is real and that's the issue and I think what they're trying to do now is that

say that because Bob Lee wasn't the case that we thought it was that that whole pyramid doesn't

exist doesn't exist that pyramid exists we can all experience it oh my god and that's the insincerity

of this it is insincere and the existence of that pyramid that we can see and hear and feel and

experience every day is why we're willing to make a bet we called it a bet that the Bob Lee case was

like the Brianna Kupfer case and in that with a disclaimer with a disclaimer and we always do

a disclaimer here and just to George Hammond from the Financial Times who emailed me here's what he

asked me there's a lot of public attention lately on whether San Francisco status as one of the

top business and technology hubs in the US is at risk in the aftermath of the pandemic duh

obviously it is I wondered if you had a moment to chat about that and whether there is a danger

that negative perceptions about the city will damage its reputation for founders and capital

allocators in the future so essentially the and it says the obviously a lot of potential for hysteria

in this conversation which i'm keen to avoid and it's like hey have you walked down the street and

I asked him have you walked down the street in San Francisco Jason the best response is send him the

thing that sac sent which is the amount of available office space in San Francisco people

companies are voting with their feet so it's already if the quality of life wasn't so poor they

stay this is the essence of gaslighting is what they do is the people who've actually created

the situation in San Francisco with their policies their policies of defunding the police making it

harder for the police to do their job decriminalizing theft under $950 allowing open-air drug markets

the people who have now created that matrix of policies have created the situation

what they then turn around and do is say no the people who are creating the problem

are the ones who are observing this that's all we're doing is observing and complaining about it

and what they try to do is say well no you're you're running down San Francisco we're not the

ones creating the problem we're observing it and just this week another data point is that the

mayor's office said that they were short more than 500 police officers in San Francisco

yeah nobody who who's going to become a police officer here are you crazy well and there's

another article just this week about how there's a lot of speculation rumors are swirling of an

unofficial strike an informal strike by police officers who are normally on the force who are

tired of risking life and limb and then you know they basically risk getting out of physical

altercation with a homeless person they bring them in and then they're just released again

so there's a lot of quiet quitting that's going on in the job it's like this learned helplessness

because why take a risk and then the police commission doesn't have your back it seems like

the only time you have prosecutorial zeal by a lot of these prosecutors is when they can go after

a cop not one of these repeat offenders and you just saw that by the way in LA

oh look motherboard and new york times just emailed and dm'd me and then and then did you

guys say that instead of solving these issues the board of supervisors was dealing with

a wild parrot what was it the meeting that was disbanded they had or yeah they had scheduled

a meeting to vote on whether the wild parrots are the official animal of the city of san francisco

so that was the um the scheduled meeting that got uh disbanded also connect may i just clarify

what you must talk about with the e-lon interview a bbc reporter interviewed elon and said there is

much more race and hate and hate speech in the feeds on twitter and he said can you give me an

example and he said well i don't have an example but people are saying this he said which people

are saying it and the bbc reporter said well just different groups of people are saying it

and you know i've certainly seen he said okay you saw it and for you he goes no i stopped looking

at for you he said so give me one example of hate speech that you've seen in your feed now we

without speaking about any inside information which i do not have much of they've been pretty

deliberate of removing hate speech from places like for you and you know it's a very complicated

issue when you have an open platform but the the people may say a word but it doesn't reach a lot

of people so if you were to say something really nasty it doesn't take a genius to block that and

not have it reach a bunch of people this reporter kept insisting to elon that this was on the rise

with no factual basis for it that other people said it and then he said but i don't look at the

feed he said so you're telling me that there's more hate speech that you've seen but you just admitted

to me that you haven't looked at the for you feed in three months and it was just like this completely

weird thing i just had mother calling a lie he called him in a lie he called him and this is

the thing if you're a journalist just cut it down the middle come with prepared with facts listen stop

taking a position either way i want to connect one dot please which is that he filled in his own

narrative even though the data wasn't necessarily there in the same way that you know we kind of

filled in our narrative about san francisco with the bob lee you know murder being another example

no we put a disclaimer on it we said we didn't hold on a second we said we knew what we didn't

know and furthermore we're taking great pains this week to correct the record and explain what we

now know yeah we're honest he was so hard to be intellectually honest this is just intellectual

honesty honestly you're you're you're going soft you're freeberg you're getting gaslit by all these

people i'm like getting gas up anyone i think the guy the guy totally the guy totally had zero data

by the way when you're a journalist you're supposed to report on data and evidence so he's

certainly you know i think just replace the name bob lee with don karmanyani it's the same story

yeah this is that don don happened to survive guys i love i love you but i got to go goodbye

here's what max well from mother body asks have fun there's been a lot of discussion

about the future of san francisco and the death has quickly become politicized

has that caused any division or disagreement from what you've seen or has that not been the case

the press is gleeful right now they're gleeful like oh my god they're just you know what just

like the right was gleeful with jessie smollett having gotten himself beaten up or you know setting

up his own all right everybody for the sultan of science currently conducting experiments on a beach

to see uh exactly how burned he can get with his spf 200 under an umbrella wearing a sun shirt

and pants freeberg freeberg on the beach where's the same outfit astronauts wear when they do

spacewalks hey stable diffusion make me an image of david freeberg wearing a full body

bathing suit covered in spf 200 under three umbrellas on a sunny beach thank you for the

dictator chamath polyhapitia creating regulations and the regular oh the regulator you can call me

the regulator regulator see you tonight when we'll eat our orchelons what's left of them

the final four or five orchelons in existence otherwise i'm putting you on the b-list today

if you're alive i will be there i'll be there i promise i promise i promise can't wait to be there

and the rain man himself namaste didn't even get to putting ron oh we'll talk about versus

nicky next week oh i think you should ask uh auto gpt how you can eat more endangered animals

have a plan for you yes and then have it go kill those animals give it a little world

put something on the dark web to go kill the remaining rhinos and bring them to chamath's

house for pokernut i don't think rhinos would taste good wasn't that the plava movie it was a

oh did you guys see is cocaine bear out yet no it was a matthew broadrick marlin brando movie

right where they're doing the takeoff on the godfather was the fresh father yeah yeah yeah

it's like a conspiracy to eat uh endangered animals he has the freshman the pressure came out in

1990 yeah marlin brando did it with um matthew broadrick and like bruno kirby they actually

they that was the whole thing no kirby that's a deep hole they were actually uh they were eating

endangered animals what do you what do you think heat too is that going to be good sacks i know

heats one of your favorite films me too my god that's awesome is there a sequel coming

they're gonna do heat too and the novels already come out adam yeah i saw the novel yeah heat's

amazing heat is amazing one of those movies where when it comes on you just can't stop watching

yes okay let's do a heat two screener best bank robbery slash shootout in movie history you know

that is literally the best highest film ever like it's up there with like the joker with reservoir

dogs the the the joker in that batman movie where he robs the bank like i mean what a great scene

all right love you besties and four blah blah blah blah this is gonna be all in podcast 124

if you want to go to the fan meetups and hang out with other stands blah blah blah blah

yeah bye bye we let your winners ride rain man david sacks we open source it to the fans and they've

just gone crazy we should all just get a room and just have one big huge orgy because they're

all just like this like sexual tension that we just need to release somehow

your feet

i'm doing

Machine-generated transcript that may contain inaccuracies.

Keywords

AutoGPT, AI tool, recursive task list, event planning, venue search, schedule creation, budget creation, checklist creation, software's impact on startups, FDA drug approval process, malicious use of AI, trust and safety teams, Bitcoin transactions, media bias, quality of life in San Francisco, Elon Musk interview

People

David Sacks, Friedberg, Chamath Palihapitiya, Jason Calacanis, Andre Carpathy, Bob Lee

Companies

OpenAI

Organizations and Institutions

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), Tesla, FDA, San Francisco Chronicle

References

Warning: Undefined variable $clean_references in /srv/www/podtranscript.com/app/podcast_episode.php on line 376

(0:00) Bestie intros!

(1:49) Understanding AutoGPTs

(23:57) Generative AI's rapid impact on art, images, video, and eventually Hollywood

(37:38) How to regulate AI?

(1:12:35) Bob Lee update, recent SF chaos

Follow the besties:

https://twitter.com/chamath

https://linktr.ee/calacanis

https://twitter.com/DavidSacks

https://twitter.com/friedberg

Follow the pod:

https://twitter.com/theallinpod

https://linktr.ee/allinpodcast

Intro Music Credit:

https://rb.gy/tppkzl

https://twitter.com/yung_spielburg

Intro Video Credit:

https://twitter.com/TheZachEffect

Referenced in the show:

https://www.allinmeetups.io/ep125

https://github.com/Torantulino/Auto-GPT

https://arxiv.org/pdf/2304.03442.pdf

https://twitter.com/chamath/status/1645848531280998400

https://bootcamp.uxdesign.cc/i-made-a-flappy-bird-clone-with-gpt4-and-midjourney-inunder-an-hour-and-you-can-do-it-too-7847bc509431

https://twitter.com/ammaar/status/1645934107304787968

https://runwayml.com/customers/how-director-and-editor-evan-halleck-uses-runway-for-films-music-videos-and-commercials

https://research.runwayml.com/gen2

https://twitter.com/wonderdynamics/status/1633627396971827200

https://twitter.com/DavidShowalter_/status/1645150966511988742

https://twitter.com/aloezeus/status/1645141925157060608

https://the-decoder.com/chaosgpt-is-the-first-public-attempt-to-destroy-humanity-with-ai

https://twitter.com/mckaywrigley/status/1646596881420783619

https://www.wsj.com/articles/bitcoin-blockchain-hacking-arrests-93a4cb29

https://www.kron4.com/news/bay-area/video-shows-ex-sf-fire-commissioner-assaulted-with-pipe-in-marina-district

https://twitter.com/activeasian/status/1644547881519681537

https://www.cnn.com/2023/04/11/business/san-francisco-whole-foods-closure/index.html

https://sfstandard.com/business/downtown-san-francisco-whole-foods-market-closing

https://twitter.com/davidsacks/status/1645969773153636352

https://twitter.com/AaronPeskin/status/1645896541893439489

https://sfchamber.com/citybeat-2022-press-release

https://sf.gov/news/mayor-london-breed-proposes-27-million-funding-address-police-staffing-shortages

https://www.sfchronicle.com/sf/bayarea/heatherknight/article/sf-police-crime-16931399.php