Podcasts about AGS

In her new children's book, “Alpha-gal Gal Takes on the World,” Erin Sherry turns the challenges of AGS into strengths. Instead of focusing on all the things AGS takes away, her main character Alpha-gal Gal gains superhero powers to keep herself safe and educate others. Throughout the book, Erin's superhero shares facts on alpha-gal in a non-fearful way, including important messages on social situations, substitutions, and being prepared for reactions. Tune in to Erin's story to hear about the inspiration behind creating an uplifting and informative picture book for kids of all ages about AGS and food allergies. Follow Erin on social media @alphagalgalPurchase your copy of "Alpha-gal Gal Takes on the World" here on Amazon.

今回のエピソードでは・・・✅ AGS式コンポジットランキング25の紹介✅ リスナーからの質問：スプリントフットボールとは？✅ エンディング：NFFの粋な計らい【参考回】#91 マイク・リーチ監督のレガシー#101 アメフト部さん＆マスター登場！「エアーレイド」プレーブックについて===================================◆⁠ウェイブサイト「Any Given Saturday」⁠アメリカにおいてアマチュアスポーツながら絶大なる人気を誇るカレッジフットボール（大学アメフト）の様々な情報を紹介するサイト。カレッジフットボールを楽しむための基礎知識からシーズン中の試合分析、スコア、ランキングなどの紹介。加えて大学選手がプロ入りするために避けて通れないNFLドラフトの情報も。◆⁠インスタグラム⁠◆⁠フェイスブック⁠◆⁠スタンドFM主にライブ配信形式でカレッジフットボールの事をフリースタイルで話しています。そのアーカイブ音源を試聴していただけます。◆匿名で質問したい方はこちらの⁠Google Forms⁠でどうぞ◆素材提供MaxKoMusic | https://maxkomusic.com/Chosic | https://www.chosic.com/free-music/all/MusMus | https://musmus.main/jp/Pixabay | https://pixabay.com/music/#カレッジフットボール#アメリカンフットボール#アメフト

On this episode, AGS Vice President of Client Delivery Jessi Guenther is joined by client Marc Cochran, Trane Technologies lead of HR operations to discuss how AGS partners closely with industrial companies to support their goals, evaluate their needs for best practices and partner in innovative solutions to provide results. 

One would think that the Trump administration's pullback on enforcement across the federal government would mean fewer clients for attorneys to defend. But that would be overlooking another important law enforcer in our system: state attorneys general. Karl Racine and Jason Downs, both partners at the firm Hogan Lovells, are bolstering their practice specializing in helping clients under scrutiny by state AGs, many of whom are actively trying to fill enforcement gaps left by the federal government. It's an area the two know well, with Racine serving as attorney general in the District of Columbia during Donald Trump's first term and Downs serving as his chief deputy. They spoke to Bloomberg Law reporter Roy Strom on the latest episode of our podcast, On The Merits, about a few of the enforcement areas they've seen state AGs prioritizing: crypto, the environment, consumer financial protection, and especially AI. Do you have feedback on this episode of On The Merits? Give us a call and leave a voicemail at 703-341-3690.

The Dean's List with Host Dean Bowen – A lawsuit brought by 20 AGs from Democrat states has found a judge to block the Department of Education's planned layoffs of half the DOE staff. In the decision to halt the terminations, Judge Myong stated that DOE employees and teachers' unions offered enough supporting documentation to cause the...

Talking spanking and much more with Josephine Drake.

Paul L. Singer, Beth Bolen Chun, Abigail Stempson, Andrea deLorimier Twice a year, state attorneys general consumer protection staff gather to discuss consumer protection issues. Our state attorney general team was at the public sessions, attending and presenting on issues important to AGs. We first heard from NAAG's Todd Leatherman, Director, Center for Consumer Protection, and Brian Kane, Executive Director, as they explained the changes to the format this year resulting from interest from the public. These conferences are now accepting input from the public on panel topics, and NAAG extended the public's attendance from half a day to a full day. As Kane put it, part of the benefits of these conferences is ​“between the panels” allowing people from AG offices and the public to have conversations in person.

The first ever Kilkenny Law Fest took place last weekend. On its bill, a discussion with Superintendent Paul Maher of the Garda Historical Society. Paul did so much in the Decade of Centenaries to involve the force, and it was great to talk to him about the 1925 merging of the Dublin Metropolitan Police and AGS. This discussion takes in early Irish policing, as well as looking at what made Dublin unique in policing.

Welcome to AI Lawyer Talking Tech. This week, we're diving into the accelerating integration of artificial intelligence within the legal field. We've seen comparisons highlighting how generative AI tools can offer faster, more intuitive legal research and produce comprehensive outputs, sometimes even identifying key cases missed by traditional platforms. Yet, alongside this promise, significant challenges persist. Recent cases reveal instances where AI has generated errors, nonexistent quotes, and misstatements of law in court filings, resulting in judicial warnings and even sanctions. This underscores the ethical duties lawyers have to competently use technology and diligently verify AI-generated content, as uncritical reliance risks providing inaccurate advice or misleading the court. Despite these perils, AI adoption is high among professionals, although sometimes involving tools not authorized by their firms. However, the market is also seeing the introduction of specialized legal AI tools designed specifically for legal research, engineered with features aimed at preventing "hallucinations" and providing more reliable results. Join us as we explore these dynamic shifts and how AI is impacting everything from legal research to financial operations and document drafting.My Experience Comparing Lexis and ChatGPT Deep Research20 May 2025My ShingleJudge scolds Tim Burke's lawyer after AI produces error-filled court motion20 May 2025Tampa Bay TimesThe Promise and Perils of Using AI for Legal Research20 May 2025JD SupraTrump's 'Big Beautiful Bill' would create a regulation-free AI hellscape, AGs warn20 May 2025TheRegister.comLawyers for a journalist accused of hacking Fox News blame AI for error-filled legal brief20 May 2025AOL.comLawyers for a journalist accused of hacking Fox News blame AI for error-filled legal brief20 May 2025DNyuzRising risks: navigating the growing landscape of AI litigation in the UK20 May 2025Financier WorldwideVirginia panel aims to put court actions in understandable English20 May 2025Orange County ReviewAt Its Momentum Conference in Dallas, Aderant Launches Next-Gen Cloud Financial Applications Aimed At Transforming Law Firm Operations20 May 2025LawSitesAderant Launches Cloud AR and GL plus Stridyn Analytics and askMADDI20 May 2025Legal Technology InsiderExterro Unveils ExPN to Equip Partners for Growth in the Evolving Data Risk Market20 May 2025ChannelE2E72% of professionals report using AI at work, compared to just 48% in 202420 May 2025IntappBeyond Regulation: What 500 Cases Reveal About the Future of AI in the Courts20 May 2025TechPolicy.press72% Use AI + Half Use Unauthorised Tools...!20 May 2025Artificial LawyerAI Hallucinations in the Courtroom: Lessons from Ko v. Li20 May 2025Hull and Hull LLPCallidus Legal AI Launches Groundbreaking Platform That Redefines Legal…20 May 2025AiThority.comInnovative Computing Systems Unveils Comprehensive Managed IT Solution Tailored for U.S. Law Firms20 May 2025Legal Technology News - Legal IT Professionals | Everything legal technology‘Legal Data Is A Goldmine' – Legatics' Daniel Porus20 May 2025Artificial LawyerY Combinator Joins LI California + Startup Gallery Cohort20 May 2025Artificial LawyerTransatlantic AI Governance – Strategic Implications for U.S. — EU Compliance20 May 2025King & SpaldingAI Watch: Global regulatory tracker - Germany20 May 2025White & CaseThe Implications and Scope of the NAIC Model Bulletin on the Use of AI by Insurers20 May 2025Holland & KnightDiscrimination Lawsuit Over Workday's AI Hiring Tools Can Proceed as Class Action: 6 Things Employers Should Do After Latest Court Decision20 May 2025Fisher & Phillips LLP

This Day in Legal History: Blue Jeans PatentedOn May 20, 1873, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office granted Patent No. 139,121 to Jacob Davis and Levi Strauss for an innovation that would revolutionize American workwear and fashion: the use of copper rivets to reinforce the stress points on men's work pants. Davis, a tailor from Reno, Nevada, originally developed the concept after customers complained about the durability of their trousers. He lacked the funds to file for a patent on his own, so he partnered with Strauss, a San Francisco dry goods merchant who had been supplying him with fabric. The riveted pants were constructed from denim—a sturdy cotton twill that Strauss already sold—which was tough enough for laborers, miners, and cowboys during the American Westward Expansion.The legal protection granted by the patent secured exclusive rights for Strauss and Davis to produce the reinforced trousers, giving them a significant advantage in the market. This protection enabled Levi Strauss & Co. to expand rapidly and establish itself as a dominant force in durable clothing for manual laborers. The patent also illustrates how intellectual property law can incentivize practical innovation by providing a framework for commercial exclusivity.While the original patent expired in 1890, the riveted jean had by then become an entrenched part of American identity. The evolution of the product—from utilitarian workwear to a global fashion staple—highlights how a simple legal instrument can underpin lasting commercial success. The legal recognition of their invention helped formalize what would become a uniquely American contribution to the world's wardrobe. Strauss and Davis's patent remains one of the most iconic examples of how intellectual property law intersects with design, utility, and culture.As federal AI regulation lags, state attorneys general (AGs) are stepping into the void by using existing laws—such as consumer protection, privacy, and anti-discrimination statutes—to govern the use of generative AI technologies. Although only California, Colorado, and Utah have passed AI-specific legislation, AGs across other states are issuing formal guidance and taking enforcement actions to address AI misuse. Key concerns include the use of personal data, deepfakes, fraudulent representations, and algorithmic bias in sectors like hiring, healthcare, and lending.California AG Rob Bonta has warned that AI tools causing misleading or discriminatory outcomes may violate state law, especially in sensitive fields like health and employment. Massachusetts AG Joy Campbell cautioned that misrepresenting AI capabilities or using AI-generated content to deceive consumers could breach the state's Consumer Protection Act. Oregon's guidance focuses on transparency, privacy, and anti-discrimination concerns, requiring consent for data use and allowing opt-outs from significant AI-based decisions. New Jersey's AG launched a Civil Rights and Technology Initiative targeting algorithmic bias, noting that even third-party tools can trigger liability under anti-discrimination laws. Texas AG Ken Paxton reached a settlement with an AI health tech firm over potentially misleading marketing, marking the first known AG enforcement action under consumer protection law involving generative AI.A Reuters column by Ashley Taylor of Clayton Friedman and Gene Fishel of Troutman Pepper Locke LLP emphasizes that companies cannot assume regulatory immunity simply because AI tools are new or complex. Liability can arise from disparate impacts alone, even absent intent to discriminate. Firms must carefully audit their AI systems, clarify marketing claims, and ensure fair and secure implementation across jurisdictions. Given the fragmented legal landscape, businesses should involve legal and technical leadership early in AI deployment to reduce risk exposure.State AGs fill the regulatory voidThe long-running feud between Donald Trump and New York Attorney General Letitia James has escalated sharply with a federal investigation now targeting James herself. Trump, having returned to the White House, now has the Justice Department behind him, while James continues to lead Democratic opposition through lawsuits challenging his policies. Both known for their combative styles, the two have clashed over ideology, politics, and Trump's business practices.The new front in their battle involves allegations that James committed mortgage fraud, based on documents where she allegedly misrepresented her primary residence and misstated details about her Brooklyn property. The Justice Department, acting on a referral from a federal housing agency, is investigating the claims through its offices in Virginia and New York. James's lawyer denies wrongdoing, saying the filings were accurate in context and reflect long-standing property use.James has framed the investigation as retaliation for her successful legal actions against Trump, including a high-profile civil fraud suit that resulted in a $450 million judgment against him for inflating asset values. Trump and his allies have attempted to link James's alleged conduct to the very behavior she prosecuted, suggesting hypocrisy.Despite the legal risks, the public feud may benefit both figures politically. James faces re-election in 2026, and her confrontation with Trump plays well with Democratic voters. For Trump, casting James as a corrupt adversary energizes his base. Their mutual antagonism has become a defining feature of New York's political and legal landscape.Donald Trump and Letitia James Raise Stakes in Bitter Feud - WSJThis week in my column for Bloomberg, I argue that House Republicans' push to repeal major clean energy tax credits from the Inflation Reduction Act is a short-sighted move that prioritizes fiscal optics over long-term national interest. While they claim to be reducing the deficit, the repeal would do little to constrain the $3.7 trillion cost of extending Trump-era tax cuts that largely benefit the wealthy. The energy credits being cut were not handouts but performance-based incentives—rewards for building, hiring, and deploying clean tech—that sparked a manufacturing and jobs boom, particularly in red states like Georgia and Tennessee.Eliminating these credits would introduce severe policy instability, undermining both current and planned investments. Companies made long-term siting and hiring decisions based on stable tax incentives; reversing them now would not only threaten those investments but signal to global capital markets that the U.S. is an unreliable industrial partner. I emphasize that the structure of the law—tying incentives to emissions reductions—was one of its best features, offering predictability that's now at risk.This volatility would be a gift to America's competitors. The EU and China are doubling down on green industrial policy, while the U.S. risks stalling momentum just as it began catching up. Trust in federal policy durability isn't easily regained once lost. The repeal wouldn't just cost jobs or projects—it would damage the credibility of American industrial policy in a global race where we're already behind. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

Pledge allegiance to the flag of The United States Of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Oh, beautiful for spacious skies, for amber waves of grain, for purple purple mountain majesties above the fruit America is back. And welcome back to the program. Please join us in welcoming, attorney general Alan Wilson. Attorney general Wilson, how are you, sir? Wait a minute. There you are. I'm doing well. How are you? I'm doing absolutely fantastic. Boy, I tell you what, you guys have been pretty busy in the AG's office. Is there ever do you guys ever take a break? No. We're always on. You get you're getting your tax dollars out of me, Charlie. Absolutely. You you guys sent me an email, a text about this. I I had no idea. Boy, I tell you what, these these drug traffickers, they're getting really tech savvy out there. There's a Chinese Fentanyl app. It's called WeChat. Yeah. WeChat is basically if if signal and Venmo and Instagram all got put in the blender, and that would be the new app. It's basically a peer to peer app that you can transfer money on and do social media post on. And, basically, Mexican drug cartels and Chinese money launderers and other illicit actors are using it to transfer money and basically launder money for illicit drug trafficking purposes. And it's a Chinese owned app. The Chinese it's a Chinese company. And so this is an app that is being, circ used to circumvent the law. Charlie, you know, president Trump has done an excellent job of shutting down the physical border of this country, but we have a digital border that bad guys are stuck trying to get around right now, and WeChat is one of those digital borders they're using. So, I mean, what would because I know, I'd be you your office and the AG over there, up there in North Carolina, you guys work together. What has been the headway that you've made against people using this app? So we're still in the beginning of this, but, basically, this is a bipartisan effort. Obviously, he's a Democrat. I'm a Republican, but we have a bipartisan letter that he and I led from AGs around the country. Basically, we sent it to WeChat. And, basically, we're asking WeChat, we know that peep that bad guys are using your platform to transfer and launder money. We wanna know what you know and when did you know it, and what are you gonna do about it. And we're waiting on them to respond to us in the next thirty days. Otherwise, we're gonna pursue potential legal courses of action. I can't go into it right now. Right. But this is I mean, the fentanyl crisis in this country is off the charts. President Trump has done an incredible job of shutting down the borders, and we're bailing out all of the water out of the proverbial boat that is America. But there is so much bad stuff that is here. Illegal aliens, drugs, gang members, Mexican cartel trafficking is going on in our state. Enough is enough, and that's why we're going after them. You're exactly right. And that brings up the case of Larisha Thompson murdered by, well, murdered, six illegal aliens, in in, Lancaster. And it's just a horrible case, a horrible story. What can we do about illegal aliens and gang activity here in South Carolina? Well, first off, I've a couple of weeks ago, I was doing a ride along with a law enforcement agency till 01:30 in the morning. They were doing sting operations with illegal aliens that were members of Trende Arago, which is a violent Venezuelan gang. Mhmm. And I was able to watch, you know, law enforcement, you know, do amazing work. When everyone else is sleeping, they were out there as the tip of the spear. What I can tell you about law enforcement right now is we are working to get all of our local sheriffs and police chiefs that can be a member of the two eighty seven g program, which is a federal program that is that allows local law enforcement to basically be deputized ICE officers. Durin ...

OpenAI's recent announcement that its nonprofit would “retain control” of its for-profit business sounds reassuring. But this seemingly major concession, celebrated by so many, is in itself largely meaningless.Litigator Tyler Whitmer is a coauthor of a newly published letter that describes this attempted sleight of hand and directs regulators on how to stop it.As Tyler explains, the plan both before and after this announcement has been to convert OpenAI into a Delaware public benefit corporation (PBC) — and this alone will dramatically weaken the nonprofit's ability to direct the business in pursuit of its charitable purpose: ensuring AGI is safe and “benefits all of humanity.”Right now, the nonprofit directly controls the business. But were OpenAI to become a PBC, the nonprofit, rather than having its “hand on the lever,” would merely contribute to the decision of who does.Why does this matter? Today, if OpenAI's commercial arm were about to release an unhinged AI model that might make money but be bad for humanity, the nonprofit could directly intervene to stop it. In the proposed new structure, it likely couldn't do much at all.But it's even worse than that: even if the nonprofit could select the PBC's directors, those directors would have fundamentally different legal obligations from those of the nonprofit. A PBC director must balance public benefit with the interests of profit-driven shareholders — by default, they cannot legally prioritise public interest over profits, even if they and the controlling shareholder that appointed them want to do so.As Tyler points out, there isn't a single reported case of a shareholder successfully suing to enforce a PBC's public benefit mission in the 10+ years since the Delaware PBC statute was enacted.This extra step from the nonprofit to the PBC would also mean that the attorneys general of California and Delaware — who today are empowered to ensure the nonprofit pursues its mission — would find themselves powerless to act. These are probably not side effects but rather a Trojan horse for-profit investors are trying to slip past regulators.Fortunately this can all be addressed — but it requires either the nonprofit board or the attorneys general of California and Delaware to promptly put their foot down and insist on watertight legal agreements that preserve OpenAI's current governance safeguards and enforcement mechanisms.As Tyler explains, the same arrangements that currently bind the OpenAI business have to be written into a new PBC's certificate of incorporation — something that won't happen by default and that powerful investors have every incentive to resist.Full transcript and links to learn more: https://80k.info/twChapters:Cold open (00:00:00)Who's Tyler Whitmer? (00:01:35)The new plan may be no improvement (00:02:04)The public hasn't even been allowed to know what they are owed (00:06:55)Issues beyond control (00:11:02)The new directors wouldn't have to pursue the current purpose (00:12:06)The nonprofit might not even retain voting control (00:16:58)The attorneys general could lose their enforcement oversight (00:22:11)By default things go badly (00:29:09)How to keep the mission in the restructure (00:32:25)What will become of OpenAI's Charter? (00:37:11)Ways to make things better, and not just avoid them getting worse (00:42:38)How the AGs can avoid being disempowered (00:48:35)Retaining the power to fire the CEO (00:54:49)Will the current board get a financial stake in OpenAI? (00:57:40)Could the AGs insist the current nonprofit agreement be made public? (00:59:15)How OpenAI is valued should be transparent and scrutinised (01:01:00)Investors aren't bad people, but they can't be trusted either (01:06:05)This episode was originally recorded on May 13, 2025.Video editing: Simon Monsour and Luke MonsourAudio engineering: Ben Cordell, Milo McGuire, Simon Monsour, and Dominic ArmstrongMusic: Ben CordellTranscriptions and web: Katy Moore

In this crossover episode of The Consumer Finance Podcast and Regulatory Oversight, Chris Willis, Kim Phan, and Stephen Piepgrass provide insights on a new joint privacy task force among several state AGs, known as the Consortium of Privacy Regulators. The consortium recently outlined goals to share state resources and align enforcement priorities regarding consumer harm and privacy rights. In response to an anticipated shift of regulatory scrutiny from federal agencies to state leaders, this episode focuses on specific steps financial services companies should consider when dealing with consumer privacy, data, complaints, and inquiries to ensure compliance and mitigate potential investigations and enforcement actions.

Buckle up!  This episode is part consumer warning, part investigative rundown, and part Wendy's personal bitch session (you've been warned).After tracking more than 30 companies using fake testimonials, undisclosed paid actors, and shady lead generation tactics, Wendy went full watchdog: reporting them to state AGs, the FTC, and even someone high up at TikTok... only to be met with the bureaucratic equivalent of “meh.”This episode pulls no punches and drops no names (just kidding, we might drop a few). It's a raw look at the mess behind those feel-good ads and a blunt reminder that when it comes to real estate and finance, you can't trust the pitch, especially when it's coming from someone reading a script.Got a question?State laws and regulations may vary.Have a story you would like to share with other sellers or buyers?Hit us up here.

When attorneys general intervene in corporate affairs, it usually means something has gone seriously wrong. In OpenAI's case, it appears to have forced a dramatic reversal of the company's plans to sideline its nonprofit foundation, announced in a blog post that made headlines worldwide.The company's sudden announcement that its nonprofit will “retain control” credits “constructive dialogue” with the attorneys general of California and Delaware — corporate-speak for what was likely a far more consequential confrontation behind closed doors. A confrontation perhaps driven by public pressure from Nobel Prize winners, past OpenAI staff, and community organisations.But whether this change will help depends entirely on the details of implementation — details that remain worryingly vague in the company's announcement.Return guest Rose Chan Loui, nonprofit law expert at UCLA, sees potential in OpenAI's new proposal, but emphasises that “control” must be carefully defined and enforced: “The words are great, but what's going to back that up?” Without explicitly defining the nonprofit's authority over safety decisions, the shift could be largely cosmetic.Links to learn more, video, and full transcript: https://80k.info/rcl4Why have state officials taken such an interest so far? Host Rob Wiblin notes, “OpenAI was proposing that the AGs would no longer have any say over what this super momentous company might end up doing. … It was just crazy how they were suggesting that they would take all of the existing money and then pursue a completely different purpose.”Now that they're in the picture, the AGs have leverage to ensure the nonprofit maintains genuine control over issues of public safety as OpenAI develops increasingly powerful AI.Rob and Rose explain three key areas where the AGs can make a huge difference to whether this plays out in the public's best interest:Ensuring that the contractual agreements giving the nonprofit control over the new Delaware public benefit corporation are watertight, and don't accidentally shut the AGs out of the picture.Insisting that a majority of board members are truly independent by prohibiting indirect as well as direct financial stakes in the business.Insisting that the board is empowered with the money, independent staffing, and access to information which they need to do their jobs.This episode was originally recorded on May 6, 2025.Chapters:Cold open (00:00:00)Rose is back! (00:01:06)The nonprofit will stay 'in control' (00:01:28)Backlash to OpenAI's original plans (00:08:22)The new proposal (00:16:33)Giving up the super-profits (00:20:52)Can the nonprofit maintain control of the company? (00:24:49)Could for profit investors sue if profits aren't prioritised? (00:33:01)The 6 governance safeguards at risk with the restructure (00:34:33)Will the nonprofit's giving just be corporate PR for the for-profit? (00:49:12)Is this good, or not? (00:51:06)Ways this could still go wrong – but reasons for optimism (00:54:19)Video editing: Simon Monsour and Luke MonsourAudio engineering: Ben Cordell, Milo McGuire, Simon Monsour, and Dominic ArmstrongMusic: Ben CordellTranscriptions and web: Katy Moore

On this episode, AGS Vice President of International Markets Simon Bradberry joins fellow AGS thought leader Cat Halliwell, executive director of service excellence to examine how skills-based hiring is misunderstood and improperly implemented. They are sharing insights on how it's not just about skills; it's about getting the work done. 

Much has been made of the hallucinatory qualities of OpenAI's ChatGPT product. But as the Wall Street Journal's resident authority on OpenAI, Keach Hagey notes, perhaps the most hallucinatory feature the $300 billion start-up co-founded by the deadly duo of Sam Altman and Elon Musk is its attempt to be simultaneously a for-profit and non-profit company. As Hagey notes, the double life of this double company reached a surreal climax this week when Altman announced that OpenAI was abandoning its promised for-profit conversion. So what, I asked Hagey, are the implications of this corporate volte-face for investors who have poured billions of real dollars into the non-profit in order to make a profit? Will they be Waiting For Godot to get their returns?As Hagey - whose excellent biography of Altman, The Optimist, is out in a couple of weeks - explains, this might be the story of the hubristic 2020's. She speaks of Altman's astonishingly (even for Silicon Valley) hubris in believing that he can get away with the alchemic conceit of inventing a multi trillion dollar for-profit non-profit company. Yes, you can be half-pregnant, Sam is promising us. But, as she warns, at some point this will be exposed as fantasy. The consequences might not exactly be another Enron or FTX, but it will have ramifications way beyond beyond Silicon Valley. What will happen, for example, if future investors aren't convinced by Altman's fantasy and OpenAI runs out of cash? Hagey suggests that the OpenAI story may ultimately become a political drama in which a MAGA President will be forced to bail out America's leading AI company. It's TikTok in reverse (imagine if Chinese investors try to acquire OpenAI). Rather than the conveniently devilish Elon Musk, my sense is that Sam Altman is auditioning to become the real Jay Gatsby of our roaring twenties. Last month, Keach Hagey told me that Altman's superpower is as a salesman. He can sell anything to anyone, she says. But selling a non-profit to for-profit venture capitalists might even be a bridge too far for Silicon Valley's most hallucinatory optimist. Five Key Takeaways * OpenAI has abandoned plans to convert from a nonprofit to a for-profit structure, with pressure coming from multiple sources including attorneys general of California and Delaware, and possibly influenced by Elon Musk's opposition.* This decision will likely make it more difficult for OpenAI to raise money, as investors typically want control over their investments. Despite this, Sam Altman claims SoftBank will still provide the second $30 billion chunk of funding that was previously contingent on the for-profit conversion.* The nonprofit structure creates inherent tensions within OpenAI's business model. As Hagey notes, "those contradictions are still there" after nearly destroying the company once before during Altman's brief firing.* OpenAI's leadership is trying to position this as a positive change, with plans to capitalize the nonprofit and launch new programs and initiatives. However, Hagey notes this is similar to what Altman did at Y Combinator, which eventually led to tensions there.* The decision is beneficial for competitors like XAI, Anthropic, and others with normal for-profit structures. Hagey suggests the most optimistic outcome would be OpenAI finding a way to IPO before "completely imploding," though how a nonprofit-controlled entity would do this remains unclear.Keach Hagey is a reporter at The Wall Street Journal's Media and Marketing Bureau in New York, where she focuses on the intersection of media and technology. Her stories often explore the relationships between tech platforms like Facebook and Google and the media. She was part of the team that broke the Facebook Files, a series that won a George Polk Award for Business Reporting, a Gerald Loeb Award for Beat Reporting and a Deadline Award for public service. Her investigation into the inner workings of Google's advertising-technology business won recognition from the Society for Advancing Business Editing and Writing (Sabew). Previously, she covered the television industry for the Journal, reporting on large media companies such as 21st Century Fox, Time Warner and Viacom. She led a team that won a Sabew award for coverage of the power struggle inside Viacom. She is the author of “The King of Content: Sumner Redstone's Battle for Viacom, CBS and Everlasting Control of His Media Empire,” published by HarperCollins. Before joining the Journal, Keach covered media for Politico, the National in Abu Dhabi, CBS News and the Village Voice. She has a bachelor's and a master's in English literature from Stanford University. She lives in Irvington, N.Y., with her husband, three daughters and dog.Named as one of the "100 most connected men" by GQ magazine, Andrew Keen is amongst the world's best known broadcasters and commentators. In addition to presenting the daily KEEN ON show, he is the host of the long-running How To Fix Democracy interview series. He is also the author of four prescient books about digital technology: CULT OF THE AMATEUR, DIGITAL VERTIGO, THE INTERNET IS NOT THE ANSWER and HOW TO FIX THE FUTURE. Andrew lives in San Francisco, is married to Cassandra Knight, Google's VP of Litigation & Discovery, and has two grown children. Full TranscriptAndrew Keen: Hello, everybody. It is May the 6th, a Tuesday, 2025. And the tech media is dominated today by OpenAI's plan to convert its for-profit business to a non-profit side. That's how the Financial Times is reporting it. New York Times says that OpenAI, and I'm quoting them, backtracks on plans to drop nonprofit control and the Wall Street Journal, always very authoritative on the tech front, leads with Open AI abandons planned for profit conversion. The Wall Street Journal piece is written by Keach Hagey, who is perhaps America's leading authority on OpenAI. She was on the show a couple of months ago talking about Sam Altman's superpower which is as a salesman. Keach is also the author of an upcoming book. It's out in a couple weeks, "The Optimist: Sam Altman, OpenAI and the Race to Invent the Future." And I'm thrilled that Keach has been remarkably busy today, as you can imagine, found a few minutes to come onto the show. So, Keach, what is Sam selling here? You say he's a salesman. He's always selling something or other. What's the sell here?Keach Hagey: Well, the sell here is that this is not a big deal, right? The sell is that, this thing they've been trying to do for about a year, which is to make their company less weird, it's not gonna work. And as he was talking to the press yesterday, he was trying to suggest that they're still gonna be able to fundraise, that these folks that they promised that if you give us money, we're gonna convert to a for-profit and it's gonna be much more normal investment for you, but they're gonna get that money, which is you know, a pretty tough thing. So that's really, that's what he's selling is that this is not disruptive to the future of OpenAI.Andrew Keen: For people who are just listening, I'm looking at Keach's face, and I'm sensing that she's doing everything she can not to burst out laughing. Is that fair, Keach?Keach Hagey: Well, it'll remain to be seen, but I do think it will make it a lot harder for them to raise money. I mean, even Sam himself said as much during the talk yesterday that, you know, investors would like to be able to have some say over what happens to their money. And if you're controlled by a nonprofit organization, that's really tough. And what they were trying to do was convert to a new world where investors would have a seat at the table, because as we all remember, when Sam got briefly fired almost two years ago. The investors just helplessly sat on the sidelines and didn't have any say in the matter. Microsoft had absolutely no role to play other than kind of cajoling and offering him a job on the sidelines. So if you're gonna try to raise money, you really need to be able to promise some kind of control and that's become a lot harder.Andrew Keen: And the ramifications more broadly on this announcement will extend to Microsoft and Microsoft stock. I think their stock is down today. We'll come to that in a few minutes. Keach, there was an interesting piece in the week, this week on AI hallucinations are getting worse. Of course, OpenAI is the dominant AI company with their ChatGPT. But is this also kind of hallucination? What exactly is going on here? I have to admit, and I always thought, you know, I certainly know more about tech than I do about other subjects, which isn't always saying very much. But I mean, either you're a nonprofit or you're a for-profit, is there some sort of hallucinogenic process going on where Sam is trying to sell us on the idea that OpenAI is simultaneously a for profit and a nonprofit company?Keach Hagey: Well, that's kind of what it is right now. That's what it had sort of been since 2019 or when it spun up this strange structure where it had a for-profit underneath a nonprofit. And what we saw in the firing is that that doesn't hold. There's gonna come a moment when those two worlds are going to collide and it nearly destroyed the company. To be challenging going forward is that that basic destabilization that like unstable structure remains even though now everything is so much bigger there's so much more money coursing through and it's so important for the economy. It's a dangerous position.Andrew Keen: It's not so dangerous, you seem still faintly amused. I have to admit, I'm more than faintly amused, it's not too bothersome for us because we don't have any money in OpenAI. But for SoftBank and the other participants in the recent $40 billion round of investment in OpenAI, this must be, to say the least, rather disconcerting.Keach Hagey: That was one of the biggest surprises from the press conference yesterday. Sam Altman was asked point blank, is SoftBank still going to give you this sort of second chunk, this $30 billion second chunk that was contingent upon being able to convert to a for-profit, and he said, quite simply, yes. Who knows what goes on in behind the scenes? I think we're gonna find out probably a lot more about that. There are many unanswered questions, but it's not great, right? It's definitely not great for investors.Andrew Keen: Well, you have to guess at the very minimum, SoftBank would be demanding better terms. They're not just going to do the same thing. I mean, it suddenly it suddenly gives them an additional ace in their hand in terms of negotiation. I mean this is not some sort of little startup. This is 30 or 40 billion dollars. I mean it's astonishing number. And presumably the non-public conversations are very interesting. I'm sure, Keach, you would like to know what's being said.Keach Hagey: Don't know yet, but I think your analysis is pretty smart on this matter.Andrew Keen: So if you had to guess, Sam is the consummate salesman. What did he tell SoftBank before April to close the round? And what is he telling them now? I mean, how has the message changed?Keach Hagey: One of the things that we see a little bit about this from the messaging that he gave to the world yesterday, which is this is going to be a simpler structure. It is going to be slightly more normal structure. They are changing the structure a little bit. So although the non-profit is going to remain in charge, the thing underneath it, the for-profit, is going change its structure a little bit and become kind of a little more normal. It's not going to have this capped profit thing where, you know, the investors are capped at 100 times what they put in. So parts of it are gonna become more normal. For employees, it's probably gonna be easier for them to get equity and things like that. So I'm sure that that's part of what he's selling, that this new structure is gonna be a little bit better, but it's not gonna be as good as what they were trying to do.Andrew Keen: Can Sam? I mean, clearly he has sold it. I mean as we joked earlier when we talked, Sam could sell ice to the Laplanders or sand to the Saudis. But these people know Sam. It's no secret that he's a remarkable salesman. That means that sometimes you have to think carefully about what he's saying. What's the impact on him? To what extent is this decision one more chip on the Altman brand?Keach Hagey: It's a setback for sure, and it's kind of a win for Elon Musk, his rival.Andrew Keen: Right.Keach Hagey: Elon has been suing him, Elon has been trying to block this very conversion. And in the end, it seems like it was actually the attorneys general of California and Delaware that really put the nail in the coffin here. So there's still a lot to find out about exactly how it all shook out. There were actually huge campaigns as well, like in the streets, billboards, posters. Polls saying, trying to put pressure on the attorney general to block this thing. So it was a broad coalition, I think, that opposed the conversion, and you can even see that a little bit in their speech. But you got to admit that Elon probably looked at this and was happy.Andrew Keen: And I'm sure Elon used his own X platform to promote his own agenda. Is this an example, Keach, in a weird kind of way of the plebiscitary politics now of Silicon Valley is that titans like Altman and Musk are fighting out complex corporate economic battles in the naked public of social media.Keach Hagey: Yes, in the naked public of social media, but what we're also seeing here is that it's sort of, it's become through the apparatus of government. So we're seeing, you know, Elon is in the Doge office and this conversion is really happening in the state AG's houses. So that's what's sort interesting to me is these like private fights have now expanded to fill both state and federal government.Andrew Keen: Last time we talked, I couldn't find the photo, but there was a wonderful photo of, I think it was Larry Ellison and Sam Altman in the Oval Office with Trump. And Ellison looked very excited. He looked extremely old as well. And Altman looked very awkward. And it's surprising to see Altman look awkward because generally he doesn't. Has Trump played a role in this or is he keeping out of it?Keach Hagey: As far as my current reporting right now, we have no reporting that Trump himself was directly involved. I can't go further than that right now.Andrew Keen: Meaning that you know something that you're not willing to ignore.Keach Hagey: Just I hope you keep your subscription to the Wall Street Journal on what role the White House played, I would say. But as far as that awkwardness, I don't know if you noticed that there was a box that day for Masa Yoshison to see.Andrew Keen: Oh yeah, and Son was in the office too, right, that was the third person.Keach Hagey: So it was a box in the podium, which I think contributed to the awkwardness of the day, because he's not a tall man.Andrew Keen: Right. To put it politely. The way that OpenAI spun it, in classic Sam Altman terms, is new funding to build towards AGI. So it's their Altman-esque use of the public to vindicate this new investment, is this just more quote unquote, and this is my word. You don't have to agree with it. Just sales pitch or might even be dishonesty here. I mean, the reality is, is new funding to build towards AGI, which is, artificial general intelligence. It's not new funding, to build toward AGI. It's new funding to build towards OpenAI, there's no public benefit of any of this, is there?Keach Hagey: Well, what they're saying is that the nonprofit will be capitalized and will sort of be hiring up and doing a bunch more things that it wasn't really doing. We'll have programs and initiatives and all of that. Which really, as someone who studied Sam's life, this sounds really a lot like what he did at Y Combinator. When he was head of Y Combinator, he also spun up a nonprofit arm, which is actually what OpenAI grew out of. So I think in Sam's mind, a nonprofit there's a place to go. Sort of hash out your ideas, it's a place to kind of have pet projects grow. That's where he did things like his UBI study. So I can sort of see that once the AGs are like, this is not gonna happen, he's like, great, we'll just make a big nonprofit and I'll get to do all these projects I've always wanted to do.Andrew Keen: Didn't he get thrown out of Y Combinator by Paul Graham for that?Keach Hagey: Yes, a little bit. You know, I would say there's a general mutiny for too much of that kind of stuff. Yeah, it's true. People didn't love it, and they thought that he took his eye off the ball. A little bit because one of those projects became OpenAI, and he became kind of obsessed with it and stopped paying attention. So look, maybe OpenAI will spawn the next thing, right? And he'll get distracted by that and move on.Andrew Keen: No coincidence, of course, that Sam went on to become a CEO of OpenAI. What does it mean for the broader AI ecosystem? I noted earlier you brought up Microsoft. I mean, I think you've already written on this and lots of other people have written about the fact that the relationship between OpenAI and Microsoft has cooled dramatically. As well as between Nadella and Altman. What does this mean for Microsoft? Is it a big deal?Keach Hagey: They have been hashing this out for months. So it is a big deal in that it will change the structure of their most important partner. But even before this, Microsoft and OpenAI were sort of locked in negotiations over how large and how Microsoft's stake in this new OpenAI will be valued. And that still has to be determined, regardless of whether it's a non-profit or a for-profit in charge. And their interests are diverging. So those negotiations are not as warm as they maybe would have been a few years ago.Andrew Keen: It's a form of polyamory, isn't it? Like we have in Silicon Valley, everyone has sex with everybody else, to put it politely.Keach Hagey: Well, OpenAI does have a new partner in Oracle. And I would expect them to have many more in terms of cloud computing partners going forward. It's just too much risk for any one company to build these huge and expensive data centers, not knowing that OpenAI is going to exist in a certain number of years. So they have to diversify.Andrew Keen: Keach, you know, this is amusing and entertaining and Altman is a remarkable individual, able to sell anything to anyone. But at what point are we really on the Titanic here? And there is such a thing as an iceberg, a real thing, whatever Donald Trump or other manufacturers of ontologies might suggest. At some point, this thing is going to end in a massive disaster.Keach Hagey: Are you talking about the Existence Force?Andrew Keen: I'm not talking about the Titanic, I'm talking about OpenAI. I mean, Parmi Olson, who's the other great authority on OpenAI, who won the FT Book of the Year last year, she's been on the show a couple of times, she wrote in Bloomberg that OpenAI can't have its money both ways, and that's what Sam is trying to do. My point is that we can all point out, excuse me, the contradictions and the hypocrisy and all the rest of it. But there are laws of gravity when it comes to economics. And at a certain point, this thing is going to crash, isn't it? I mean, what's the metaphor? Is it Enron? Is it Sam Bankman-Fried? What kind of examples in history do we need to look at to try and figure out what really is going on here?Keach Hagey: That's certainly one possibility, and there are a good number of people who believe that.Andrew Keen: Believe what, Enron or Sam Bankman-Fried?Keach Hagey: Oh, well, the internal tensions cannot hold, right? I don't know if fraud is even necessary so much as just, we've seen it, we've already seen it happen once, right, the company almost completely collapsed one time and those contradictions are still there.Andrew Keen: And when you say it happened, is that when Sam got pushed out or was that another or something else?Keach Hagey: No, no, that's it, because Sam almost got pushed out and then all of the funders would go away. So Sam needs to be there for them to continue raising money in the way that they have been raising money. And that's really going to be the question. How long can that go on? He's a young man, could go on a very long time. But yeah, I think that really will determine whether it's a disaster or not.Andrew Keen: But how long can it go on? I mean, how long could Sam have it both ways? Well, there's a dream. I mean maybe he can close this last round. I mean he's going to need to raise more than $40 billion. This is such a competitive space. Tens of billions of dollars are being invested almost on a monthly basis. So this is not the end of the road, this $40-billion investment.Keach Hagey: Oh, no. And you know, there's talk of IPO at some point, maybe not even that far away. I don't even let me wrap my mind around what it would be for like a nonprofit to have a controlling share at a public company.Andrew Keen: More hallucinations economically, Keach.Keach Hagey: But I mean, IPO is the exit for investors, right? That's the model, that is the Silicon Valley model. So it's going to have to come to that one way or another.Andrew Keen: But how does it work internally? I mean, for the guys, the sales guys, the people who are actually doing the business at OpenAI, they've been pretty successful this year. The numbers are astonishing. But how is this gonna impact if it's a nonprofit? How does this impact the process of selling, of building product, of all the other internal mechanics of this high-priced startup?Keach Hagey: I don't think it will affect it enormously in the short term. It's really just a question of can they continue to raise money for the enormous amount of compute that they need. So so far, he's been able to do that, right? And if that slows up in any way, they're going to be in trouble. Because as Sam has said many times, AI has to be cheap to be actually useful. So in order to, you know, for it to be widespread, for to flow like water, all of those things, it's got to be cheap and that's going to require massive investment in data centers.Andrew Keen: But how, I mean, ultimately people are putting money in so that they get the money back. This is not a nonprofit endeavor to put 40 billion from SoftBank. SoftBank is not in the nonprofit business. So they're gonna need their money back and the only way they generally, in my understanding, getting money back is by going public, especially with these numbers. How can a nonprofit go public?Keach Hagey: It's a great question. That's what I'm just phrasing. I mean, this is, you know, you talk to folks, this is what's like off in the misty distance for them. It's an, it's a fascinating question and one that we're gonna try to answer this week.Andrew Keen: But you look amused. I'm no financial genius. Everyone must be asking the same question.Keach Hagey: Well, the way that they've said it is that the for-profit will be, will have a, the non-profit will control the for profit and be the largest shareholder in it, but the rest of the shares could be held by public markets theoretically. That's a great question though.Andrew Keen: And lawyers all over the world must be wrapping their hands. I mean, in the very best case, it's gonna be lawsuits on this, people suing them up the wazoo.Keach Hagey: It's absolutely true. You should see my inbox right now. It's just like layers, layers, layer.Andrew Keen: Yeah, my wife. My wife is the head of litigation. I don't know if I should be saying this publicly anyway, I am. She's the head of Litigation at Google. And she lost some of her senior people and they all went over to AI. I'm big, I'm betting that they regret going over there can't be much fun being a lawyer at OpenAI.Keach Hagey: I don't know, I think it'd be great fun. I think you'd have like enormous challenges and have lots of billable hours.Andrew Keen: Unless, of course, they're personally being sued.Keach Hagey: Hopefully not. I mean, look, it is a strange and unprecedented situation.Andrew Keen: To what extent is this, if not Shakespearean, could have been written by some Greek dramatist? To what extend is this symbolic of all the hype and salesmanship and dishonesty of Silicon Valley? And in a sense, maybe this is a final scene or a penultimate scene in the Silicon Valley story of doing good for the world. And yet, of course, reaping obscene profit.Keach Hagey: I think it's a little bit about trying to have your cake and eat it too, right? Trying to have the aura of altruism, but also make something and make a lot of money. And what it seems like today is that if you started as a nonprofit, it's like a black hole. You can never get out. There's no way to get out, and that idea was just like maybe one step too clever when they set it up in the beginning, right. It seemed like too good to be true because it was. And it might end up really limiting the growth of the company.Andrew Keen: Is Sam completely in charge here? I mean, a number of the founders have left. Musk, of course, when you and I talked a couple of months ago, OpenAI came out of conversations between Musk and Sam. Is he doing this on his own? Does he have lieutenants, people who he can rely on?Keach Hagey: Yeah, I mean, he does. He has a number of folks that have been there, you know, a long time.Andrew Keen: Who are they? I mean, do we know their names?Keach Hagey: Oh, sure. Yeah. I mean, like Brad Lightcap and Jason Kwon and, you know, just they're they're Greg Brockman, of course, still there. So there are a core group of executives that have that have been there pretty much from the beginning, close to it, that he does trust. But if you're asking, like, is Sam really in control of this whole thing? I believe the answer is yes. Right. He is on the board of this nonprofit, and that nonprofit will choose the board of the for-profit. So as long as that's the case, he's in charge.Andrew Keen: How divided is OpenAI? I mean, one of the things that came out of the big crisis, what was it, 18 months ago when they tried to push him out, was it was clearly a profoundly divided company between those who believed in the nonprofit mission versus the for-profit mission. Are those divisions still as acute within the company itself? It must be growing. I don't know how many thousands of people work.Keach Hagey: It has grown very fast. It is not as acute in my experience. There was a time when it was really sort of a warring of tribes. And after the blip, as they call it, a lot of those more safety focused people, people that subscribe to effective altruism, left or were kind of pushed out. So Sam took over and kind of cleaned house.Andrew Keen: But then aren't those people also very concerned that it appears as if Sam's having his cake and eating it, having it both ways, talking about the company being a non-profit but behaving as if it is a for-profit?Keach Hagey: Oh, yeah, they're very concerned. In fact, a number of them have signed on to this open letter to the attorneys general that dropped, I don't know, a week and a half ago, something like that. You can see a number of former OpenAI employees, whistleblowers and others, saying this very thing, you know, that the AG should block this because it was supposed to be a charitable mission from the beginning. And no amount of fancy footwork is gonna make it okay to toss that overboard.Andrew Keen: And I mean, in the best possible case, can Sam, the one thing I think you and I talked about last time is Sam clearly does, he's not driven by money. There's something else. There's some other demonic force here. Could he theoretically reinvent the company so that it becomes a kind of AI overlord, a nonprofit AI overlord for our 21st century AI age?Keach Hagey: Wow, well I think he sometimes thinks of it as like an AI layer and you know, is this my overlord? Might be, you know.Andrew Keen: As long as it's not made in China, I hope it's made in India or maybe in Detroit or something.Keach Hagey: It's a very old one, so it's OK. But it's really my attention overlord, right? Yeah, so I don't know about the AI overlord part. Although it's interesting, Sam from the very beginning has wanted there to be a democratic process to control what decision, what kind of AI gets built and what are the guardrails for AGI. As long as he's there.Andrew Keen: As long as he's the one determining it, right?Keach Hagey: We talked about it a lot in the very beginning of the company when things were smaller and not so crazy. And what really strikes me is he doesn't really talk about that much anymore. But what we did just see is some advocacy organizations that kind of function in that exact way. They have voters all over the world and they all voted on, hey, we want you guys to go and try to that ended up having this like democratic structure for deciding the future of AI and used it to kind of block what he was trying to do.Andrew Keen: What are the implications for OpenAI's competitors? There's obviously Anthropic. Microsoft, we talked about a little bit, although it's a partner and a competitor simultaneously. And then of course there's Google. I assume this is all good news for the competition. And of course XAI.Keach Hagey: It is good news, especially for a company like XAI. I was just speaking to an XAI investor today who was crowing. Yeah, because those companies don't have this weird structure. Only OpenAI has this strange nonprofit structure. So if you are an investor who wants to have some exposure to AI, it might just not be worth the headache to deal with the uncertainty around the nonprofit, even though OpenAI is like the clear leader. It might be a better bet to invest in Anthropic or XAI or something else that has just a normal for-profit structure.Andrew Keen: Yeah. And it's hard to actually quote unquote out-Trump, Elon Musk on economic subterfuge. But Altman seems to have done that. I mean, Musk, what he folded X into XAI. It was a little bit of controversy, but he seems to got away with it. So there is a deep hostility between these two men, which I'm assuming is being compounded by this process.Keach Hagey: Absolutely. Again, this is a win for Elon. All these legal cases and Elon trying to buy OpenAI. I remember that bid a few months ago where he actually put a number on it. All that was about trying to block the for-profit conversion because he's trying to stop OpenAI and its tracks. He also claims they've abandoned their mission, but it's always important to note that it's coming from a competitor.Andrew Keen: Could that be a way out of this seeming box? Keach, a company like XAI or Microsoft or Google, or that probably wouldn't happen on the antitrust front, would buy OpenAI as maybe a nonprofit and then transform it into a for-profit company?Keach Hagey: Maybe you and Sam should get together and hash that out. That's the kind ofAndrew Keen: Well Sam, I'm available to be hired if you're watching. I'll probably charge less than your current consigliere. What's his name? Who's the consiglieri who's working with him on this?Keach Hagey: You mean Chris Lehane?Andrew Keen: Yes, Chris Lehane, the ego.Keach Hagey: Um,Andrew Keen: How's Lehane holding up in this? Do you think he's getting any sleep?Keach Hagey: Well, he's like a policy guy. I'm sure this has been challenging for everybody. But look, you are pointing to something that I think is real, which is there will probably be consolidation at some point down the line in AI.Andrew Keen: I mean, I know you're not an expert on the maybe sort of corporate legal stuff, but is it in theory possible to buy a nonprofit? I don't even know how you buy a non-profit and then turn it into a for-profit. I mean is that one way out of this, this cul-de-sac?Keach Hagey: I really don't know the answer to that question, to be honest with you. I can't think of another example of it happening. So I'm gonna go with no, but I don't now.Andrew Keen: There are no equivalents, sorry to interrupt, go on.Keach Hagey: No, so I was actually asking a little bit, are there precedents for this? And someone mentioned Blue Cross Blue Shield had gone from being a nonprofit to a for-profit successfully in the past.Andrew Keen: And we seem a little amused by that. I mean, anyone who uses US health care as a model, I think, might regret it. Your book, The Optimist, is out in a couple of weeks. When did you stop writing it?Keach Hagey: The end of December, end of last year, was pencils fully down.Andrew Keen: And I'm sure you told the publisher that that was far too long a window. Seven months on Silicon Valley is like seven centuries.Keach Hagey: It was actually a very, very tight timeline. They turned it around like incredibly fast. Usually it'sAndrew Keen: Remarkable, yeah, exactly. Publishing is such, such, they're such quick actors, aren't they?Keach Hagey: In this case, they actually were, so I'm grateful for that.Andrew Keen: Well, they always say that six months or seven months is fast, but it is actually possible to publish a book in probably a week or two, if you really choose to. But in all seriousness, back to this question, I mean, and I want everyone to read the book. It's a wonderful book and an important book. The best book on OpenAI out. What would you have written differently? Is there an extra chapter on this? I know you warned about a lot of this stuff in the book. So it must make you feel in some ways quite vindicated.Keach Hagey: I mean, you're asking if I'd had a longer deadline, what would I have liked to include? Well, if you're ready.Andrew Keen: Well, if you're writing it now with this news under your belt.Keach Hagey: Absolutely. So, I mean, the thing, two things, I guess, definitely this news about the for-profit conversion failing just shows the limits of Sam's power. So that's pretty interesting, because as the book was closing, we're not really sure what those limits are. And the other one is Trump. So Trump had happened, but we do not yet understand what Trump 2.0 really meant at the time that the book was closing. And at that point, it looked like Sam was in the cold, you know, he wasn't clear how he was going to get inside Trump's inner circle. And then lo and behold, he was there on day one of the Trump administration sharing a podium with him announcing that Stargate AI infrastructure investment. So I'm sad that that didn't make it into the book because it really just shows the kind of remarkable character he is.Andrew Keen: He's their Zelig, but then we all know what happened to Woody Allen in the end. In all seriousness, and it's hard to keep a straight face here, Keach, and you're trying although you're not doing a very good job, what's going to happen? I know it's an easy question to ask and a hard one to answer, but ultimately this thing has to end in catastrophe, doesn't it? I use the analogy of the Titanic. There are real icebergs out there.Keach Hagey: Look, there could be a data breach. I do think that.Andrew Keen: Well, there could be data breaches if it was a non-profit or for-profit, I mean, in terms of this whole issue of trying to have it both ways.Keach Hagey: Look, they might run out of money, right? I mean, that's one very real possibility. They might run outta money and have to be bought by someone, as you said. That is a totally real possibility right now.Andrew Keen: What would happen if they couldn't raise any more money. I mean, what was the last round, the $40 billion round? What was the overall valuation? About $350 billion.Keach Hagey: Yeah, mm-hmm.Andrew Keen: So let's say that they begin to, because they've got, what are their hard costs monthly burn rate? I mean, it's billions of just.Keach Hagey: Well, the issue is that they're spending more than they are making.Andrew Keen: Right, but you're right. So they, let's say in 18 months, they run out of runway. What would people be buying?Keach Hagey: Right, maybe some IP, some servers. And one of the big questions that is yet unanswered in AI is will it ever economically make sense, right? Right now we are all buying the possibility of in the future that the costs will eventually come down and it will kind of be useful, but that's still a promise. And it's possible that that won't ever happen. I mean, all these companies are this way, right. They are spending far, far more than they're making.Andrew Keen: And that's the best case scenario.Keach Hagey: Worst case scenario is the killer robots murder us all.Andrew Keen: No, what I meant in the best case scenario is that people are actually still without all the blow up. I mean, people are actual paying for AI. I mean on the one hand, the OpenAI product is, would you say it's successful, more or less successful than it was when you finished the book in December of last year?Keach Hagey: Oh, yes, much more successful. Vastly more users, and the product is vastly better. I mean, even in my experience, I don't know if you play with it every day.Andrew Keen: I use Anthropic.Keach Hagey: I use both Claude and ChatGPT, and I mean, they're both great. And I find them vastly more useful today than I did even when I was closing the book. So it's great. I don't know if it's really a great business that they're only charging me $20, right? That's great for me, but I don't think it's long term tenable.Andrew Keen: Well, Keach Hagey, your new book, The Optimist, your new old book, The Optimist: Sam Altman, Open AI and the Race to Invent the Future is out in a couple of weeks. I hope you're writing a sequel. Maybe you should make it The Pessimist.Keach Hagey: I think you might be the pessimist, Andrew.Andrew Keen: Well, you're just, you are as pessimistic as me. You just have a nice smile. I mean, in all reality, what's the most optimistic thing that can come out of this?Keach Hagey: The most optimistic is that this becomes a product that is actually useful, but doesn't vastly exacerbate inequality.Andrew Keen: No, I take the point on that, but in terms of this current story of this non-profit versus profit, what's the best case scenario?Keach Hagey: I guess the best case scenario is they find their way to an IPO before completely imploding.Andrew Keen: With the assumption that a non-profit can do an IPO.Keach Hagey: That they find the right lawyers from wherever they are and make it happen.Andrew Keen: Well, AI continues its hallucinations, and they're not in the product themselves. I think they're in their companies. One of the best, if not the best authority, our guide to all these hallucinations in a corporate level is Keach Hagey, her new book, The Optimist: Sam Altman, Open AI and the Race to Invent the Future is out in a couple of weeks. Essential reading for anyone who wants to understand Sam Altman as the consummate salesman. And I think one thing we can say for sure, Keach, is this is not the end of the story. Is that fair?Keach Hagey: Very fair. Not the end of the story. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit keenon.substack.com/subscribe

Paul L. Singer, Beth Bolen Chun, Abigail Stempson, Andrea deLorimier Last week, the Kelley Drye State AG team attended the National Association of Attorneys General (NAAG) Attorney General Symposium. The panels included a number of topics of importance to state attorneys general including cell phone jamming in prisons, social engineering or ​“pig butchering” scams, human trafficking, youth and young adult mental health especially pertaining to student athletes, cannabis legislative trends and enforcement, and disaster preparedness and response. In addition, below we've highlighted some of the other topics discussed by AGs.

The podcast we are releasing today is part 2 of a re-purposed webinar we produced on March 25 titled “The Impact of the Election on the CFPB - Part 4.” As a result of the diminishing impact of the CFPB on enforcing the consumer financial services laws, we expect that void to be filled by state government enforcement agencies and private civil litigation, including class and mass actions.  Our webinar focused on private civil litigation. Our featured guest for this webinar was Ira Rheingold, Executive Director of the National Association of Consumer Advocates. He was joined on the panel by Thomas Burke, Dan McKenna, Jenny Perkins, Joseph Schuster, and Melanie Vartabedian, litigators in our firm's Consumer Financial Services Group. We discussed the following areas where the panelists are predicting an increase in private civil litigation during 2025 and beyond: 1. Solar Litigation Trends (Ira, Melanie). 2. Increased volume of arbitrations and mass arbitrations (Ira, Dan). 3. A general emphasis on “unfair” practices, including a close look at alleged unlawful fees (Ira). 4.  Crypto industry practices -fees, deception and third-party responsibility (Ira). 5.  National Bank Act preemption and DIDMCA opt-out litigation (Joseph). If you missed listening to part 1 of this re-purposed webinar, you can access the podcast in the link to the following blog which appears here. The blog describes the topics we covered. Alan Kaplinsky, the former chair for 25 years and now the Senior Counsel of the Consumer Financial Services Group, hosted the podcast show. For our podcasts repurposed from webinars that we produced as part of our series entitled “The Impact of the Election on the CFPB” Part 1 (regulations and other written guidance), click here and here; Part 2 (supervision and enforcement),  click here and here; Part 3 (state AGs and departments of banking), click here and here. 

Belichick does an interview, Draft Day slides, Texas Sweeps the Ags, Playoffs, and Shannon Sharpe. Support Our Sponsors PrizePicks- Download the app today and use code DIP to get $50 instantly after you play your first $5 lineup! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

If you have attended a male-male spanking event in Southern Califonia in recent years, you most likely already know Scott (HotBotScott). If not, you will definitely know more about him after listening to this episode.

The podcast we are releasing today is part 1 of a re-purposed webinar we produced on March 25 titled “The Impact of the Election on the CFPB - Part 4.” As a result of the diminishing impact of the CFPB on enforcing the consumer financial services laws, we expect that void to be filled by state government enforcement agencies and private civil litigation, including class and mass actions. Our webinar will focus on private civil litigation. Our featured guest for this webinar was Ira Rheingold, Executive Director of the National Association of Consumer Advocates. He was joined on the panel by Thomas Burke, Dan McKenna, Jenny Perkins, Joseph Schuster, and Melanie Vartabedian, litigators in our firm's Consumer Financial Services Group. The podcast began with Ira observing that state enforcement agencies and plaintiffs' class action lawyers will be taking a careful look at enforcement actions voluntarily dismissed by the CFPB to ascertain whether the complaints should be re-filed by them in federal or state court.  We then proceeded to discuss the following areas where the panelists are predicting an increase in private civil litigation during 2025 and beyond: Increased FCRA litigation, especially in ID Theft (Jenny, Ira). The use of AI and corporate responsibility for ensuring that it does not create unfair or discriminatory practices (Ira). Increased retail bank litigation, including EFTA claims (Ira, Tom). Part 2 of this re-purposed webinar will be released next Thursday, May 1. Alan Kaplinsky, the former chair for 25 years and now Senior Counsel of the Consumer Financial Services Group, hosted the podcast show. For our podcasts repurposed from webinars that we produced as part of our series entitled “The Impact of the Election on the CFPB” Part 1 (regulations and other written guidance), click here and here; Part 2 (supervision and enforcement),  click here and here; Part 3 (state AGs and departments of banking), click here and here. 

MSNBC’s Ali Vitali examines the state of democracy and Democratic politics.Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel details how AGs are fighting back against Trump.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

[WEEKEND RECAP 04-19-25] The Secret Service plans to fire DEI-hired agents, but an Obama-appointed judge rules it illegal. Trump then assigns them to protect Clinton, Obama, and Biden, who reject them and demand merit-based male agents.  The agency that silenced many of us here on

Our podcast show being released today is part 2 of a repurposed interactive webinar that we presented on March 24 featuring two of the leading journalists who cover the CFPB - Jon Hill from Law360 and Evan Weinberger from Bloomberg. Our show begins with Tom Burke, a Ballard Spahr consumer financial services litigator, describing in general terms the status of the 38 CFPB enforcement lawsuits that were pending when Rohit Chopra was terminated. The cases fall into four categories: (a) those which have already been voluntarily dismissed with prejudice by the CFPB; (b) those which the CFPB has notified the courts that it intends to continue to prosecute; (c) those in which the CFPB has sought a stay for a period of time in order for it to evaluate whether or not to continue to prosecute them where the stay has been granted by the courts; and (d) those in which the CFPB's motion for a stay has been denied by the courts or not yet acted upon. Alan Kaplinsky then gave a short report describing a number of bills introduced this term related to the CFPB. Alan remarked that the only legislative effort which might bear fruit for the Republicans is to attempt to add to the budget reconciliation bill a provision subjecting the CFPB to funding through Congressional appropriations. Such an effort would need to be approved by the Senate Parliamentarian. Finally, Alan expressed surprise that the Republicans, in seeking to shut down the CFPB, have not relied on the argument that the CFPB has been unlawfully funded by the Federal Reserve Board since September 2022 because there has been no “combined earnings of the Federal Reserve Banks” beginning then through the present. (Dodd-Frank stipulates that the CFPB may be funded only out of such “combined earnings”). For more information about that funding issue, listen to Alan's recent interview of Professor Hal Scott of Harvard Law School who has written prolifically about it. On Monday of this week, Professor Scott published his third op-ed in the Wall Street Journal, in which he concluded: “Since the bureau is operating illegally, the president can halt its work immediately by executive order. The order should declare that all work at the CFPB will stop, that all rules enacted since funding became illegal in September 2022 are void, and that no new rules will be enforced.” Joseph Schuster then briefly described what has been happening at other federal agencies with respect to consumer financial services matters. Joseph and Alan reported on the fact that President Trump recently fired without cause the two Democratic members of the Federal Trade Commission leaving only two Republican members on the Commission. He took that action despite an old Supreme Court case holding that the language in the FTC Act stating that the President may remove an FTC member only for cause does not run afoul of the separation of powers clause in the Constitution.  The two Democratic commissioners have sued the Administration for violating the FTC Act provision, stating that the President may only remove an FTC commissioner for cause. The President had previously fired Democratic members at the Merit Systems Selection Board and National Labor Relations Board. President Trump based his firings on the belief that the Supreme Court will overrule the old Supreme Court case on the basis that the “termination for cause” language in the relevant statutes is unconstitutional. After the recording of this webinar, the DC Circuit Court of Appeals stayed, by a 2-1 vote, a District Court order holding that Trump's firing of the Democratic members of the NLRB and Merit Systems Selection Board was unlawful. That order was subsequently overturned by the court of appeals acting en banc. Subsequently, Chief Justice Roberts stayed that order. In light of these developments, it seems unlikely that the two FTC commissioners will be reinstated, if at all, until the Supreme Court decides the case. Also, after the recording of this webinar, the Senate confirmed a third Republican to be an FTC commissioner. For those of you who want a deeper dive into post-election developments at federal agencies other than the CFPB, please register for our webinar titled “What Is Happening at the Federal Agencies (Other Than the CFPB) That is Relevant to the Consumer Financial Services Industry?” which will occur on May 13, 2025. Joseph then discussed developments at the FDIC where the FDIC withdrew the very controversial brokered deposits proposal, the 2023 corporate governance proposal, the Change-in-Bank- Control Act proposal and the incentive-based compensation proposal. He also reported that the FDIC rescinded its 2024 Statement of Policy on Bank Merger Transactions and delayed the compliance date for certain provisions in the sign and advertising rule.  Joseph then discussed developments at the OCC where it (and the FDIC) announced that it would no longer use “reputation risk” as a basis for evaluating the safety and soundness of state-chartered banks that it supervises. The OCC, also, conditionally approved a charter for a Fintech business model to be a national bank and withdrew statements relating to crypto currency risk. Finally, Joseph discussed how state AGs and departments of banking have significantly ramped up their enforcement activities in response to what is happening at the CFPB. The podcast ended with each participant expressing his view on what the CFPB will look like when the dust settles. The broad consensus is that the CFPB will continue to operate with a greatly reduced staff and will only perform duties that are statutorily required. It is anticipated that there will be very little rulemaking except for rules that the CFPB is required to issue - namely, the small business data collection rule under 1071 of Dodd-Frank and the open banking rule under 1033 of Dodd-Frank. The panel also felt that the number of enforcement lawsuits and investigations will measurably decline with the focus being on companies engaged in blatant fraud or violations of the Military Lending Act. This podcast show was hosted by Alan Kaplinsky, the former practice group leader for 25 years and now senior counsel of the Consumer Financial Services Group. If you missed part 1 of our repurposed webinar produced on March 24, click here for a blog describing its content and a link to the podcast itself. In short, part 1 featured Jon Hill from Law360 and Evan Weinberger from Bloomberg, who chronicle the initiatives of CFPB Acting Directors Scott Bessent and Russell Vought and DOGE to dismantle the CFPB and the status of the two lawsuits brought to enjoin those initiatives. Ballard Spahr partners John Culhane and Rich Andreano give a status report on the effort of Acting Director Vought to nullify most of the final and proposed rules and other written guidance issued by Rohit Chopra. The podcast concludes with John and Rich describing the fact that supervision and examinations of banks and non-banks is non-existent.

Democrats defend criminal illegals. They work to subvert President Trump's demands that college campuses be safe. They accept tens of millions in dark money foreign donations. They spy on and leak details from President Trump's cabinet. And they meet in private with triggered state AGs to do anything to stop MAGA. Listen to all the ways the left is working against the American agenda.

Chicago's largest law firm has no formal agreement backing the deal it reached with the Trump administration. Crain's reporter Mark Weinraub and host Amy Guth discuss why the deals with Big Law are nowhere to be found.Plus: Durbin pushes to save DOJ's Chicago antitrust office from chopping block, Chicago names a City Hall vet as acting aviation commissioner, Raoul joins state AGs urging Congress to break up pharmaceutical middlemen and new stores slated for shuttered Dom's in Old Town, Whole Foods in River North.

Marc welcomes Heritage Foundation's Hans von Spakovsky to expose what he calls the Biden administration's deliberate scheme to flood the U.S. with illegal migrants and hand them a pathway to the ballot box through parole, work permits, and Social Security numbers. Hans breaks down the role of federal judges in blocking deportations and how the Trump administration just scored five key Supreme Court victories. He also analyzes a New York ruling striking down non-citizen voting and Arizona's move to purge 50,000 people from voter rolls who couldn't prove citizenship. Plus, Hans calls out Letitia James' bogus legal attack on Trump over COVID education funds as another political stunt from one of the country's most partisan AGs.

Whelp, goodbye folks!  Eric and I have been DOGE'd. In a somewhat delayed April Fools, Nancy Lundeberg and Annie Medina-Walpole have taken over podcast host duties this week. Their purpose is to interview me, Eric, and Ken Covinsky about your final AGS literature review plenary session taking place at the Annual Meeting in Chicago this May (for those attending, our session is the plenary the morning of May 10).  We discuss our favorite articles, parody songs, and memories from AGS meetings past, with a little preview of a song for this year's meeting.   We covered: The first parody song I wrote, for AGS 2018 in Orlando, about this article by Nancy Schoenborn on how to discuss stopping cancer screening. Ken's favorite articles, including The Impact of Rudeness on Medical Team Performance: A Randomized Trial Effect of Exercise Intervention on Functional Decline in Very Elderly Patients During Acute Hospitalization Eric's favorite article on the effect of chair placement on physicians' behavior and patients' satisfaction Tim Anderson's study on the intensification of older adults' outpatient blood pressure treatment at hospital discharge Nancy's favorite topic and parody song, Aducanumab, which won Drug of the Year in 2021.  Enjoy! And maybe, just maybe, Eric and I will be reinstated and return as hosts next week… -Alex Smith  

Hey friends! In this episode of #TheIntegrativeHealthPodcast, I'm diving into two health concerns that often don't get the attention they deserve—hip pain and Alpha-gal syndrome (AGS). I'll break down the potential causes, including inflammation, trigger points, and hormonal imbalances, plus how integrative treatments like physical therapy and peptide therapy can help. Then, I'll discuss AGS, an allergic reaction triggered by tick bites, and how it might explain some of the mysterious symptoms you've been experiencing. Plus, I'll share lifestyle changes and therapies to help you manage and heal from both conditions. If you're dealing with these health issues or just want to learn more, this episode is a must-listen!Explore these valuable resources to support your health and wellness journey.Peptides 101 coursehttps://drjen.mykajabi.com/offers/2249zHbK/checkoutSupplementshttps://healthybydrjen.shop/PODCAST: Thank you for listening please subscribe and share! Shop supplements: https://healthybydrjen.shop/CHECK OUT a list of my Favorite products here: https://www.healthybydrjen.com/drjenfavorites FOLLOW ME:Instagram :: https://www.instagram.com/integrativedrmom/Facebook :: https://www.facebook.com/integrativedrmomYouTube :: https://www.youtube.com/@integrativedrmom FTC: Some links included in this description might be affiliate links. If you purchase a product through one of them, I will receive a commission (at no additional cost to you). I truly appreciate your support of my channel. Thank you for watching! Video is not sponsored. DISCLAIMER: This podcast does not contain any medical or health related diagnosis or treatment advice. Content provided on this podcast is for informational purposes only. For any medical or health related advice, please consult with a physician or other healthcare professionals. Further, information about specific products or treatments within this podcast are not to diagnose, treat, cure or prevent disease.

State attorneys general (State AGs) are becoming increasingly active in the realm of antitrust enforcement, focusing on mergers, monopolization, and ESG-related cases. In recent years, state AGs have taken assertive roles in challenging major mergers, such as JetBlue's attempted acquisition of Spirit Airlines and Kroger's attempted acquisition of Albertsons. These actions highlight a trend of state AGs bringing their own cases in state courts, sometimes parallel to federal enforcement efforts. State AGs have also been at the forefront of monopolization cases, particularly against big tech companies, and have challenged algorithmic pricing and data sharing arrangements. Additionally, ESG-related antitrust actions have emerged, with red state AGs investigating financial institutions supporting environmentally conscious investing. In the latest episode of MoForecast, Morrison Foerster partners Carrie H. Cohen, global co-chair of the Investigations + White Collar Defense Group and State + Local Government Enforcement team, and Megan Gerking, partner in the firm's global Antitrust Law practice, discuss the current state of antitrust enforcement by state AGs and what to expect in 2025. They explore the potential for state AGs to continue active participation in merger and conduct investigations, possibly filling perceived gaps in federal enforcement under the new Trump administration. Listen to the episode to gain a deeper understanding of the future of state AG enforcement in the antitrust arena.

Talking spanking and more with my friend, Elsa.

A simple first trip to the mall gets really turned inside out when we somehow discuss porn. Influencers getting clowned is kinda stupid, plus about 6 movies that are “aight but kinda stupid”. Back to the mall for some hot pretzels and expensive baby blankets. Then we have our annual AGS (any given sunday) review, this year with fresh concepts and points of view. Gratitude from a gift isn't about a thank you, it's about using that gift. Tales from the liquor store and “Thick ATF” might be the first adult film the boys will direct.    

Hours before his confirmation hearing, former Rep. Dave Weldon's nomination to head the CDC was withdrawn.   Weldon has been a vaccine critic. How much of a role did Big Pharma play? AnneMarie Schieber and Devon Herrick also talk about the growing focus on vaccines, and the history of vaccine policy. Most recently the Trump's administration to nix vaccines on chickens for bird flu.  Also in the podcast, state AGs take the first step in going after Anthony Fauci for violating state laws when handing the COVID-19 pandemic. A company offers indemnity style health insurance for direct primary care members, and how “meritocracy” is bad for your health. Also, how spouses age differently and how this can complicate health care decisions. 

Hours before his confirmation hearing, former Rep. Dave Weldon's nomination to head the CDC was withdrawn.   Weldon has been a vaccine critic. How much of a role did Big Pharma play? AnneMarie Schieber and Devon Herrick also talk about the growing focus on vaccines, and the history of vaccine policy. Most recently the Trump's administration to nix vaccines on chickens for bird flu.  Also in the podcast, state AGs take the first step in going after Anthony Fauci for violating state laws when handing the COVID-19 pandemic. A company offers indemnity style health insurance for direct primary care members, and how “meritocracy” is bad for your health. Also, how spouses age differently and how this can complicate health care decisions. 

AlabamaGovernor Ivey signs bill into law that bans Glock switches on guns in ALGovernor Ivey signs bill into law that restructures state VA departmentAG Marshall joins 25 other AGS in supporting Trump's deportations of TdADHR Commissioner opposes bill requiring more parental notificationA Social Security office in Gadsden is tagged by DOGE for closure this yearState of Louisiana uses AL's nitrogen hypoxia method for inmate executionsNationalA Federal judge issues injunction on DoD's barring of transgenders in militaryWH Press Secretary says judges issuing injunctions are anti Trump activistsPresident Trump to sign EO that dissolves the US Department of EducationWH Trade advisor says jobs created under Biden admin went to immigrantsPolice in Chicago arrested person who vandalized Tesla dealership

“A Man of No Importance” is the latest musical from SpeakEasy Stage Company.. We hear performances from the cast and speak with actors Eddie Shields, Billy Meleady & Kathy St. George for this week's Live Music Friday.GBH's Callie Crossley discusses federal pressure on Maine's governor over a trans student athlete. She also discusses the removal of the “Black Lives Matter” mural in D.C., and Attorney General Andrea Campbell joining other AGs who are suing Trump about the dismantling of the education department.Boston Globe travel writer Christopher Muther gives a eulogy for free checked luggage on domestic flights and provides tips for traveling on the cheap in Thailand.Political analyst Chuck Todd joins for our "Press Play" media analysis segment.

In the realm of False Claims Act (FCA) enforcement, state attorneys general (AGs) are increasingly collaborating with federal authorities and fellow state AGs to address allegedly fraudulent activities. Companies operating across multiple states are under heightened scrutiny, particularly in the healthcare sector, where compliance with regulations is critical. The United States Department of Justice (DOJ) highlighted this collaboration with state AGs in its announcement of FCA recoveries last year, noting that DOJ is working closely with state AGs to recover funds for both federal and state Medicaid programs. There also has been increased coordination targeting third-party investors, such as private equity and venture capital firms, to ensure that they conduct thorough due diligence and maintain robust compliance programs when investing in healthcare companies. This increased coordination aims to hold all parties accountable, from healthcare providers to their financial backers, in preventing and addressing alleged fraud. In the latest episode of MoForecast, Morrison Foerster partners Carrie H. Cohen, global co-chair of the Investigations + White Collar Defense Group and State + Local Government Enforcement team, and Adam Braverman, a partner in the Investigations + White Collar Defense Group, examine the current dynamics of state AG enforcement under the FCA. They explore the implications of multijurisdictional investigations and the growing involvement of third-party investors in healthcare fraud cases. Their discussion provides valuable insights for companies navigating these complex legal challenges, highlighting the importance of proactive compliance measures and strategic responses to enforcement actions. Tune in to the podcast to gain a deeper understanding of the future of state AG enforcement in the FCA arena. MoForecast is a podcast series discussing enforcement and policy trends we can expect from the new presidential administration. This episode continues our focus on state AGs, which aims to provide valuable insights for in-house counsel, compliance professionals, and defense lawyers navigating the evolving landscape of state AG enforcement.

In partnership with Food Allergy Research & Education (FARE), Gary Falcetano discusses the unique challenges of diagnosing and managing Alpha-gal syndrome (AGS), a red meat allergy triggered by tick bites with Dr. Scott Commins, a leading expert in Alpha-gal syndrome (AGS) and distinguished professor at the university of North Carolina. They explore the distinct nature of Alpha-gal as a carbohydrate allergen, the prolonged journey to diagnosis, and the syndrome's expanding geographic prevalence. Key topics include the delayed onset of symptoms, the role of fatty meats in severe reactions, and the presence of Alpha-gal in medications. Gain valuable insights into effective management strategies and future treatment possibilities, equipping healthcare providers with the knowledge to better support patients with AGS. Episode resources and references available at: https://www.thermofisher.com/phadia/us/en/resources/mmunoCAST/alpha-gal-syndrome-tick-season-dr-scott-commins.html?cid=0ct_3pc_05032024_9SGOV4

As the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) faces uncertainty, state attorneys general (state AGs) are poised to fill the enforcement gap in consumer financial protection. With the CFPB's future in question, state AGs are expected to intensify their focus on consumer protection laws, particularly in areas such as lending, credit, and alternative financial products. This shift will likely impact companies operating in the financial services sector, as state AGs leverage their broad jurisdictional powers to address practices they deem harmful to consumers. In the latest episode of MoForecast, Morrison Foerster partners Carrie H. Cohen, global co-chair of the Investigations + White Collar Defense Group and State + Local Government Enforcement team, and Maria Earley, former CFPB enforcement attorney and member of the Financial Services Group, delve into state AG enforcement of consumer financial protection. They discuss the anticipated areas of focus for state AGs, including the regulation of Fintech partnerships and alternative credit products. Their conversation offers critical insights for companies facing these regulatory challenges, emphasizing the importance of monitoring consumer complaints and maintaining compliance with state laws. Tune in to the podcast to gain a deeper understanding of the future of state AG enforcement in consumer financial protection.

When OpenAI announced plans to convert from nonprofit to for-profit control last October, it likely didn't anticipate the legal labyrinth it now faces. A recent court order in Elon Musk's lawsuit against the company suggests OpenAI's restructuring faces serious legal threats, which will complicate its efforts to raise tens of billions in investment.As nonprofit legal expert Rose Chan Loui explains, the court order set up multiple pathways for OpenAI's conversion to be challenged. Though Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers denied Musk's request to block the conversion before a trial, she expedited proceedings to the fall so the case could be heard before it's likely to go ahead. (See Rob's brief summary of developments in the case.)And if Musk's donations to OpenAI are enough to give him the right to bring a case, Rogers sounded very sympathetic to his objections to the OpenAI foundation selling the company, benefiting the founders who forswore “any intent to use OpenAI as a vehicle to enrich themselves.”But that's just one of multiple threats. The attorneys general (AGs) in California and Delaware both have standing to object to the conversion on the grounds that it is contrary to the foundation's charitable purpose and therefore wrongs the public — which was promised all the charitable assets would be used to develop AI that benefits all of humanity, not to win a commercial race. Some, including Rose, suspect the court order was written as a signal to those AGs to take action.And, as she explains, if the AGs remain silent, the court itself, seeing that the public interest isn't being represented, could appoint a “special interest party” to take on the case in their place.This places the OpenAI foundation board in a bind: proceeding with the restructuring despite this legal cloud could expose them to the risk of being sued for a gross breach of their fiduciary duty to the public. The board is made up of respectable people who didn't sign up for that.And of course it would cause chaos for the company if all of OpenAI's fundraising and governance plans were brought to a screeching halt by a federal court judgment landing at the eleventh hour.Host Rob Wiblin and Rose Chan Loui discuss all of the above as well as what justification the OpenAI foundation could offer for giving up control of the company despite its charitable purpose, and how the board might adjust their plans to make the for-profit switch more legally palatable.This episode was originally recorded on March 6, 2025.Chapters:Intro (00:00:11)More juicy OpenAI news (00:00:46)The court order (00:02:11)Elon has two hurdles to jump (00:05:17)The judge's sympathy (00:08:00)OpenAI's defence (00:11:45)Alternative plans for OpenAI (00:13:41)Should the foundation give up control? (00:16:38)Alternative plaintiffs to Musk (00:21:13)The 'special interest party' option (00:25:32)How might this play out in the fall? (00:27:52)The nonprofit board is in a bit of a bind (00:29:20)Is it in the public interest to race? (00:32:23)Could the board be personally negligent? (00:34:06)Video editing: Simon MonsourAudio engineering: Ben Cordell, Milo McGuire, Simon Monsour, and Dominic ArmstrongTranscriptions: Katy Moore

As a bonus for listeners, we're sharing this week's episode from "Trumpland with Alex Wagner" on attorneys general and their legal battles against Trump's agenda. Numerous lawsuits are underway as efforts ramp up to fight against the Trump administration's agenda, with the charge led by a select group of attorneys general. On this episode, Alex Wagner heads to Phoenix, Arizona where Democratic state attorneys general organized a town hall for citizens impacted by Trump's executive orders and DOGE's targeting of the federal government. Alex speaks directly with some of the AGs behind these legal efforts, including Kwame Raoul of Illinois, William Tong of Connecticut, and Letitia James of New York. Then she sits with Arizona AG Kris Mayes, the organizer of the town hall, for a look at what's next as these attorneys continue to advocate on behalf of the U.S. Constitution and the citizens it protects.Follow and listen to the whole series here: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/trumpland-with-alex-wagner/id1638974657

Numerous lawsuits are underway as efforts ramp up to fight against the Trump administration's agenda, with the charge led by a select group of attorneys general. On this episode, Alex Wagner heads to Phoenix, Arizona where Democratic state attorneys general organized a town hall for citizens impacted by Trump's executive orders and DOGE's targeting of the federal government. Alex speaks directly with some of the AGs behind these legal efforts, including Kwame Raoul of Illinois, William Tong of Connecticut, and Letitia James of New York. Then she sits with Arizona AG Kris Mayes, the organizer of the town hall, for a look at what's next as these attorneys continue to advocate on behalf of the U.S. Constitution and the citizens it protects. Remember to follow the show so you don't miss a single episode. And sign up for MSNBC Premium on Apple Podcasts to listen without ads.

Dr. Sarah McGill, gastroenterologist at the University of North Carolina, identified a pattern in her patients testing positive for alpha-gal syndrome when presenting with only GI symptoms, specifically after eating red meat. In this episode, we talk to Dr. McGill about what led her to start testing her GI patients for alpha-gal syndrome, as well as the guidance she co-authored for the American Gastroenterological Association regarding her findings. Listen now to learn more about Dr. McGill's research and how she's helping to raise awareness of the GI-only onset of AGS.For more information about Dr. McGill's practice or to book an appointment visit:https://www.med.unc.edu/medicine/gi/people/sarah-mcgill-md-msc/Read Dr. McGill's Guidance Here:https://www.cghjournal.org/article/S1542-3565(23)00040-X/fulltext

21-year-old Holly talks about her first adult spanking experiences and many other spanking related topics.

In the 5 AM Hour: Patrice Onwuka and Hans Von Spakovsky discussed: HANS: State and Local Officials Can Be Criminally Prosecuted for Protecting Illegal Aliens Tom Homan Fires Back At Dem Mayor Who Said There Has Been ‘Mischaracterization’ Of Immigrants In Community Virginia governor signs executive order deputizing state law enforcement to help with migrant crisis LAST WEEK: US appeals court rejects Trump's emergency bid to curtail birthright citizenship FLASHBACK: FEB. 5: President Trump bars biological males from competing in women’s sports Jason Miyares joined U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi and fellow state AGs to discuss keeping biological men out of women’s and girls’ sports and Title IX enforcement. UK prime minister believes his country will play 'leading part' in maintaining security guarantees for Ukraine King Charles Invites Donald Trump For ‘Unprecedented’ Second State Visit To UK Where to find more about WMAL's morning show: Follow the Show Podcasts on Apple podcasts, Audible and Spotify. Follow WMAL's "O'Connor and Company" on X: @WMALDC, @LarryOConnor, @Jgunlock, @patricepinkfile, and @heatherhunterdc. Facebook: WMALDC and Larry O'Connor Instagram: WMALDC Show Website: https://www.wmal.com/oconnor-company/ How to listen live weekdays from 5 to 9 AM: https://www.wmal.com/listenlive/ Episode: Friday, February 28, 2025 / 5 AM Hour See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In this episode of Above the Business, Bradley Hamner sits down with Jason Stefely, Founder of Agency Growth Services and a successful State Farm agent. Jason shares his journey from launching his first agency at 23 to pioneering remote sales solutions for insurance agents across the country. He discusses the challenges of moving his business to Cupertino, California, right before the COVID-19 pandemic and how he turned adversity into an opportunity by embracing a fully remote sales team model.Bradley and Jason dive into the key factors that make remote teams work, including accountability, structured training, and culture-building. They explore how in-person team bonding and ongoing virtual collaboration play a crucial role in team effectiveness. Jason also details the New Household Acquisition Training program, a system he developed to ensure sales team competency, which has now become a sought-after resource for State Farm agents nationwide.Whether you're a business owner considering remote teams or looking to enhance your sales training, this episode offers actionable insights into leveraging technology, maintaining a strong company culture, and optimizing team performance.What You'll Learn in This Episode: ✅ How Jason Stefely built a thriving insurance agency at a young age and adapted to industry changes. ✅ The challenges and benefits of transitioning to a fully remote sales team. ✅ Key strategies for ensuring accountability and performance in a remote work environment. ✅ The importance of structured sales training and how the New Household Acquisition Training program works. ✅ Best practices for integrating remote and in-office teams for maximum efficiency. Jason Stefely opened his first State Farm agency in 2004 at the age of 23 and quickly became a leader in the industry. After expanding his operations in Oregon, he relocated to Cupertino, California, in 2019, facing significant hiring and operational challenges. To overcome these obstacles, Jason developed a fully remote sales team model, which eventually led to the creation of Agency Growth Services (AGS). Today, AGS provides specialized training and remote team solutions for State Farm agents nationwide, helping them scale their businesses more effectively.Connect with Jason Stefely:

Truth Be Told with Booker Scott – Barack Obama appointed Judge Engelmayer to block the DOGE team from accessing Treasury records after 19 blue state AGs sue. DOGE exposes deep state funding, CIA ties, and government overspending. Pam Bondi takes charge at the DOJ, hinting at retribution, while Tom Homan and ICE ramp up deportations of criminal illegal immigrants.

Talking Points Memo’s Josh Marshall examines how Trump’s spending freezes impact everyday American life. California Attorney General Rob Bonta details how AGs can fight back against Trump’s aggressions.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

OA1110 - For the first time in US history, an American President (both former and future) is facing criminal sentencing. We review Judge Juan Merchan's most recent ruling on Donald Trump's motion to dismiss his conviction for 34 felony counts of falsifying business records and the difficult balance that Merchan has struck in trying to weigh the jury's verdict and the rule of law itself against the fact that the defendant will be ten days away from regaining the nuclear codes as of the time of his scheduled hearing.  We also review Aileen Cannon's recent probably-illegal desperate order to try to stop special counsel Jack Smith's report on Trump's many federal crimes from going public before trying to understand why Democrats would even consider signing on an extremely hard-right immigration bill which can only help to fuel  Trump's mass deportation machine. How will the Laken Riley Act allow undocumented people to get away with nearly any theft offense, and give state AGs broad power over national immigration policy?  Matt then drops a quick footnote on the questionable state of Rudy Giuliani's physical, mental, and legal health as two different federal judges consider just how contemptuous he has become before we circle back for some late-breaking updates in both of this episode's Trump stories. Docket for Trump v. US (SD FL) NY Judge Juan Merchan's ruling denying Trump's motion to dismiss and scheduling sentencing for 1/10/25 (1/3/25) Trump's application for a stay of sentencing to the US Supreme Court (1/7/25) SCOTUS ruling on Trump's application for stay of sentencing (1/9/25) Full text of the Laken Riley Act, H.R. 29 (introduced 1/5/25) Rudy Giuliani's sworn declaration confirming that he will be attending contempt proceedings in DC federal court (1/9/25) Check out the OA Linktree for all the places to go and things to do! If you'd like to support the show (and lose the ads!), please pledge at patreon.com/law!