Podcasts about altman

AI went boom this week.

Jovens querem fugir da internet e adultos pagam caro por retiros de desconexão digital. A OpenAI compra a genialidade de Jony Ive para criar dispositivos de IA ainda mais irresistíveis.Qual a próxima armadilha depois das telas?No RESUMIDO #315: jovens querem fugir da internet, OpenAI compra empresa de Jony Ive para lançar gadget de IA, Google lança o modo AI e quer transformar as buscas, Geração Z troca álcool por antidepressivos, BlueSky quer dominar o que restou da internet social, pesquisadores vazam 2 bilhões de mensagens do Discord e muito mais!--Todos os links comentados no episódio estão no https://resumido.cc/podcasts/parem-a-internet-que-eu-quero-descer-altman-3-ive-discordia-no-discord/--Colabore e ajude o RESUMIDO a seguir em frente! www.catarse.me/resumido

OpenAI was founded as a nonprofit meant to conduct artificial intelligence research that would benefit the general public. In the company's early days, reporter Karen Hao arranged to spend time in OpenAI's offices and noticed the culture there was incredibly secretive. That secrecy raised questions for Hao that ultimately resulted in her new book, Empire of AI. The book is an intimate look at the company behind ChatGPT, but also at the industry-wide race to control AI. In today's episode, she speaks with NPR's Steve Inskeep about early disagreements between founders Sam Altman and Elon Musk, Altman's talents for fundraising and storytelling, and how the AI race is reproducing elements of colonial empire.To listen to Book of the Day sponsor-free and support NPR's book coverage, sign up for Book of the Day+ at plus.npr.org/bookofthedayLearn more about sponsor message choices: podcastchoices.com/adchoicesNPR Privacy Policy

- Goldman Sachs: WWDC25 Will Show Apple's AI Progress - Bloomberg: Apple Smart Glasses in 2026 - Altman and Ives Tease Whatever the Hell They're Making - TF International Analyst Dishes on OpenAIAIo Product - Apple TV+ Outs “The Buccaneers” Season-Two Trailer - Adventure Pic “Fountain of Youth” Hits Apple TV+ - Worries Over the Take It Down Act and 23andMe gets a buyer on Checklist 424 - find it at checklist.libsyn.com - Catch Ken on Mastodon - @macosken@mastodon.social - Send Ken an email: info@macosken.com - Chat with us on Patreon for as little as $1 a month. Support the show at Patreon.com/macosken

OpenAI just made its biggest acquisition yet, scooping up Jony Ive and Sam Altman's secretive device startup, io, in a $6.5 billion all-equity deal. Ive, the legendary designer behind the iPhone and other iconic Apple products, will now lead creative and design work at OpenAI through his firm LoveFrom. The goal? To take AI “beyond the screen” and build a new generation of AI-powered consumer devices. Beyond the tech, there's a clear narrative play here. OpenAI is framing Altman as the Jobs-esque visionary and Ive as the design genius who makes it all real. Social media had a field day with the staged buddy shots of the duo, but the messaging is hard to miss: Take the iPhone launch, and make it AI. Today, on TechCrunch's Equity podcast, hosts Kirsten Korosec, Max Zeff, and Anthony Ha unpack the deal, dive into AI wearables, and discuss more of this week's tech headlines. Listen to the full episode to hear about: Max's inside scoop from Google I/O: the return of Google Glass and developers' reactions to Google's AI-powered search upgrades Luminar drama from layoffs to CEO step downs and the lidar startup's potential $200 million fundraising effort 23andMe's second life, and what the company's new buyer plans to do with users' DNA data Equity will be back next week, so don't miss it! Equity is TechCrunch's flagship podcast, produced by Theresa Loconsolo, and posts every Wednesday and Friday.  Subscribe to us on Apple Podcasts, Overcast, Spotify and all the casts. You also can follow Equity on X and Threads, at @EquityPod. For the full episode transcript, for those who prefer reading over listening, check out our full archive of episodes here. Credits: Equity is produced by Theresa Loconsolo with editing by Kell. We'd also like to thank TechCrunch's audience development team. Thank you so much for listening, and we'll talk to you next time. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

TECNOLOGIA y LIBERTAD twitter.com/D3kkaR BTC: dekkar$paystring.crypt

Xiaomi has a new top of the line in-house smartphone chip, and GT Tandon talks about the falling cost of AI training and inferencing.Starring Jason Howell, Jenn Cutter, and GT Tandon.Show notes can be found here.

Few technological advances have made the kind of splash –– and had the potential long-term impact –– that ChatGPT did in November 2022. It made a nonprofit called OpenAI and its CEO, Sam Altman, household names around the world. Today, ChatGPT is still the world's most popular AI Chatbot; OpenAI recently closed a $40 billion funding deal, the largest private tech deal on record. But who is Sam Altman? And was it inevitable that OpenAI would become such a huge player in the AI space? Kara speaks to two fellow tech reporters who have tackled these questions in their latest books: Keach Hagey is a reporter at The Wall Street Journal. Her book is called “The Optimist: Sam Altman, OpenAI and the Race to Reinvent the Future.” Karen Hao writes for publications including The Atlantic and leads the Pulitzer Center's AI Spotlight Series. Her book is called “Empire of AI: Dreams and Nightmares in Sam Altman's OpenAI.” They speak to Kara about Altman's background, his short firing/rehiring in 2023 known as “The Blip”, how Altman used OpenAI's nonprofit status to recruit AI researchers and get Elon Musk on board, and whether OpenAI's mission is still to reach AGI, artificial general intelligence. Questions? Comments? Email us at on@voxmedia.com or find us on Instagram, TikTok, and Bluesky @onwithkaraswisher. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

May 22, 2025 Hour 4 Joshua Altman.  Joshua directed the docuseries on Dale Earnhardt.  The Good, Bad & Ugly.

Yesterday, the self-styled San Francisco “progressive” Joan Williams was on the show arguing that Democrats need to relearn the language of the American working class. But, as some of you have noted, Williams seems oblivious to the fact that politics is about more than simply aping other people's language. What you say matters, and the language of American working class, like all industrial working classes, is rooted in a critique of capitalism. She should probably read the New Yorker staff writer John Cassidy's excellent new book, Capitalism and its Critics, which traces capitalism's evolution and criticism from the East India Company through modern times. He defines capitalism as production for profit by privately-owned companies in markets, encompassing various forms from Chinese state capitalism to hyper-globalization. The book examines capitalism's most articulate critics including the Luddites, Marx, Engels, Thomas Carlisle, Adam Smith, Rosa Luxemburg, Keynes & Hayek, and contemporary figures like Sylvia Federici and Thomas Piketty. Cassidy explores how major economists were often critics of their era's dominant capitalist model, and untangles capitalism's complicated relationship with colonialism, slavery and AI which he regards as a potentially unprecedented economic disruption. This should be essential listening for all Democrats seeking to reinvent a post Biden-Harris party and message. 5 key takeaways* Capitalism has many forms - From Chinese state capitalism to Keynesian managed capitalism to hyper-globalization, all fitting the basic definition of production for profit by privately-owned companies in markets.* Great economists are typically critics - Smith criticized mercantile capitalism, Keynes critiqued laissez-faire capitalism, and Hayek/Friedman opposed managed capitalism. Each generation's leading economists challenge their era's dominant model.* Modern corporate structure has deep roots - The East India Company was essentially a modern multinational corporation with headquarters, board of directors, stockholders, and even a private army - showing capitalism's organizational continuity across centuries.* Capitalism is intertwined with colonialism and slavery - Industrial capitalism was built on pre-existing colonial and slave systems, particularly through the cotton industry and plantation economies.* AI represents a potentially unprecedented disruption - Unlike previous technological waves, AI may substitute rather than complement human labor on a massive scale, potentially creating political backlash exceeding even the "China shock" that contributed to Trump's rise.Keen On America is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. Full TranscriptAndrew Keen: Hello, everybody. A couple of days ago, we did a show with Joan Williams. She has a new book out, "Outclassed: How the Left Lost the Working Class and How to Win Them Back." A book about language, about how to talk to the American working class. She also had a piece in Jacobin Magazine, an anti-capitalist magazine, about how the left needs to speak to what she calls average American values. We talked, of course, about Bernie Sanders and AOC and their language of fighting oligarchy, and the New York Times followed that up with "The Enduring Power of Anti-Capitalism in American Politics."But of course, that brings the question: what exactly is capitalism? I did a little bit of research. We can find definitions of capitalism from AI, from Wikipedia, even from online dictionaries, but I thought we might do a little better than relying on Wikipedia and come to a man who's given capitalism and its critics a great deal of thought. John Cassidy is well known as a staff writer at The New Yorker. He's the author of a wonderful book, the best book, actually, on the dot-com insanity. And his new book, "Capitalism and its Critics," is out this week. John, congratulations on the book.So I've got to be a bit of a schoolmaster with you, John, and get some definitions first. What exactly is capitalism before we get to criticism of it?John Cassidy: Yeah, I mean, it's a very good question, Andrew. Obviously, through the decades, even the centuries, there have been many different definitions of the term capitalism and there are different types of capitalism. To not be sort of too ideological about it, the working definition I use is basically production for profit—that could be production of goods or mostly in the new and, you know, in today's economy, production of services—for profit by companies which are privately owned in markets. That's a very sort of all-encompassing definition.Within that, you can have all sorts of different types of capitalism. You can have Chinese state capitalism, you can have the old mercantilism, which industrial capitalism came after, which Trump seems to be trying to resurrect. You can have Keynesian managed capitalism that we had for 30 or 40 years after the Second World War, which I grew up in in the UK. Or you can have sort of hyper-globalization, hyper-capitalism that we've tried for the last 30 years. There are all those different varieties of capitalism consistent with a basic definition, I think.Andrew Keen: That keeps you busy, John. I know you started this project, which is a big book and it's a wonderful book. I read it. I don't always read all the books I have on the show, but I read from cover to cover full of remarkable stories of the critics of capitalism. You note in the beginning that you began this in 2016 with the beginnings of Trump. What was it about the 2016 election that triggered a book about capitalism and its critics?John Cassidy: Well, I was reporting on it at the time for The New Yorker and it struck me—I covered, I basically covered the economy in various forms for various publications since the late 80s, early 90s. In fact, one of my first big stories was the stock market crash of '87. So yes, I am that old. But it seemed to me in 2016 when you had Bernie Sanders running from the left and Trump running from the right, but both in some way offering very sort of similar critiques of capitalism. People forget that Trump in 2016 actually was running from the left of the Republican Party. He was attacking big business. He was attacking Wall Street. He doesn't do that these days very much, but at the time he was very much posing as the sort of outsider here to protect the interests of the average working man.And it seemed to me that when you had this sort of pincer movement against the then ruling model, this wasn't just a one-off. It seemed to me it was a sort of an emerging crisis of legitimacy for the system. And I thought there could be a good book written about how we got to here. And originally I thought it would be a relatively short book just based on the last sort of 20 or 30 years since the collapse of the Cold War and the sort of triumphalism of the early 90s.But as I got into it more and more, I realized that so many of the issues which had been raised, things like globalization, rising inequality, monopoly power, exploitation, even pollution and climate change, these issues go back to the very start of the capitalist system or the industrial capitalist system back in sort of late 18th century, early 19th century Britain. So I thought, in the end, I thought, you know what, let's just do the whole thing soup to nuts through the eyes of the critics.There have obviously been many, many histories of capitalism written. I thought that an original way to do it, or hopefully original, would be to do a sort of a narrative through the lives and the critiques of the critics of various stages. So that's, I hope, what sets it apart from other books on the subject, and also provides a sort of narrative frame because, you know, I am a New Yorker writer, I realize if you want people to read things, you've got to make it readable. Easiest way to make things readable is to center them around people. People love reading about other people. So that's sort of the narrative frame. I start off with a whistleblower from the East India Company back in the—Andrew Keen: Yeah, I want to come to that. But before, John, my sense is that to simplify what you're saying, this is a labor of love. You're originally from Leeds, the heart of Yorkshire, the center of the very industrial revolution, the first industrial revolution where, in your historical analysis, capitalism was born. Is it a labor of love? What's your family relationship with capitalism? How long was the family in Leeds?John Cassidy: Right, I mean that's a very good question. It is a labor of love in a way, but it's not—our family doesn't go—I'm from an Irish family, family of Irish immigrants who moved to England in the 1940s and 1950s. So my father actually did start working in a big mill, the Kirkstall Forge in Leeds, which is a big steel mill, and he left after seeing one of his co-workers have his arms chopped off in one of the machinery, so he decided it wasn't for him and he spent his life working in the construction industry, which was dominated by immigrants as it is here now.So I don't have a—it's not like I go back to sort of the start of the industrial revolution, but I did grow up in the middle of Leeds, very working class, very industrial neighborhood. And what a sort of irony is, I'll point out, I used to, when I was a kid, I used to play golf on a municipal golf course called Gotts Park in Leeds, which—you know, most golf courses in America are sort of in the affluent suburbs, country clubs. This was right in the middle of Armley in Leeds, which is where the Victorian jail is and a very rough neighborhood. There's a small bit of land which they built a golf course on. It turns out it was named after one of the very first industrialists, Benjamin Gott, who was a wool and textile industrialist, and who played a part in the Luddite movement, which I mention.So it turns out, I was there when I was 11 or 12, just learning how to play golf on this scrappy golf course. And here I am, 50 years later, writing about Benjamin Gott at the start of the Industrial Revolution. So yeah, no, sure. I think it speaks to me in a way that perhaps it wouldn't to somebody else from a different background.Andrew Keen: We did a show with William Dalrymple, actually, a couple of years ago. He's been on actually since, the Anglo or Scottish Indian historian. His book on the East India Company, "The Anarchy," is a classic. You begin in some ways your history of capitalism with the East India Company. What was it about the East India Company, John, that makes it different from other for-profit organizations in economic, Western economic history?John Cassidy: I mean, I read that. It's a great book, by the way. That was actually quoted in my chapter on these. Yeah, I remember. I mean, the reason I focused on it was for two reasons. Number one, I was looking for a start, a narrative start to the book. And it seemed to me, you know, the obvious place to start is with the start of the industrial revolution. If you look at economics history textbooks, that's where they always start with Arkwright and all the inventors, you know, who were the sort of techno-entrepreneurs of their time, the sort of British Silicon Valley, if you could think of it as, in Lancashire and Derbyshire in the late 18th century.So I knew I had to sort of start there in some way, but I thought that's a bit pat. Is there another way into it? And it turns out that in 1772 in England, there was a huge bailout of the East India Company, very much like the sort of 2008, 2009 bailout of Wall Street. The company got into trouble. So I thought, you know, maybe there's something there. And I eventually found this guy, William Bolts, who worked for the East India Company, turned into a whistleblower after he was fired for finagling in India like lots of the people who worked for the company did.So that gave me two things. Number one, it gave me—you know, I'm a writer, so it gave me something to focus on a narrative. His personal history is very interesting. But number two, it gave me a sort of foundation because industrial capitalism didn't come from nowhere. You know, it was built on top of a pre-existing form of capitalism, which we now call mercantile capitalism, which was very protectionist, which speaks to us now. But also it had these big monopolistic multinational companies.The East India Company, in some ways, was a very modern corporation. It had a headquarters in Leadenhall Street in the city of London. It had a board of directors, it had stockholders, the company sent out very detailed instructions to the people in the field in India and Indonesia and Malaysia who were traders who bought things from the locals there, brought them back to England on their company ships. They had a company army even to enforce—to protect their operations there. It was an incredible multinational corporation.So that was also, I think, fascinating because it showed that even in the pre-existing system, you know, big corporations existed, there were monopolies, they had royal monopolies given—first the East India Company got one from Queen Elizabeth. But in some ways, they were very similar to modern monopolistic corporations. And they had some of the problems we've seen with modern monopolistic corporations, the way they acted. And Bolts was the sort of first corporate whistleblower, I thought. Yeah, that was a way of sort of getting into the story, I think. Hopefully, you know, it's just a good read, I think.William Bolts's story because he was—he came from nowhere, he was Dutch, he wasn't even English and he joined the company as a sort of impoverished young man, went to India like a lot of English minor aristocrats did to sort of make your fortune. The way the company worked, you had to sort of work on company time and make as much money as you could for the company, but then in your spare time you're allowed to trade for yourself. So a lot of the—without getting into too much detail, but you know, English aristocracy was based on—you know, the eldest child inherits everything, so if you were the younger brother of the Duke of Norfolk, you actually didn't inherit anything. So all of these minor aristocrats, so major aristocrats, but who weren't first born, joined the East India Company, went out to India and made a fortune, and then came back and built huge houses. Lots of the great manor houses in southern England were built by people from the East India Company and they were known as Nabobs, which is an Indian term. So they were the sort of, you know, billionaires of their time, and it was based on—as I say, it wasn't based on industrial capitalism, it was based on mercantile capitalism.Andrew Keen: Yeah, the beginning of the book, which focuses on Bolts and the East India Company, brings to mind for me two things. Firstly, the intimacy of modern capitalism, modern industrial capitalism with colonialism and of course slavery—lots of books have been written on that. Touch on this and also the relationship between the birth of capitalism and the birth of liberalism or democracy. John Stuart Mill, of course, the father in many ways of Western democracy. His day job, ironically enough, or perhaps not ironically, was at the East India Company. So how do those two things connect, or is it just coincidental?John Cassidy: Well, I don't think it is entirely coincidental, I mean, J.S. Mill—his father, James Mill, was also a well-known philosopher in the sort of, obviously, in the earlier generation, earlier than him. And he actually wrote the official history of the East India Company. And I think they gave his son, the sort of brilliant protégé, J.S. Mill, a job as largely as a sort of sinecure, I think. But he did go in and work there in the offices three or four days a week.But I think it does show how sort of integral—the sort of—as you say, the inheritor and the servant in Britain, particularly, of colonial capitalism was. So the East India Company was, you know, it was in decline by that stage in the middle of the 19th century, but it didn't actually give up its monopoly. It wasn't forced to give up its monopoly on the Indian trade until 1857, after, you know, some notorious massacres and there was a sort of public outcry.So yeah, no, that's—it's very interesting that the British—it's sort of unique to Britain in a way, but it's interesting that industrial capitalism arose alongside this pre-existing capitalist structure and somebody like Mill is a sort of paradoxical figure because actually he was quite critical of aspects of industrial capitalism and supported sort of taxes on the rich, even though he's known as the great, you know, one of the great apostles of the free market and free market liberalism. And his day job, as you say, he was working for the East India Company.Andrew Keen: What about the relationship between the birth of industrial capitalism, colonialism and slavery? Those are big questions and I know you deal with them in some—John Cassidy: I think you can't just write an economic history of capitalism now just starting with the cotton industry and say, you know, it was all about—it was all about just technical progress and gadgets, etc. It was built on a sort of pre-existing system which was colonial and, you know, the slave trade was a central element of that. Now, as you say, there have been lots and lots of books written about it, the whole 1619 project got an incredible amount of attention a few years ago. So I didn't really want to rehash all that, but I did want to acknowledge the sort of role of slavery, especially in the rise of the cotton industry because of course, a lot of the raw cotton was grown in the plantations in the American South.So the way I actually ended up doing that was by writing a chapter about Eric Williams, a Trinidadian writer who ended up as the Prime Minister of Trinidad when it became independent in the 1960s. But when he was younger, he wrote a book which is now regarded as a classic. He went to Oxford to do a PhD, won a scholarship. He was very smart. I won a sort of Oxford scholarship myself but 50 years before that, he came across the Atlantic and did an undergraduate degree in history and then did a PhD there and his PhD thesis was on slavery and capitalism.And at the time, in the 1930s, the link really wasn't acknowledged. You could read any sort of standard economic history written by British historians, and they completely ignored that. He made the argument that, you know, slavery was integral to the rise of capitalism and he basically started an argument which has been raging ever since the 1930s and, you know, if you want to study economic history now you have to sort of—you know, have to have to address that. And the way I thought, even though the—it's called the Williams thesis is very famous. I don't think many people knew much about where it came from. So I thought I'd do a chapter on—Andrew Keen: Yeah, that chapter is excellent. You mentioned earlier the Luddites, you're from Yorkshire where Luddism in some ways was born. One of the early chapters is on the Luddites. We did a show with Brian Merchant, his book, "Blood in the Machine," has done very well, I'm sure you're familiar with it. I always understood the Luddites as being against industrialization, against the machine, as opposed to being against capitalism. But did those two things get muddled together in the history of the Luddites?John Cassidy: I think they did. I mean, you know, Luddites, when we grew up, I mean you're English too, you know to be called a Luddite was a term of abuse, right? You know, you were sort of antediluvian, anti-technology, you're stupid. It was only, I think, with the sort of computer revolution, the tech revolution of the last 30, 40 years and the sort of disruptions it's caused, that people have started to look back at the Luddites and say, perhaps they had a point.For them, they were basically pre-industrial capitalism artisans. They worked for profit-making concerns, small workshops. Some of them worked for themselves, so they were sort of sole proprietor capitalists. Or they worked in small venues, but the rise of industrial capitalism, factory capitalism or whatever, basically took away their livelihoods progressively. So they associated capitalism with new technology. In their minds it was the same. But their argument wasn't really a technological one or even an economic one, it was more a moral one. They basically made the moral argument that capitalists shouldn't have the right to just take away their livelihoods with no sort of recompense for them.At the time they didn't have any parliamentary representation. You know, they weren't revolutionaries. The first thing they did was create petitions to try and get parliament to step in, sort of introduce some regulation here. They got turned down repeatedly by the sort of—even though it was a very aristocratic parliament, places like Manchester and Leeds didn't have any representation at all. So it was only after that that they sort of turned violent and started, you know, smashing machines and machines, I think, were sort of symbols of the system, which they saw as morally unjust.And I think that's sort of what—obviously, there's, you know, a lot of technological disruption now, so we can, especially as it starts to come for the educated cognitive class, we can sort of sympathize with them more. But I think the sort of moral critique that there's this, you know, underneath the sort of great creativity and economic growth that capitalism produces, there is also a lot of destruction and a lot of victims. And I think that message, you know, is becoming a lot more—that's why I think why they've been rediscovered in the last five or ten years and I'm one of the people I guess contributing to that rediscovery.Andrew Keen: There's obviously many critiques of capitalism politically. I want to come to Marx in a second, but your chapter, I thought, on Thomas Carlyle and this nostalgic conservatism was very important and there are other conservatives as well. John, do you think that—and you mentioned Trump earlier, who is essentially a nostalgist for a—I don't know, some sort of bizarre pre-capitalist age in America. Is there something particularly powerful about the anti-capitalism of romantics like Carlyle, 19th century Englishman, there were many others of course.John Cassidy: Well, I think so. I mean, I think what is—conservatism, when we were young anyway, was associated with Thatcherism and Reaganism, which, you know, lionized the free market and free market capitalism and was a reaction against the pre-existing form of capitalism, Keynesian capitalism of the sort of 40s to the 80s. But I think what got lost in that era was the fact that there have always been—you've got Hayek up there, obviously—Andrew Keen: And then Keynes and Hayek, the two—John Cassidy: Right, it goes to the end of that. They had a great debate in the 1930s about these issues. But Hayek really wasn't a conservative person, and neither was Milton Friedman. They were sort of free market revolutionaries, really, that you'd let the market rip and it does good things. And I think that that sort of a view, you know, it just became very powerful. But we sort of lost sight of the fact that there was also a much older tradition of sort of suspicion of radical changes of any type. And that was what conservatism was about to some extent. If you think about Baldwin in Britain, for example.And there was a sort of—during the Industrial Revolution, some of the strongest supporters of factory acts to reduce hours and hourly wages for women and kids were actually conservatives, Tories, as they were called at the time, like Ashley. That tradition, Carlyle was a sort of extreme representative of that. I mean, Carlyle was a sort of proto-fascist, let's not romanticize him, he lionized strongmen, Frederick the Great, and he didn't really believe in democracy. But he also had—he was appalled by the sort of, you know, the—like, what's the phrase I'm looking for? The sort of destructive aspects of industrial capitalism, both on the workers, you know, he said it was a dehumanizing system, sounded like Marx in some ways. That it dehumanized the workers, but also it destroyed the environment.He was an early environmentalist. He venerated the environment, was actually very strongly linked to the transcendentalists in America, people like Thoreau, who went to visit him when he visited Britain and he saw the sort of destructive impact that capitalism was having locally in places like Manchester, which were filthy with filthy rivers, etc. So he just saw the whole system as sort of morally bankrupt and he was a great writer, Carlyle, whatever you think of him. Great user of language, so he has these great ringing phrases like, you know, the cash nexus or calling it the Gospel of Mammonism, the shabbiest gospel ever preached under the sun was industrial capitalism.So, again, you know, that's a sort of paradoxical thing, because I think for so long conservatism was associated with, you know, with support for the free market and still is in most of the Republican Party, but then along comes Trump and sort of conquers the party with a, you know, more skeptical, as you say, romantic, not really based on any reality, but a sort of romantic view that America can stand by itself in the world. I mean, I see Trump actually as a sort of an effort to sort of throw back to mercantile capitalism in a way. You know, which was not just pre-industrial, but was also pre-democracy, run by monarchs, which I'm sure appeals to him, and it was based on, you know, large—there were large tariffs. You couldn't import things in the UK. If you want to import anything to the UK, you have to send it on a British ship because of the navigation laws. It was a very protectionist system and it's actually, you know, as I said, had a lot of parallels with what Trump's trying to do or tries to do until he backs off.Andrew Keen: You cheat a little bit in the book in the sense that you—everyone has their own chapter. We'll talk a little bit about Hayek and Smith and Lenin and Friedman. You do have one chapter on Marx, but you also have a chapter on Engels. So you kind of cheat. You combine the two. Is it possible, though, to do—and you've just written this book, so you know this as well as anyone. How do you write a book about capitalism and its critics and only really give one chapter to Marx, who is so dominant? I mean, you've got lots of Marxists in the book, including Lenin and Luxemburg. How fundamental is Marx to a criticism of capitalism? Is most criticism, especially from the left, from progressives, is it really just all a footnote to Marx?John Cassidy: I wouldn't go that far, but I think obviously on the left he is the central figure. But there's an element of sort of trying to rebuild Engels a bit in this. I mean, I think of Engels and Marx—I mean obviously Marx wrote the great classic "Capital," etc. But in the 1840s, when they both started writing about capitalism, Engels was sort of ahead of Marx in some ways. I mean, the sort of materialist concept, the idea that economics rules everything, Engels actually was the first one to come up with that in an essay in the 1840s which Marx then published in one of his—in the German newspaper he worked for at the time, radical newspaper, and he acknowledged openly that that was really what got him thinking seriously about economics, and even in the late—in 20, 25 years later when he wrote "Capital," all three volumes of it and the Grundrisse, just these enormous outpourings of analysis on capitalism.He acknowledged Engels's role in that and obviously Engels wrote the first draft of the Communist Manifesto in 1848 too, which Marx then topped and tailed and—he was a better writer obviously, Marx, and he gave it the dramatic language that we all know it for. So I think Engels and Marx together obviously are the central sort of figures in the sort of left-wing critique. But they didn't start out like that. I mean, they were very obscure, you've got to remember.You know, they were—when they were writing, Marx was writing "Capital" in London, it never even got published in English for another 20 years. It was just published in German. He was basically an expat. He had been thrown out of Germany, he had been thrown out of France, so England was last resort and the British didn't consider him a threat so they were happy to let him and the rest of the German sort of left in there. I think it became—it became the sort of epochal figure after his death really, I think, when he was picked up by the left-wing parties, which are especially the SPD in Germany, which was the first sort of socialist mass party and was officially Marxist until the First World War and there were great internal debates.And then of course, because Lenin and the Russians came out of that tradition too, Marxism then became the official doctrine of the Soviet Union when they adopted a version of it. And again there were massive internal arguments about what Marx really meant, and in fact, you know, one interpretation of the last 150 years of left-wing sort of intellectual development is as a sort of argument about what did Marx really mean and what are the important bits of it, what are the less essential bits of it. It's a bit like the "what did Keynes really mean" that you get in liberal circles.So yeah, Marx, obviously, this is basically an intellectual history of critiques of capitalism. In that frame, he is absolutely a central figure. Why didn't I give him more space than a chapter and a chapter and a half with Engels? There have been a million books written about Marx. I mean, it's not that—it's not that he's an unknown figure. You know, there's a best-selling book written in Britain about 20 years ago about him and then I was quoting, in my biographical research, I relied on some more recent, more scholarly biographies. So he's an endlessly fascinating figure but I didn't want him to dominate the book so I gave him basically the same space as everybody else.Andrew Keen: You've got, as I said, you've got a chapter on Adam Smith who's often considered the father of economics. You've got a chapter on Keynes. You've got a chapter on Friedman. And you've got a chapter on Hayek, all the great modern economists. Is it possible, John, to be a distinguished economist one way or the other and not be a critic of capitalism?John Cassidy: Well, I don't—I mean, I think history would suggest that the greatest economists have been critics of capitalism in their own time. People would say to me, what the hell have you got Milton Friedman and Friedrich Hayek in a book about critics of capitalism? They were great exponents, defenders of capitalism. They loved the system. That is perfectly true. But in the 1930s, 40s, 50s, 60s, and 70s, middle of the 20th century, they were actually arch-critics of the ruling form of capitalism at the time, which was what I call managed capitalism. What some people call Keynesianism, what other people call European social democracy, whatever you call it, it was a model of a mixed economy in which the government played a large role both in propping up demand and in providing an extensive social safety net in the UK and providing public healthcare and public education. It was a sort of hybrid model.Most of the economy in terms of the businesses remained in private hands. So most production was capitalistic. It was a capitalist system. They didn't go to the Soviet model of nationalizing everything and Britain did nationalize some businesses, but most places didn't. The US of course didn't but it was a form of managed capitalism. And Hayek and Friedman were both great critics of that and wanted to sort of move back to 19th century laissez-faire model.Keynes was a—was actually a great, I view him anyway, as really a sort of late Victorian liberal and was trying to protect as much of the sort of J.S. Mill view of the world as he could, but he thought capitalism had one fatal flaw: that it tended to fall into recessions and then they can snowball and the whole system can collapse which is what had basically happened in the early 1930s until Keynesian policies were adopted. Keynes sort of differed from a lot of his followers—I have a chapter on Joan Robinson in there, who were pretty left-wing and wanted to sort of use Keynesianism as a way to shift the economy quite far to the left. Keynes didn't really believe in that. He has a famous quote that, you know, once you get to full employment, you can then rely on the free market to sort of take care of things. He was still a liberal at heart.Going back to Adam Smith, why is he in a book on criticism of capitalism? And again, it goes back to what I said at the beginning. He actually wrote "The Wealth of Nations"—he explains in the introduction—as a critique of mercantile capitalism. His argument was that he was a pro-free trader, pro-small business, free enterprise. His argument was if you get the government out of the way, we don't need these government-sponsored monopolies like the East India Company. If you just rely on the market, the sort of market forces and competition will produce a good outcome. So then he was seen as a great—you know, he is then seen as the apostle of free market capitalism. I mean when I started as a young reporter, when I used to report in Washington, all the conservatives used to wear Adam Smith badges. You don't see Donald Trump wearing an Adam Smith badge, but that was the case.He was also—the other aspect of Smith, which I highlight, which is not often remarked on—he's also a critic of big business. He has a famous section where he discusses the sort of tendency of any group of more than three businessmen when they get together to try and raise prices and conspire against consumers. And he was very suspicious of, as I say, large companies, monopolies. I think if Adam Smith existed today, I mean, I think he would be a big supporter of Lina Khan and the sort of antitrust movement, he would say capitalism is great as long as you have competition, but if you don't have competition it becomes, you know, exploitative.Andrew Keen: Yeah, if Smith came back to live today, you have a chapter on Thomas Piketty, maybe he may not be French, but he may be taking that position about how the rich benefit from the structure of investment. Piketty's core—I've never had Piketty on the show, but I've had some of his followers like Emmanuel Saez from Berkeley. Yeah. How powerful is Piketty's critique of capitalism within the context of the classical economic analysis from Hayek and Friedman? Yeah, it's a very good question.John Cassidy: It's a very good question. I mean, he's a very paradoxical figure, Piketty, in that he obviously shot to world fame and stardom with his book on capital in the 21st century, which in some ways he obviously used the capital as a way of linking himself to Marx, even though he said he never read Marx. But he was basically making the same argument that if you leave capitalism unrestrained and don't do anything about monopolies etc. or wealth, you're going to get massive inequality and he—I think his great contribution, Piketty and the school of people, one of them you mentioned, around him was we sort of had a vague idea that inequality was going up and that, you know, wages were stagnating, etc.What he and his colleagues did is they produced these sort of scientific empirical studies showing in very simple to understand terms how the sort of share of income and wealth of the top 10 percent, the top 5 percent, the top 1 percent and the top 0.1 percent basically skyrocketed from the 1970s to about 2010. And it was, you know, he was an MIT PhD. Saez, who you mentioned, is a Berkeley professor. They were schooled in neoclassical economics at Harvard and MIT and places like that. So the right couldn't dismiss them as sort of, you know, lefties or Trots or whatever who're just sort of making this stuff up. They had to acknowledge that this was actually an empirical reality.I think it did change the whole basis of the debate and it was sort of part of this reaction against capitalism in the 2010s. You know it was obviously linked to the sort of Sanders and the Occupy Wall Street movement at the time. It came out of the—you know, the financial crisis as well when Wall Street disgraced itself. I mean, I wrote a previous book on all that, but people have sort of, I think, forgotten the great reaction against that a decade ago, which I think even Trump sort of exploited, as I say, by using anti-banker rhetoric at the time.So, Piketty was a great figure, I think, from, you know, I was thinking, who are the most influential critics of capitalism in the 21st century? And I think you'd have to put him up there on the list. I'm not saying he's the only one or the most eminent one. But I think he is a central figure. Now, of course, you'd think, well, this is a really powerful critic of capitalism, and nobody's going to pick up, and Bernie's going to take off and everything. But here we are a decade later now. It seems to be what the backlash has produced is a swing to the right, not a swing to the left. So that's, again, a sort of paradox.Andrew Keen: One person I didn't expect to come up in the book, John, and I was fascinated with this chapter, is Silvia Federici. I've tried to get her on the show. We've had some books about her writing and her kind of—I don't know, you treat her critique as a feminist one. The role of women. Why did you choose to write a chapter about Federici and that feminist critique of capitalism?John Cassidy: Right, right. Well, I don't think it was just feminist. I'll explain what I think it was. Two reasons. Number one, I wanted to get more women into the book. I mean, it's in some sense, it is a history of economics and economic critiques. And they are overwhelmingly written by men and women were sort of written out of the narrative of capitalism for a very long time. So I tried to include as many sort of women as actual thinkers as I could and I have a couple of early socialist feminist thinkers, Anna Wheeler and Flora Tristan and then I cover some of the—I cover Rosa Luxemburg as the great sort of tribune of the left revolutionary socialist, communist whatever you want to call it. Anti-capitalist I think is probably also important to note about. Yeah, and then I also have Joan Robinson, but I wanted somebody to do something in the modern era, and I thought Federici, in the world of the Wages for Housework movement, is very interesting from two perspectives.Number one, Federici herself is a Marxist, and I think she probably would still consider herself a revolutionary. She's based in New York, as you know now. She lived in New York for 50 years, but she came from—she's originally Italian and came out of the Italian left in the 1960s, which was very radical. Do you know her? Did you talk to her? I didn't talk to her on this. No, she—I basically relied on, there has been a lot of, as you say, there's been a lot of stuff written about her over the years. She's written, you know, she's given various long interviews and she's written a book herself, a version, a history of housework, so I figured it was all there and it was just a matter of pulling it together.But I think the critique, why the critique is interesting, most of the book is a sort of critique of how capitalism works, you know, in the production or you know, in factories or in offices or you know, wherever capitalist operations are working, but her critique is sort of domestic reproduction, as she calls it, the role of unpaid labor in supporting capitalism. I mean it goes back a long way actually. There was this moment, I sort of trace it back to the 1940s and 1950s when there were feminists in America who were demonstrating outside factories and making the point that you know, the factory workers and the operations of the factory, it couldn't—there's one of the famous sort of tire factory in California demonstrations where the women made the argument, look this factory can't continue to operate unless we feed and clothe the workers and provide the next generation of workers. You know, that's domestic reproduction. So their argument was that housework should be paid and Federici took that idea and a couple of her colleagues, she founded the—it's a global movement, but she founded the most famous branch in New York City in the 1970s. In Park Slope near where I live actually.And they were—you call it feminists, they were feminists in a way, but they were rejected by the sort of mainstream feminist movement, the sort of Gloria Steinems of the world, who Federici was very critical of because she said they ignored, they really just wanted to get women ahead in the sort of capitalist economy and they ignored the sort of underlying from her perspective, the underlying sort of illegitimacy and exploitation of that system. So they were never accepted as part of the feminist movement. They're to the left of the Feminist Movement.Andrew Keen: You mentioned Keynes, of course, so central in all this, particularly his analysis of the role of automation in capitalism. We did a show recently with Robert Skidelsky and I'm sure you're familiar—John Cassidy: Yeah, yeah, great, great biography of Keynes.Andrew Keen: Yeah, the great biographer of Keynes, whose latest book is "Mindless: The Human Condition in the Age of AI." You yourself wrote a brilliant book on the last tech mania and dot-com capitalism. I used it in a lot of my writing and books. What's your analysis of AI in this latest mania and the role generally of manias in the history of capitalism and indeed in critiquing capitalism? Is AI just the next chapter of the dot-com boom?John Cassidy: I think it's a very deep question. I think I'd give two answers to it. In one sense it is just the latest mania the way—I mean, the way capitalism works is we have these, I go back to Kondratiev, one of my Russian economists who ended up being killed by Stalin. He was the sort of inventor of the long wave theory of capitalism. We have these short waves where you have sort of booms and busts driven by finance and debt etc. But we also have long waves driven by technology.And obviously, in the last 40, 50 years, the two big ones are the original deployment of the internet and microchip technology in the sort of 80s and 90s culminating in the dot-com boom of the late 90s, which as you say, I wrote about. Thanks very much for your kind comments on the book. If you just sort of compare it from a financial basis I think they are very similar just in terms of the sort of role of hype from Wall Street in hyping up these companies. The sort of FOMO aspect of it among investors that they you know, you can't miss out. So just buy the companies blindly. And the sort of lionization in the press and the media of, you know, of AI as the sort of great wave of the future.So if you take a sort of skeptical market based approach, I would say, yeah, this is just another sort of another mania which will eventually burst and it looked like it had burst for a few weeks when Trump put the tariffs up, now the market seemed to be recovering. But I think there is, there may be something new about it. I am not, I don't pretend to be a technical expert. I try to rely on the evidence of or the testimony of people who know the systems well and also economists who have studied it. It seems to me the closer you get to it the more alarming it is in terms of the potential shock value that there is there.I mean Trump and the sort of reaction to a larger extent can be traced back to the China shock where we had this global shock to American manufacturing and sort of hollowed out a lot of the industrial areas much of it, like industrial Britain was hollowed out in the 80s. If you, you know, even people like Altman and Elon Musk, they seem to think that this is going to be on a much larger scale than that and will basically, you know, get rid of the professions as they exist. Which would be a huge, huge shock. And I think a lot of the economists who studied this, who four or five years ago were relatively optimistic, people like Daron Acemoglu, David Autor—Andrew Keen: Simon Johnson, of course, who just won the Nobel Prize, and he's from England.John Cassidy: Simon, I did an event with Simon earlier this week. You know they've studied this a lot more closely than I have but I do interview them and I think five, six years ago they were sort of optimistic that you know this could just be a new steam engine or could be a microchip which would lead to sort of a lot more growth, rising productivity, rising productivity is usually associated with rising wages so sure there'd be short-term costs but ultimately it would be a good thing. Now, I think if you speak to them, they see since the, you know, obviously, the OpenAI—the original launch and now there's just this huge arms race with no government involvement at all I think they're coming to the conclusion that rather than being developed to sort of complement human labor, all these systems are just being rushed out to substitute for human labor. And it's just going, if current trends persist, it's going to be a China shock on an even bigger scale.You know what is going to, if that, if they're right, that is going to produce some huge political backlash at some point, that's inevitable. So I know—the thing when the dot-com bubble burst, it didn't really have that much long-term impact on the economy. People lost the sort of fake money they thought they'd made. And then the companies, obviously some of the companies like Amazon and you know Google were real genuine profit-making companies and if you bought them early you made a fortune. But AI does seem a sort of bigger, scarier phenomenon to me. I don't know. I mean, you're close to it. What do you think?Andrew Keen: Well, I'm waiting for a book, John, from you. I think you can combine dot-com and capitalism and its critics. We need you probably to cover it—you know more about it than me. Final question, I mean, it's a wonderful book and we haven't even scratched the surface everyone needs to get it. I enjoyed the chapter, for example, on Karl Polanyi and so much more. I mean, it's a big book. But my final question, John, is do you have any regrets about anyone you left out? The one person I would have liked to have been included was Rawls because of his sort of treatment of capitalism and luck as a kind of casino. I'm not sure whether you gave any thought to Rawls, but is there someone in retrospect you should have had a chapter on that you left out?John Cassidy: There are lots of people I left out. I mean, that's the problem. I mean there have been hundreds and hundreds of critics of capitalism. Rawls, of course, incredibly influential and his idea of the sort of, you know, the veil of ignorance that you should judge things not knowing where you are in the income distribution and then—Andrew Keen: And it's luck. I mean the idea of some people get lucky and some people don't.John Cassidy: It is the luck of the draw, obviously, what card you pull. I think that is a very powerful critique, but I just—because I am more of an expert on economics, I tended to leave out philosophers and sociologists. I mean, you know, you could say, where's Max Weber? Where are the anarchists? You know, where's Emma Goldman? Where's John Kenneth Galbraith, the sort of great mid-century critic of American industrial capitalism? There's so many people that you could include. I mean, I could have written 10 volumes. In fact, I refer in the book to, you know, there's always been a problem. G.D.H. Cole, a famous English historian, wrote a history of socialism back in the 1960s and 70s. You know, just getting to 1850 took him six volumes. So, you've got to pick and choose, and I don't claim this is the history of capitalism and its critics. That would be a ridiculous claim to make. I just claim it's a history written by me, and hopefully the people are interested in it, and they're sufficiently diverse that you can address all the big questions.Andrew Keen: Well it's certainly incredibly timely. Capitalism and its critics—more and more of them. Sometimes they don't even describe themselves as critics of capitalism when they're talking about oligarchs or billionaires, they're really criticizing capitalism. A must read from one of America's leading journalists. And would you call yourself a critic of capitalism, John?John Cassidy: Yeah, I guess I am, to some extent, sure. I mean, I'm not a—you know, I'm not on the far left, but I'd say I'm a center-left critic of capitalism. Yes, definitely, that would be fair.Andrew Keen: And does the left need to learn? Does everyone on the left need to read the book and learn the language of anti-capitalism in a more coherent and honest way?John Cassidy: I hope so. I mean, obviously, I'd be talking my own book there, as they say, but I hope that people on the left, but not just people on the left. I really did try to sort of be fair to the sort of right-wing critiques as well. I included the Carlyle chapter particularly, obviously, but in the later chapters, I also sort of refer to this emerging critique on the right, the sort of economic nationalist critique. So hopefully, I think people on the right could read it to understand the critiques from the left, and people on the left could read it to understand some of the critiques on the right as well.Andrew Keen: Well, it's a lovely book. It's enormously erudite and simultaneously readable. Anyone who likes John Cassidy's work from The New Yorker will love it. Congratulations, John, on the new book, and I'd love to get you back on the show as anti-capitalism in America picks up steam and perhaps manifests itself in the 2028 election. Thank you so much.John Cassidy: Thanks very much for inviting me on, it was fun.Keen On America is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. 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

To get live links to the music we play and resources we offer, visit www.WOSPodcast.comThis show includes the following songs:Grenon - snow for a day FOLLOW ON SPOTIFYMandy Lopez - Scapegoat FOLLOW ON SPOTIFYDelaney Parker - Stockyard FOLLOW ON SPOTIFYAna Gracey - Afterlife FOLLOW ON SPOTIFYErin Darley - NRG FOLLOW ON SPOTIFYYasmin Schancer - Eulogy FOLLOW ON SPOTIFYNina Eliza - Mean So Much FOLLOW ON SPOTIFYMonsieur Stone x Emily Gray x Eric Pilavian - Let Me Breathe FOLLOW ON SPOTIFYEmma Della Rossa - Worse FOLLOW ON SPOTIFYBirdsy - Liar FOLLOW ON SPOTIFYAmoreena Athanas - It Never Rains In Arizona FOLLOW ON SPOTIFYJanet Devlin - Back to My Senses FOLLOW ON SPOTIFYFaith Groves - Mugshots FOLLOW ON SPOTIFYJessica Carter Altman - London Fog FOLLOW ON SPOTIFYRhodoSun - Stay with Me Till Dawn FOLLOW ON SPOTIFYFor Music Biz Resources Visit www.FEMusician.com and www.ProfitableMusician.comVisit our Sponsor Profitable Musician Newsletter at profitablemusician.com/joinVisit our Sponsor Ed and Carol Nicodemi at edandcarolnicodemi.comVisit our Sponsor Mandi Macias at mandimacias.comVisit our Sponsor Susie Maddocks at susiemaddocks.comVisit www.wosradio.com for more details and to submit music to our review board for consideration.Visit our resources for Indie Artists: https://www.wosradio.com/resourcesBecome more Profitable in just 3 minutes per day. http://profitablemusician.com/join

Vince Berry was in studio this morning, and recapped his weekend excursion with Auntie Barbara, Chaz's mother-in-law. Little did she know, Vince had recorded (at Chaz's request) the whole car trip. (0:00)  Fox 61's Jimmy Altman was in studio with Chaz and AJ this morning, talking about the viral videos of the ship crashing into the Brooklyn Bridge. While discussing the incident, a Tribe member who served a 10-year career in the Coast Guard called to share his observations. (8:09)  The Tribe called in their pet peeves, after Jimmy Altman shared the thing he sees some other reporters do that he's bothered by. (20:11)  Comedian Paul Virzi was on the phone, fired up after a big Knicks win against the Celtics over the weekend. (34:50) 

OpenAI CEO Sam Altman laid out a big vision for the future of ChatGPT at an AI event hosted by VC firm Sequoia earlier this month.  When asked by one attendee about how ChatGPT can become more personalized, Altman replied that he eventually wants the model to document and remember everything in a person's life. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Send us a textEpisode 548"Earnhardt:Director: Joshua AltmanDirector Joshua Altman joins me to talk about his new documentary on Prime Video called "Earnhardt" we discuss Dale, his family, his passing and much more.Drops May 22nd on Prime Video.A charismatic, working-class hero to millions of fans, Dale Earnhardt was the most influential figure the sport of NASCAR has ever known. ‘The Intimidator' spent the better part of two decades as the most visible figure in stock car racing, breaking through the confines of the sport's regional fan base into mainstream notoriety. The Goodwrench No. 3 Chevrolet, with an eye-catching black paint job, became one of the most feared and iconic symbols in NASCAR history, as Earnhardt notched 76 race wins and a record-tying seven NASCAR Cup Series championships over a groundbreaking 26-year career. Racing was his life, and it ran in his blood. He grew up idolizing his father Ralph, a respected driver on the early NASCAR circuit, and his own children likewise strove to follow him onto the track—with son Dale Earnhardt Jr. eventually becoming one of the most enduringly popular drivers of all time in his own right. From one generation to the next, racing would become the Earnhardt legacy – fueling their greatest triumphs and delivering their deepest loss.Earnhardt is a four-part documentary series that explores the legendary racing career and complex family dynamics of NASCAR legend Dale Earnhardt. With rare archival footage, thrilling races, and emotionally revealing interviews from his children, rivals, and closest friends, Earnhardt is the definitive story of an American icon, both on and off the track.www.mmcpodcast.com#primevideo #daleearnhardt #daleearnhardtjr #nascar #racing #carracing #interview #podcast #documentary #racingcar Reach out to Darek Thomas and Monday Morning Critic!Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/mondaymorningcritic/Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/mondaymorningcritic/TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@mondaymorningcriticMondaymorningcritic@gmail.com

OpenAI CEO Sam Altman is using his olive oil inefficiently in an “offense to horticulture,” the Financial Times humorously reports. For its “Lunch with the FT” series, the paper joined Altman in his kitchen. He prepared a garlicky pasta and salad Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

We kick things off with James O'Keefe going completely off the rails—yes, again. Then we dive into President Trump's epic visit to Saudi Arabia alongside Elon Musk and Sam Altman, where he got a hero's welcome and delivered a powerful speech on peace, Iran, and the Abraham Accords.Meanwhile, Jake Tapper is in full meltdown mode—first teasing his new book, then blaming the White House for lying to him. We unpack his legacy of cover-ups, cheap fakes, and Brian Stelter flashbacks, plus the moment Biden had to be literally woken up during an interview.Also:-Axios gets roasted, Joe Concha drops bombs, and Scott Jennings demolishes the Dems' Biden blame game-Biden forgets George Clooney (!), Schumer dodges, and Hakeem Jeffries defends raiding ICE-Standing ovations for Trump on Syria, TikTokers spotlight Gen Z conservatives, and Tucker takes a flamethrower to Ben Shapiro-Jimmy Kimmel pushes TDS like it's a subscription servicePlus: Newark ICE protests, Rep. LaMonica's legal mess, and Cori Bush's new SubstackSUPPORT OUR SPONSORS TO SUPPORT OUR SHOW!Find out who's selling your data with AURA before it's too late. Start your 2-week free trial at https://Aura.com/chicks. Just $12/month after that.Get 2 FREE tickets to The Last Rodeo when you become a premium member of the Angel Studios Guild. Visit https://Angel.com/chicks and sign up today!Give your dog the best nutrition with Ruff Greens. Get your FREE jumpstart bag, just cover shipping, at https://RuffChicks.com using code CHICKSStand up for women's sports with XX-XY.  Visit https://thetruthfits.com and use code CHICKS20 for 20% off your first purchaseStart your morning with Blackout Coffee and The Chicks! Bold brews and SO MANY flavors — blackout with us! Visit https://Blackoutcoffee.com/CHICKS and use code CHICKS at checkout for 20% off your first order.

https://lp.constantcontactpages.com/cu/KnR13hm/turnaroundtimeThe inventor of the famous Z-score for evaluating corporate financial distress — and Turnaround Time favorite — NYU Professor of Finance Emeritus Edward Altman returns for his fourth appearance on our podcast. In this episode, Professor Altman discusses the evolution of the Z-score over nearly 60 years, shares insights on current market conditions, including the impact of tariffs on corporate distress, and reveals surprising trends in distressed exchanges. In this episode, Professor Altman is interviewed by Joseph Sarachek, managing partner of The Sarachek Firm and adjunct professor at NYU Stern School of Business. To learn more about turnaround management, news, and experts, visit turnaround.org.   Episode Links View Professor Altman's slides here.  Our episode is sponsored by Change Capital. Learn more about Ed Altman at NYU Leonard N. Stern School of Business. Learn more about Joseph Saracheck at Saracheck Law. Learn more about the Turnaround Management Association here. Our music is by Kit and the Calltones.

Dr. Edward Altman, creator of the Z-Score bankruptcy prediction model and Max L. Heine Professor of Finance, Emeritus at the Stern School of Business, joins Julia La Roche on episode 257 for an in-depth discussion on where we are in the credit cycle. Sponsor: This episode is brought to you by Monetary Metals. https://monetary-metals.com/julia In this episode, Ed Altman discusses the current state of the credit cycle. Dr. Altman explains that 2024 saw more Chapter 11 bankruptcy filings than any year since the Great Financial Crisis, with over 7,000 filings. He analyzes why the economy has moved from a "benign" phase to a "stress" phase in his credit cycle framework, highlighting the dichotomy between high-yield bonds and bank loans, the impact of floating-rate debt, and the growth of private credit markets. Dr. Altman also examines distressed exchanges as alternatives to bankruptcy, government debt concerns, and why credit cycles typically precede business cycles as leading economic indicators.Dr. Altman is a renowned professor and researcher for his bankruptcy prediction and credit risk analysis work. Dr. Altman earned his MBA and Ph.D. in Finance from the University of California, Los Angeles. He has been with NYU Stern School of Business since 1967. He is most famous for developing the Z-Score formula in the late 1960s. The Z-Score is a financial model that uses historical data to predict a company's likelihood of bankruptcy. This formula is widely used by investors, financial analysts, and auditors as a tool for predicting corporate defaults and an aid in credit risk management. Dr. Altman has published numerous books and articles on the topics of bankruptcy, corporate distress analysis, corporate financial restructuring, and credit risk. His work has had a significant impact on both academic finance and practical investment analysis. Links: Wiser Funding: https://www.wiserfunding.com/ Corporate Financial Distress, Restructuring and Bankruptcy Book: https://www.amazon.com/Corporate-Financial-Distress-Restructuring-Bankruptcy/dp/1119481805/NYU Stern: https://www.stern.nyu.edu/faculty/bio/edward-altman00:00 - Introduction to Dr. Edward Altman 01:17 - The current credit cycle and economy outlook 03:17 - Credit market dichotomy between high yield bonds and bank loans 05:43 - Floating rate vs fixed rate debt performance 09:16 - Credit cycle as a leading indicator for the business cycle 15:21 - Record high Chapter 11 bankruptcies in 2024 19:06 - Understanding distressed exchanges as a default technique 26:58 - The Z-Score: history and evolution 33:49 - Changes in corporate debt markets over the decades 36:37 - Bond rating equivalents for Z-Scores 38:32 - Comparing current conditions to the 2007 credit bubble 45:19 - Private credit market growth and impact 51:38 - Government debt concerns and interest payments 59:59 - Closing thoughts on the credit cycle and market outlook

Sam Altman's outsize ambition and messianic optimism take center stage in a conversation with Keach Hagey, author of The Optimist: Sam Altman, OpenAI, and the Race to Invent the Future. From failed flip-phone apps to billion-dollar AI bets, Altman emerges as one of Silicon Valley's most effective—and unsettling—dream merchants. Plus: Trump's flying palace may be more than a bribe; it's a perfect symbol of soft corruption via cushy luxury. And of all the cease-fires for Trump to broker, he chooses one where U.S. weapons and interests are barely at stake. Produced by Corey WaraEmail us at ⁠⁠⁠⁠thegist@mikepesca.com⁠⁠⁠⁠To advertise on the show, contact ⁠⁠⁠⁠sales@advertisecast.com⁠⁠⁠⁠ or visit ⁠⁠⁠⁠https://advertising.libsyn.com/TheGist⁠⁠⁠⁠Subscribe to The Gist: ⁠⁠⁠⁠https://subscribe.mikepesca.com/⁠⁠⁠⁠Subscribe to The Gist Youtube Page: ⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC4_bh0wHgk2YfpKf4rg40_g⁠⁠⁠⁠Subscribe to The Gist Instagram Page: ⁠⁠⁠⁠GIST INSTAGRAM⁠⁠⁠⁠Follow The Gist List at: ⁠⁠⁠⁠Pesca⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠Profundities | Mike Pesca | Substack⁠⁠⁠⁠ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Send us a textWelcome to another episode of Yappin N Shxt! In today's episode:   Wedding efficiency!  Paper invites or nah?OpenAI CEO Sam Altman's (founder of ChatGPT) other co-founded venture, now rolling out stateside, is an orb that scans your eyeballs in exchange for cryptocurrency.The device, which creates a unique user ID for your scan, is meant to address a problem that Altman had a hand in creating: how to verify identities and confirm humanity in a world full of artificial intelligence.The project, called World (formerly Worldcoin)Social Security moving up in technology--allowed to use a digital version.The next thing SpaceX is trying to launch is its own municipality: Residents of the tiny coastal stretch the company uses for rocket sendoffs are voting today on whether to establish a city called Starbase, Texas.Turning the 1.45-square-mile area in South Texas—which doesn't currently have much besides SpaceX launchpads, rocket assembly facilities, and employee housing—into a city would give Musk's company more direct say in local decision-makingWhat is a Labubu? The dolls were created in 2015 by Hong Kong-based artist Kasing Lung, who started manufacturing them exclusively with Chinese toy retailer Pop Mart in 2019. The toy's popularity skyrocketed last year when K-pop star Lisa from Blackpink was seen carrying themNext Funko pop or something else? Beanie babies?Yappin N Shxt is a production of Lost Dawgs Media.Listen to us on all of your favorite podcasting apps!Follow us on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/yappinnshxtpod/

“Who's Cheating?” asks Keith Teare in his weekly summary of tech news. Keith is defending a Columbia University student who was punished for openly used AI in his classes. As Arthur C. Clark famously noted, advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic, and so its use is often viewed as cheating by the old regime. But, as Keith and I agree, the $80,000 annual fees that universities are now charging for an undergraduate education could also be seen as a particularly egregious form of cheating. Especially since that a similar education could mostly be achieved by a $20 monthly OpenAI account. Five Takeaways* AI usage in education is causing institutional resistance, with a Columbia student's expulsion highlighting the tension between traditional learning and new technology adoption.* Universities face an existential crisis as AI makes knowledge more accessible, potentially undermining their expensive business model of gatekeeping talent.* Google's search dominance is threatened as Apple explores AI alternatives and companies like Anthropic develop competitive search APIs.* OpenAI is navigating a complex transition, maintaining non-profit governance while uncapping profit potential, signaling Altman's focus on commercial applications.* The future of AI lies in the application layer, with OpenAI's hiring of Instacart's CEO for applications suggesting a strategy to own the entire AI stack from infrastructure to user interface.Keen On America is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. 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

AI innovator and OpenAI CEO Sam Altman sees a big problem on the horizon: As AI becomes more and more intelligent, how can anyone tell the humans from the bots? Altman's World project thinks it has a solution. WSJ's Angus Berwick unpacks the plan and explores some of the problems that have cropped up during the rollout. Annie Minoff hosts.  Sign up for WSJ's free What's News newsletter. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Plus AI Brings Back Murder Victim Like this? Get AIDAILY, delivered to your inbox, 3x a week. Subscribe to our newsletter at https://aidaily.usAI Chatbots: Flattering Users at the Expense of TruthA recent update to ChatGPT made it overly flattering, endorsing even ill-conceived ideas. This behavior stems from Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF), where AI models learn to please users, sometimes sacrificing accuracy. The article argues that such sycophantic tendencies mirror social media's echo chambers, suggesting AI should serve as a tool for exploring diverse knowledge rather than merely affirming user biases.AI Brings Murder Victim's Voice to Courtroom in Unprecedented Legal MomentIn a groundbreaking Arizona case, AI technology enabled the late Christopher Pelkey to deliver a victim impact statement at his killer's sentencing. Pelkey's sister used AI to recreate his voice and likeness, allowing him to express forgiveness and reflect on life. The judge acknowledged the statement's impact, sentencing the defendant to 10.5 years. This marks a significant moment in the integration of AI into the legal system.MIT's AI Model Predicts 3D Genome Structures in MinutesMIT chemists have developed a generative AI model that rapidly predicts the 3D structure of the human genome from DNA sequences. This innovation allows for the generation of thousands of chromatin conformations in minutes, significantly accelerating genomic research. The model's predictions closely match experimental data, offering a powerful tool for understanding gene regulation and cellular function.AI Isn't Replacing Your Job—It's Replacing Your BossAI is reshaping the workplace by automating middle management tasks like scheduling, reporting, and decision-making. Tools such as virtual assistants and chatbots now handle up to 69% of managerial duties, streamlining operations and reducing bureaucracy. This shift empowers frontline employees while diminishing traditional supervisory roles.I Tried an AI Aging App—And It Wasn't as Bad as I ThoughtA CNET writer tested an AI-powered aging app to see a glimpse of their future self. The results were surprisingly realistic and less unsettling than anticipated. While the app offered a fun and insightful look into potential aging, it also sparked reflections on the emotional implications of visualizing one's future appearance.Sam Altman Warns Congress: Overregulating AI Could Undermine U.S. LeadershipIn a recent Senate hearing, OpenAI CEO Sam Altman cautioned that excessive AI regulation might hinder the United States' competitive edge, particularly against China. This marks a shift from his earlier stance advocating for stringent oversight. Altman emphasized the need for balanced policies that foster innovation while addressing potential risks associated with AI technologies.

Economist Daniel Altman — who publishes the Daniel Altman's High Yield Economics newsletter — says that the Federal Reserve and its chairman Jerome Powell provided more certainty than the market was expecting on Wednesday by effectively confirming that fighting inflation, rather than unemployment, is Job One. That means interest rates will stay higher for longer, with cuts not occurring until late this year or into 2026. Altman worries about the potential for stagflation and says that the job market may be weaker than the numbers are suggesting, but he does believe the worst-case outcomes can be avoided with appropriate policy decisions. Charlie Ripley, senior investment strategist at Allianz Investment Management, says that the soft economic data like consumer confidence suggests that the economy is headed into a big slowdown, but the hard data isn't validating the biggest worries yet. Ripley says fundamentals remain strong, and that there are some plusses — like falling energy prices — that have been overlooked amid the dire headlines. Todd Rosenbluth, head of research at VettaFi, makes a brand new fund that is focused on hedge-fund activity his "ETF of the Week," noting the fund's potential for diversifying the average portfolio and for running against market trends.

We love to hear from our listeners. Send us a message.In this episode of Cell & Gene: The Podcast, Host Erin Harris sits down with Peter Altman, Ph.D., CEO of BioCardia, to discuss the company's evolution from a cardiac biotherapeutic delivery firm to a developer of autologous and allogeneic cell therapies for cardiovascular and pulmonary diseases. Altman highlights BioCardia's CardiAMP program, a precision medicine approach that pre-screens patients based on their cell profiles to improve trial outcomes and reduce costs. He explains why no cardiac cell therapy has yet received FDA approval, citing challenges in delivery, immune rejection, and arrhythmia risks. Altman outlines BioCardia's near-term roadmap, including regulatory submissions in the U.S. and Japan and the launch of a second trial focused on patients most likely to benefit.Subscribe to the podcast!Apple | Spotify | YouTube

On Episode 566 of Impact Boom, Miriam Altman-Reyes of Brass Ring Ventures discusses empowering underrepresented tech founders to scale impact-driven innovations, and key lessons from start-up leadership to help you unlock economic mobility and achieve both financial sustainability and measurable impact. If you are a changemaker wanting to learn actionable steps to grow your organisations or level up your impact, don't miss out on this episode! If you enjoyed this episode, then check out Episode 252 with David Ponraj on fostering resourceful and healthy enterprise ecosystems -> https://bit.ly/3Z5kHPo The team who made this episode happen were: Host: Indio Myles Guest(s): Miriam Altman-Reyes Producer: Indio Myles We invite you to join our community on Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn or Instagram to stay up to date on the latest social innovation news and resources to help you turn ideas into impact. You'll also find us on all the major podcast streaming platforms, where you can also leave a review and provide feedback.

We always hate to say goodbye... but we must close this chapter of the podcast and officially send off our Alan Rudolph series out to the beautiful blue ocean. We honor the man himself talking about what we learned looking at all of these movies he made, what he and Altman showed us about American filmmaking, read some choice quotes from the man himself, his top 10 favorite movies. AND... we announce our upcoming subject for the next season, before we hand out some Bob awards for these final 10 Rudolph movies, our ranked list of them, and what we're looking for in the next series. From both of us hosts, thank you to everyone who's listened to us ramble about movies for these 20+ episodes, whether you're a new listener or a day-oner, we appreciate having you around. Thank you to everyone in our discord for keeping the conversation going and for anyone that went and watched even one Alan Rudolph movie from our discussions let alone all of them. And thank you to all of our guests who we'll list below, but the biggest thanks of all goes to our pal Jason Miller who really got the fire cooking on this season, who got us so psyched about a guy that made some seriously unparalleled movies right under the radar of the Hollywood machine, thanks Jason! And to all of our other guests - Thank you so much to…VALERIE KEATON, PETER RALEIGH, ESME HOLDEN, CHRIS WOODWARD, AARON CASIAS, ETAN WEISFOGEL, JANE ALTOIDS, JORDAN FISH, GIGI, IAN RHINE, JAKE SERWIN - and our guests who couldn't quite make it in ANNABEL JESSICA GOLDSMITH and TORREY PAQUETTE, we'll catch you again next time.  See you all in June for Series 4 of Altmania! Follow Altmania: altmaniapod.com estebannoel.com Support us on Patreon: patreon.com/altmania

In 1816, 18-year-old Mary Wollstonecraft Godwin (later Shelley) birthed science fiction during a rainy vacation on Lake Geneva. Inspired by a vision of a man crouched beside the corpse he reanimated, Frankenstein warned of what happens when man tries to play God. Two centuries later, the monsters are real, and they're called Musk, Altman, and Zuckerberg. Today's tech titans, like Frankenstein's Victor, race to build superintelligent machines in their image: soulless wannabe-gods with devastating reach. Gil Duran, of the Nerd Reich newsletter, connects this to A.I. worship, quoting a billionaire obsessed with “creating God” through algorithms. M.I.T.'s annotated Frankenstein likens Victor's horror to Oppenheimer's nuclear regret. We've entered a new atomic age, but instead of bombs, it's information weapons and hacked minds. As Pulitzer-nominated journalist Carole Cadwalladr warns, this is what a digital coup looks like. A.I. is trained to replace journalists, strip away privacy, and deepen inequality, just as Gaslit Nation has warned since 2018. What's the answer? Community. Skill-sharing. Nature. The real world. Jack Welch, once worshipped like Musk is today, gutted G.E. with fear-based leadership. Now he's a cautionary tale. So will today's tech gods be. Mary Shelley saw it coming. “Frightful must it be,” she wrote. We agree. But there's power in human connection, in rejecting the machine's illusions. Frankenstein's monster was abandoned. Let's not abandon each other. Join our resilience salons. Find your people. Build the future together. Want to enjoy Gaslit Nation ad-free? Join our community of listeners for bonus shows, ad-free episodes, exclusive Q&A sessions, our group chat, invites to live events like our Monday political salons at 4pm ET over Zoom, and more! Sign up at Patreon.com/Gaslit! Show Notes   The song you heard in this week's episode is “Unspoken Word” by Evrette Allen: https://soundcloud.com/user-726164627/unspoken-word-mix-13/s-GEvlnfQnmh4?si=954f31de09d644948d51a225224bd7ba&utm_source=clipboard&utm_medium=text&utm_campaign=social_sharing   Nerd Reich: https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2018/02/12/the-strange-and-twisted-life-of-frankenstein   After two hundred years, are we ready for the truth about Mary Shelley's novel? https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2018/02/12/the-strange-and-twisted-life-of-frankenstein   Astronomers have determined the exact hour that Mary Shelley thought of Frankenstein. https://lithub.com/astronomers-have-determined-the-exact-hour-that-mary-shelley-thought-of-frankenstein/   AI's Energy Demands Are Out of Control. Welcome to the Internet's Hyper-Consumption Era Generative artificial intelligence tools, now part of the everyday user experience online, are causing stress on local power grids and mass water evaporation. https://www.wired.com/story/ai-energy-demands-water-impact-internet-hyper-consumption-era/   Short-term profits and long-term consequences — did Jack Welch break capitalism? https://www.npr.org/2022/06/01/1101505691/short-term-profits-and-long-term-consequences-did-jack-welch-break-capitalism   Carole Cadwalladr TED Talk: This Is What a Digital Coup Looks Like https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TZOoT8AbkNE   Self-styled prophets are claiming they have "awakened" chatbots and accessed the secrets of the universe through ChatGPT https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-features/ai-spiritual-delusions-destroying-human-relationships-1235330175/

As the conclave nears, John-Henry and Fr. James Altman explore the chilling prophecy of Peter the Roman—St. Malachy's final pope, said to reign during the Church's ultimate trial. Could this prophecy be unfolding now? They examine rising papal contender Cardinal Pierbattista Pizzaballa, and whether the Latin Patriarch of Jerusalem could fulfill the chilling prophecy of Peter the Roman, the final pope listed in St. Malachy's alleged vision. With Pizzaballa's roots in the Holy Land, his growing visibility, and the Church in deep crisis, the parallels are hard to ignore. The hosts explore what this prophecy could mean, whether it's unfolding now, and why the next pope could lead the Church through its greatest trial yet.U.S. residents! Create a will with LifeSiteNews: https://www.mylegacywill.com/lifesitenews ****PROTECT Your Wealth with gold, silver, and precious metals: https://stjosephpartners.com/lifesitenews +++SHOP ALL YOUR FUN AND FAVORITE LIFESITE MERCH! https://shop.lifesitenews.com/ ****Download the all-new LSNTV App now, available on iPhone and Android!LSNTV Apple Store: https://apps.apple.com/us/app/lsntv/id6469105564 LSNTV Google Play: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.lifesitenews.app +++Connect with John-Henry Westen and all of LifeSiteNews on social media:LifeSite: https://linktr.ee/lifesitenews John-Henry Westen: https://linktr.ee/jhwesten Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

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

Neste programa especial, o jornalista e analista político Breno Altman mergulha em uma das páginas mais decisivas da história moderna. Quais foram as causas, os conflitos e as consequências da Segunda Guerra Mundial? Como seu legado ainda ecoa na política, na economia e nas relações internacionais de hoje?

Tom Bilyeu and Producer Drew jump straight into the breaking news of the US signing a critical minerals deal with Ukraine, dissecting the motivations behind this strategic move and its potential to reshape the global power dynamic amidst ongoing war with Russia. The episode then shifts focus to the volatile US economy, exploring the reality behind the recent economic contraction, the intricacies of trade deficits, and the initial ripple effects caused by new tariffs. Drawing from real-time data and personal insight, Tom and Drew provide context on how these changes may impact Main Street businesses, American allies, and the emerging trade chess game involving China and Canada. SHOWNOTES 00:00 Trump's Rhetoric on Russia Shift 04:30 US-Ukraine Security Guarantee Dispute 06:27 Ukraine's Leverage and Military Challenges 11:44 Pre-Tariff Import Surge Concerns 14:42 Government Bailout vs. Market Failure 17:42 Pre-MMA Reality Check 21:41 Balancing Immigration and Human Rights 25:01 Blockchain and AI's Impact on Humanity 29:43 Book Triggers Emotional Response 33:10 "Promoting Healthier SNAP Spending" 33:48 "Anxiety Over U.S. Future" CHECK OUT OUR SPONSORS Vital Proteins: Get 20% off by going to ⁠https://www.vitalproteins.com⁠ and entering promo code IMPACT at check out Upway: Get $150 OFF any purchase over a thousand when you use code IMPACT at ⁠https://upway.co⁠. iRestore: For a limited time only, our listeners are getting a HUGE discount on the iRestore Elite when you use code IMPACT at ⁠https://iRestore.com/impact⁠. Monarch Money: Use code THEORY at ⁠https://monarchmoney.com⁠ for 50% off your first year! Mint Mobile: If you like your money, Mint Mobile is for you. Shop plans at ⁠https://mintmobile.com/impact.⁠  DISCLAIMER: Upfront payment of $45 for 3-month 5 gigabyte plan required (equivalent to $15/mo.). New customer offer for first 3 months only, then full-price plan options available. Taxes & fees extra. See MINT MOBILE for details. What's up, everybody? It's Tom Bilyeu here: If you want my help... STARTING a business:⁠ join me here at ZERO TO FOUNDER⁠ SCALING a business:⁠ see if you qualify here.⁠ Get my battle-tested strategies and insights delivered weekly to your inbox:⁠ sign up here.⁠ ********************************************************************** If you're serious about leveling up your life, I urge you to check out my new podcast,⁠ Tom Bilyeu's Mindset Playbook⁠ —a goldmine of my most impactful episodes on mindset, business, and health. Trust me, your future self will thank you. ********************************************************************** Join me live on my⁠ Twitch stream⁠. I'm live daily from 6:30 to 8:30 am PT at⁠ www.twitch.tv/tombilyeu⁠ ********************************************************************** LISTEN TO IMPACT THEORY AD FREE + BONUS EPISODES on APPLE PODCASTS:⁠ apple.co/impacttheory⁠ ********************************************************************** FOLLOW TOM: Instagram:⁠ https://www.instagram.com/tombilyeu/⁠ Tik Tok:⁠ https://www.tiktok.com/@tombilyeu?lang=en⁠ Twitter:⁠ https://twitter.com/tombilyeu⁠ YouTube:⁠ https://www.youtube.com/@TomBilyeu Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Sam Altman didn't want to be the subject of a biography, suggesting the AI revolution is about more than one person, says Keach Hagey, a Wall Street Journal reporter and author of “The Optimist.” But on this episode, host and Vanity Fair editor-in-chief Radhika Jones, along with executive editor Claire Howorth and Hive editor Michael Calderone, go deep on the man himself, speaking with Hagey about Altman's progressive politics, friendship with Peter Thiel, feud with Elon Musk, and dealings with Donald Trump, along with his brief exit from OpenAI—aka “The Blip”—and vision for this potentially world-altering technology.  Learn about your ad choices: dovetail.prx.org/ad-choices

Duolingo will replace contract workers with AI, OpenAI adds shopping to ChatGPT in a challenge to Google, researchers secretly experimented on Reddit users with AI-generated comments, and so much more on the AI Inside podcast! Support the show on Patreon! http://patreon.com/aiinsideshow Subscribe to the YouTube channel! http://www.youtube.com/@aiinsideshow Enjoying the AI Inside podcast? Please rate us ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ in your podcatcher of choice! Note: Time codes subject to change depending on dynamic ad insertion by the distributor. CHAPTERS: 03:15 - Duolingo will replace contract workers with AI 12:36 - ⁠Duolingo More Than Doubles Courses as ‘AI-First' Push Draws Heat⁠ 15:07 - Google launches AI tools for practicing languages through personalized lessons 16:09 - Generative AI is not replacing jobs or hurting wages at all, say economists 22:53 - Prompt engineer: The Hottest AI Job of 2023 Is Already Obsolete 28:10 - Meta's ChatGPT competitor shows how your friends use AI 37:45 - Microsoft CEO says up to 30% of the company's code was written by AI 39:53 - Altman and Nadella, Who Ignited the Modern AI Boom Together, Are Drifting Apart 41:21 - OpenAI Adds Shopping to ChatGPT in a Challenge to Google 42:58 - Researchers secretly experimented on Reddit users with AI-generated comments 47:53 - Clip from our Interview with Emily Bender and Alex Hanna, authors of The AI Con Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Ian Altman discusses the biggest blind spot in sales meetings: lack of preparation. He emphasizes the importance of setting realistic goals aligned with the client's needs rather than unrealistic expectations. Altman advises salespeople to identify what clients need to believe to achieve their goals and to prepare for different meeting scenarios (the good, the bad, and the ugly). Role-playing these scenarios with different team members helps salespeople practice and improve their ability to handle various outcomes effectively. He concludes that thorough planning and realistic expectations lead to better client meeting outcomes.Biggest MistakesNot having any planning whatsoever for the meeting.Having unrealistic expectations for the meeting outcome.Not thinking through the logistics of the meeting from the client's perspective.Coming to a meeting with no expectations.Best PracticesSet realistic expectations for the meeting that focus on solving the client's needs.Determine what the client needs to believe for the desired outcome to happen.Prepare questions to ask the client to confirm if they believe what you need them to believe.Plan for three possible scenarios: good, bad, and ugly.Role-play each scenario with a team (salesperson, customer, and observer).

For the finale of our miniseries on 60s and 70s Hollywood, we're talking about Robert Altman's cynical war comedy, M*A*S*H. Joining us for the discussion is writer, podcaster, friend of the show, and Altman skeptic Nick Newman. Then, we answer an email about Letterboxd and “irl”. 00:00 - M*A*S*H 1:09:46 - e-mail

Woedend is het Witte Huis op Amazon. De webwinkel wilde op een deel van de website laten zien hoe erg die handelstarieven van Trump er in hakken. Dat kan de president er niet bij hebben, niet nu hij aan die tarieven aan het morrelen is.Trump komt namelijk de autosector tegemoet. Een aantal heffingen bouwt hij af. Daarmee maakt hij wéér een draai. Deze aflevering kijken we of hij nog meer concessies gaat doen en wat er over blijft van zijn plannen voor de handelsoorlog. En of het nog goed komt tussen hem en Amazon-oprichter Jeff Bezos.Spanningen zijn er ook tussen Microsoft en OpenAI. Jarenlang waren ze de beste vrienden van Sillicon Valley. Zelfs toen de topman van OpenAI ruw op straat werd gezet, ving Satya Nadella van Microsoft hem op. Maar die tijd is voorbij. Ook bespreken we de problemen van chipmaker NXP. Dat waarschuwt voor een 'zeer onzekere omgeving'. En juist van die onzekerheid zijn beleggers niet gecharmeerd. Ook niet van het feit dat de topman ineens met pensioen gaat.Hebben we ook nog goed nieuws en dat komt van de maker van het favoriete drankje van Trump. Coca-Cola zegt dat het (tegen de verwachtingen in) géén last heeft van de tarieven van diezelfde Trump. In tegenstelling tot aartsrivaal Pepsi.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In this episode, Jamie and Jaeden unpack the latest moves from OpenAI, including rumors of a potential leap into the social media space. They explore the growing rivalry between Sam Altman and Elon Musk, the complex challenges of building a responsible social platform, and the urgent need for AI safety standards and legislation. The discussion sheds light on the breakneck speed of AI innovation and the ethical questions shaping its future.Chapters00:00 Introduction to OpenAI's Latest Developments03:06 OpenAI's Social Media Ambitions05:52 Safety Concerns in AI Development09:03 Legislation and Safety Standards in AI11:54 Conclusion and Call to ActionAI Hustle YouTube Channel: https://www.youtube.com/@AI-Hustle-PodcastOur Skool Community: https://www.skool.com/aihustle/aboutTry AI Box: ⁠⁠https://AIBox.ai/⁠⁠

Darkness Radio presents Creepy Critters: A Pennsylvania Bigfoot and UFO Adventure with Cryptozoologist and Bigfoot Researcher, Eric H. Altman & Cryptozoologist & UFOlogist, Stan Gordon! Eric H Altman is the Executive Director of the Pennsylvania Bigfoot Society.  Eric was the past director of the Pennsylvania Bigfoot Society from 2000 to 2016.  ​He is a field investigator and researcher with over 23 years experience Eric is the organizer of the upcoming Pennsylvania Bigfoot Camping Adventure in 2025 and has put together an all-star lineup that includes out other guest today! Stan Gordon has been researching UFO sightings, Bigfoot encounters, and other mysterious events in Pennsylvania since 1959.. He is the primary investigator of the 1965 UFO crash incident that occurred near Kecksburg, PA.  Stan has been taking calls on UFO sightings and other strange reports from the public since 1969, and he continues to receive unusual reports on a regular basis. He has given illustrated lectures both locally and nationally on the topics of UFOs, Bigfoot, Cryptids, and strange encounters since the late 1960s. Gordon is a former PA State Director for the Mutual UFO Network (MUFON) and was its first recipient In 1987 of the MUFON Meritorious Achievement in a UFO investigation Award. He was listed in the 2005 FATE Magazine special, The 100 Most Influential People in UFOlogy Today.  He is the producer of the award winning UFO video documentary, “Kecksburg The Untold Story.”  Stan is the author of four books, Silent Invasion: The Pennsylvania UFO-Bigfoot Casebook, Really Mysterious Pennsylvania, and Astonishing Encounters: Pennsylvania's Unknown Creatures, and Stan's 4th book, “Creepy Cryptids And Strange UFO Encounters Of Pennsylvania. On Today's Show, we talk to Eric and Stan about the 2025 Pennsylvania Bigfoot Camping Adventure, and we get deep in the woods with both with some chilling tales about the  connection between UFO's and Bigfoot... we even throw in the Government and Men In Black for good measure!   Get your tickets for the 2024 PA Bigfoot Camping Adventure here:  https://www.pabigfootcampingadventure.com/tickets.html Check out the Pennsylvania Bigfoot Society's website here:  https://www.pabigfoot.com/aboutus.html Get Stan Gordon's latest book,"  Creepy Cryptids and Strange UFO Encounters of Pennsylvania. Bigfoot, Thunderbirds, Mysteries of the Chestnut Ridge and More. Casebook Four" here:  https://bit.ly/3GzXD4Q Check out Stan Gordon at his website:  https://www.stangordon.info/wp/ #paranormal  #supernatural  #metaphysical  #paranormalpodcasts  #darknessradio  #timdennis #erichaltman #ericaltman #pennsylvaniabigfootcampingadventure #stangordon #creepycryptidsandstrangeufoencountersofpennsylvania #bigfootthunderbirdsmysteriesofthechestnutridgeandmore #Cryptids #Cryptozoology #bigfoot #sasquatch #yeti  #abominablesnowman #ogopogo #lochnessmonster #chupacabra #beastofbrayroad #mothman  #paranormaltv  #discoveryplus #Aliens  #UFO #UAP #Extraterrestrials  #Alienspaceships  #disclosure #shadowpeople #conspiracytheory 

"I hate L.A. All they do is snort coke and talk." For Episode 356, David and Brandon finish off their main Hyperlink series with SHORT CUTS. Listen as the two discuss Robert Altman's adaptation of the Raymond Carver short stories, how Altman ran his sets, and why the film is one of the most ambitious films we've covered in this series. Also, don't forget to join our Patreon for more exclusive content: Opening - Timecode and Digital Cinema -  (00:00:10) Recap of the Hyperlink Genre (00:06:06) Intro to Short Cuts (00:09:43) How Short Cuts Got to Production (00:14:52) Favorite Scenes (00:28:16) On Set Life - (01:11:12) Aftermath: Release and Legacy (01:19:01) What Worked and What Didn't (01:22:01) Film Facts (01:26:37) Awards (01:26:59) Final Questions on the Movie (01:33:49) Final Genre Questions (01:39:06) Wrapping Up the Episode (01:46:35) Contact Us: Facebook: @cinenation Instagram: @cinenationpodcast Twitter/X: @CineNationPod TikTok: @cinenation Letterboxd: CineNation Podcast

Daniel speaks with Wendy Altman Cohen, the Founder of Image Optics, and legendary optician to movie and television studios, as well as who's who in Hollywood.       https://imageoptics.com/

Is the AI race moving too fast for its own good? In this episode of Leveraging AI, we unpack Altman's revealing TED Talk, OpenAI's silent safety rollback, and why ChatGPT just went all-in on vibe coding, enterprise disruption, and social media dominance.This week's AI news is anything but boring — and has massive implications for business leaders. In this session, you'll discover:Why Sam Altman believes ChatGPT will become your lifelong digital companion — and why that's both exciting and terrifyingWhat Altman didn't say about AI safety and the future of AGIHow OpenAI is aggressively chasing developer dominance with its new GPT-4.1 familyThe $3B coding acquisition OpenAI is reportedly chasing — and what that means for the future of softwareWhy OpenAI skipped publishing a safety report for their newest models (yep, really)How ChatGPT is crushing TikTok in app downloads — and quietly testing a social networkThe enterprise AI gold rush: from supply chains and email to avatars and customer service

Watch Politics War Room & James Carville Explains on YouTube @PoliticsWarRoomOfficial James and Al unload on the Trump administration's discriminatory practices and its war on education before welcoming the founder of the global investment bank Evercore, Roger Altman.  They discuss the intricacies of our relationship with China and the E.U., how tariffs and trade wars can upset the international order, and the effects that the friction they create will have on our economy.  During their analysis, they look at the future of consumer sentiment, the long-term stability of our position as the leader of the global economy, and the risk of declining growth. Email your questions to James and Al at politicswarroom@gmail.com or tweet them to @politicon.  Make sure to include your city– we love to hear where you're from! More from James and Al: Get text updates from Politics War Room and Politicon. Watch Politics War Room & James Carville Explains on YouTube @PoliticsWarRoomOfficial Get updates and some great behind-the-scenes content from the documentary CARVILLE: WINNING IS EVERYTHING, STUPID by following James on X @jamescarville and his new TikTok @realjamescarville James Carville & Al Hunt have launched the Politics War Room Substack Check Out Andrew Zucker's New Politicon Podcast: The Golden Age Get More From This Week's Guest:  Roger Altman: Evercore | The Hamilton Project  Please Support Our Sponsors: Quince: Get 365-day returns and free shipping on high-quality, stylish, and affordable clothing you'll wear for years to come when you go to quince.com/warroom Zbiotics: Get back into action after a night out with 15% off your first order of Zbiotics when you go to zbiotics.com/pwr and use code: PWR Fast Growing Trees: Get the best deals for your yard, including up to half off on select plants and other deals with an additional 15% off at fastgrowingtrees.com using the code WARROOM

The AI revolution is here to stay, says Sam Altman, the CEO of OpenAI. In a probing, live conversation with head of TED Chris Anderson, Altman discusses the astonishing growth of AI and shows how models like ChatGPT could soon become extensions of ourselves. He also addresses questions of safety, power and moral authority, reflecting on the world he envisions — where AI will almost certainly outpace human intelligence. (Recorded on April 11, 2025) Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The AI revolution is here to stay, says Sam Altman, the CEO of OpenAI. In a probing, live conversation with head of TED Chris Anderson, Altman discusses the astonishing growth of AI and shows how models like ChatGPT could soon become extensions of ourselves. He also addresses questions of safety, power and moral authority, reflecting on the world he envisions — where AI will almost certainly outpace human intelligence. (Recorded on April 11, 2025)

The AI revolution is here to stay, says Sam Altman, the CEO of OpenAI. In a probing, live conversation with head of TED Chris Anderson, Altman discusses the astonishing growth of AI and shows how models like ChatGPT could soon become extensions of ourselves. He also addresses questions of safety, power and moral authority, reflecting on the world he envisions — where AI will almost certainly outpace human intelligence. (Recorded on April 11, 2025)

Somesh Dash of IVP joins Nick to discuss Classical vs. Jazz Leadership, IPO Readiness & Key Metrics for a Successful Offering, Requirements for David to Beat Goliath, and Why Altman and Other Leaders are Pivoting to Open Source. In this episode we cover: AI's Role in Venture Investing AI Open Source & Model Layer AI in Healthcare, Education & Social Impact Globalization of Tech, Broader Trends & Perspectives Founder Traits & Evaluation Market Dynamics & Cycles Future of Tech & AI-Native Generation Guest Links: Guest's LinkedIn Company's LinkedIn Company's Website Twitter/X (guest) The host of The Full Ratchet is Nick Moran of New Stack Ventures, a venture capital firm committed to investing in founders outside of the Bay Area. Want to keep up to date with The Full Ratchet? Follow us on social. You can learn more about New Stack Ventures by visiting our LinkedIn and Twitter.