Podcast appearances and mentions of Eric Schmidt

Alice Han and James Kynge start with Trump's claim that China ran an influence operation using voter files from over 220 million Americans, and why Beijing is calling it fabricated. They dig into what the underlying intelligence actually shows, how it lands just two months before Trump's planned visit to China, and what it means that global public opinion is now tilting toward Xi over Trump. Then, Selina Xu, head of China research for former Google CEO Eric Schmidt, joins to talk about her recent trip to China with Schmidt, where the U.S. and China each have the edge in the AI race, how culture and adoption differ between the two countries, and whether Beijing's pushback against emotional dependence on AI is a sign of things to come. Subscribe to China Decode on Substack for weekly analysis, livestreams, and deep dives into the biggest story shaping the global economy: chinadecode.profgmedia.com. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

This week's video transcript summary is here. You can click on any bulleted section to see the actual transcript. Thanks to Granola for its software.EditorialIntelligence: Who Owns it?This week the word “AI” feels too small.AI is a technology. Intelligence is its product. And if intelligence is the product, the question is no longer just: Which model is best? Who has the cheapest tokens? Who owns the weights? Who controls the data center? Those are important questions, but they are lower in the stack.The bigger question is simpler and more political:Who owns intelligence?That sounds abstract until you make it concrete. Intelligence is becoming something companies can capture, package, serve, meter, route, improve, and sell.It can write code, answer questions, design molecules, automate offices, run agents, draft legal work, advise scientists, serve consumers, and reshape workflows. It is not merely software. It is a general-purpose capability. And all humans could benefit from more of it.General-purpose capabilities have a habit of becoming public questions. But the default answer, that public good is best delivered by government, is the wrong answer in this context.The Product Is IntelligenceWe should stop talking about AI as a feature and start talking about intelligence as the universal thing that is delivered as an input to the world.Water is an input. Electricity is an input. Literacy is an input. Connectivity is an input. Once a society depends on them, access stops being optional. Nobody needs government to build every well, power plant, school, or network. But everybody understands that a civilization cannot be organized around less than universal and reliable access to foundational inputs.Intelligence is reaching that level of importance now that we all know it is real.Government should not own it, operate it, or develop it. Quite the opposite. Companies are the right actors to build fast, compete hard, improve models, serve customers, and discover the real use cases. Self-interest is a useful framing here. Markets are good at finding demand, reducing costs, and turning invention into services people actually use.Companies are the right operators, developers, and owners. But that does not settle the real question of who owns the benefits. That is an economic question.If intelligence becomes metered infrastructure, what happens to the value it creates?The Ownership StackThis week's articles keep circling the same issue from different directions but in the nature of ‘circling' never quite nail it.Jamin Ball's “Own Your Weights” starts with the enterprise version of the question. Owning a model file is not enough. The durable asset is the loop: the data flywheel, the evaluations, the reinforcement system, the workflow learning, and the operating context that lets capability compound.Benedict Evans' “Ways to Think About Token Pricing” adds the market layer. Tokens may become essential, abundant, and cheap, like mobile data. But being essential does not guarantee that the token layer captures the value. The money may move up the stack to whoever owns the workflow, the customer, the distribution, or the application.Alex Karp's fight with the labs, reported in “Alex Karp Is Saying What Every Angry CEO Is Thinking About AI”, is the same argument in sharper enterprise language. Companies are afraid that model providers will not just sell intelligence, but learn from customer workflows and then move into the markets where those workflows create value. The “All-in” group are echoing Karp's view.And “What Is Loop Engineering, and Who Owns It?” names the new contested terrain. The loop is where intelligence meets the world. Whoever owns the loop owns the learning. Whoever owns the learning owns the compounding asset.That is why “who owns intelligence?” is not a slogan. It is the question under the model layer, the application layer, the enterprise layer, and the economic layer.Because intelligence is the product, the tools creating it are fragmented and competitive. So there is no logic in trying to discuss this at the level of a single company or set of tools and models.The Old Promise Was That Commerce Would Tame PowerThe essays this week give the historical backdrop.Deirdre McCloskey, in “What Really Caused the Industrial Revolution”, argues that modern growth came not simply from capital accumulation, but from a change in permission: ordinary people were allowed to innovate, trade, build, and be honored for it.That matters because intelligence could be another expansion of permission. It could make more people capable of building, learning, creating, coding, researching, translating, selling, and coordinating. It could lower the cost of competence.But only if access is broad.Paul Krugman's “AI in an Age of Oligarchy” warns that the same technology lands differently in different political economies. A new general-purpose technology entering a broad, open, upwardly mobile society is one thing. The same technology entering a concentrated economy, with extreme wealth and weak counterweights, is another.Tim O'Reilly's Economist essay, “Elon Musk is building a form of capitalism that Adam Smith would hate”, makes the governance point more directly. The old liberal hope was that commerce would tame arbitrary power. Markets, boards, courts, shareholders, disclosure, and competition would discipline the prince.But what if the prince uses markets to escape discipline?Henry Farrell's “political economy of billionaire derangement” pushes the same point. Founder culture, monopoly ambition, peer rivalry, weak correction mechanisms, and vast private control can amplify appetites rather than restrain them.The danger with intelligence is not that companies build it. They should. Companies build it, meter it, use public tolerance and public infrastructure to scale it, learn from everyone who uses it. All of those things are inevitable and healthy. Market forces will sort out winners from losers. The real danger is that the winners treat all of the surplus produced as purely private.Metered Intelligence Creates SurplusIf metering is not the problem, what is?The problem is pretending that metered intelligence creates value only for the metering entity. Metering water is only tolerated as a public good. If the public were blackmailed by a private water company with the threat of no water we would all rebel.Once we understand that the product of AI is intelligence we can see that every time intelligence is used, there is the immediate transaction: the user pays, the provider serves.But there is also system value. Usage creates signals. Workflows reveal patterns. Prompts, corrections, failures, preferences, integrations, edge cases, and business processes all help define where intelligence is useful and how it should improve. Intelligence breeds intelligence.Even when customer data is contractually protected, the market learns. The platform learns where demand is. The product team learns which workflows matter. The ecosystem learns which jobs are vulnerable, which tasks are automatable, and which parts of the economy can be reorganized around machine intelligence.So the surplus is not born in a vacuum.It rests on public science, public education, public data exhaust, public law, public infrastructure, public energy systems, public tolerance for data centers, and billions of human interactions. It is served by companies, but it is not made only by companies.This is why “Americans Deserve a Dividend From AI Companies' Riches” belongs at the center of this week's issue. The detail can be debated. The principle is harder to dismiss. If intelligence becomes a new foundational resource, then some part of the wealth it creates should flow back to the people whose society makes it possible. Intelligence did not suddenly appear. AI is built on the entire history of human intelligence. It benefits from it and at the same time evolves it.Not Nationalization. A Human Wealth Fund.If intelligence belongs to everybody, some conclude that government ownership of intelligence is the right outcome.Governments are not well suited to build, operate, or improve intelligence. They will move too slowly, regulate too early, politicize the wrong things, and confuse economic participation with operational control.Andrew McAfee's “Why I Didn't Sign the AI Open Letter” is useful here. His objection is not that the technology is unimportant. It is that steering too hard before we understand the shape of the change can become its own failure mode. Marc Andreessen's satire of AI regulation is less policy than temperament, but it captures a real Silicon Valley fear: that regulation can become permission, capture, and incumbency before it becomes wisdom.That fear should be taken seriously.But it does not answer the economic question. It answers only the operational one.How can the economic benefits of intelligence be distributed? The better answer is a sovereign human wealth fund.Call it a sovereign wealth fund if you must, but the phrase is too national. Intelligence will not respect borders. The leading companies are global. The models, chips, data centers, agents, platforms, and workflows will be transnational from the beginning. If the value created by intelligence is global, then the mechanism for sharing some of that value should begin with the companies global enough to capture it. The nice thing about xAI, OpenAI, and Anthropic is that they are supranational.These companies own and operate intelligence. Let them compete. Let them profit. Let them keep the incentives that make the system improve. But if intelligence is the new water, the wealth it creates cannot belong only to the companies that meter it. And they, themselves, have the power to fix it, even more than governments.Access will become a Human Right; Ownership Is the Economic DesignThis is where human rights come in. There is no right to access an AI model, yet. But there will soon be a need to change that.Not as a claim that every person is entitled to every frontier model at every moment for free. That is not serious. Capacity has costs. Models have costs. Inference has costs. Data centers have costs. Although those costs will decline over time, possibly quite quickly as self-learning models address costs.The claim is more basic: in a world where intelligence becomes a primary input into education, work, health, science, citizenship, creativity, and economic agency, baseline access to intelligence starts to look like a civic requirement.That could mean public access layers. It could mean education credits. It could mean open models. It could mean AI dividends. It could mean public-interest compute. It could mean taxes on rents. It could mean a company-initiated human wealth fund that returns some of the upside to society without handing the operating system to the state. The latter could couple wealth growth with universal distribution of ownership.The exact mechanism matters. But the distinction matters more.Government should not own intelligence. It should be universally available. And people should have a claim on the wealth intelligence creates.The Frontier Is Also PhysicalThe abstraction is not weightless.“The Fight Against AI Data Centers Is Just Beginning”, “New York becomes the first state to enact a data center moratorium”, Reuters on pollution from Musk's xAI power project, and DataGravity's “Who Captures Value in AI Infrastructure?” all say the same thing from the ground up.Intelligence uses land. It uses power. It uses water. It uses chips. It uses grid capacity. It uses neighborhoods. It uses public patience.That makes the value question unavoidable. A society can accept the buildout if the buildout is legible as shared progress. It will resist it if the costs are local, the profits are private, and the benefits feel enclosed.Who Owns the “Loop”?The week ends where it began.“Anthropic and Blackstone” are betting that implementation is the next trillion-dollar business. “Vint Cerf” is working on identity for agents on the open internet. “GPT-Red” points toward systems that improve their own robustness. “Kimi K3” adds another open frontier model to the global mix.The model race continues. The deployment race is accelerating. The governance race is behind.My view is this:The central product of this era is intelligence. Companies have figured out how to capture it, package it, serve it, and meter it. That is good. It should stay in the hands of builders who have the incentive to make it better.But intelligence is too foundational to become just another private toll booth. A significant part of it will turn out to be free to users.As intelligence becomes a general-purpose resource, then access to it becomes a human-capability question, and the surplus from it becomes an economic-justice question. Not because government should run it. Because government should not run it. The operating layer belongs with companies. The wealth question belongs with everyone. But companies are best placed to turn that into a process of distribution.The question is not whether companies should build intelligence. They should.The question is whether humanity gets a stake in the wealth created by the thing that may soon become its most important shared input.Contents* Essays* Deirdre McCloskey on What Really Caused the Industrial Revolution* AI in an Age of Oligarchy* Elon Musk is building a form of capitalism that Adam Smith would hate* Murky Mirror: Truth and Consequences* The political economy of billionaire derangement* Is there any “oligarchy” to fight?* AI* Nearly 200 Economists and Tech Leaders Warn of A.I. Threats* Why I Didn't Sign the AI Open Letter* Own Your Weights* Ways to Think About Token Pricing* Alex Karp Is Saying What Every Angry CEO Is Thinking About AI* The AI Agents Are Coming for Microsoft Office* What Is Loop Engineering, and Who Owns It?* The Fight Against AI Data Centers Is Just Beginning* 6 months to live for open models* Americans Deserve a Dividend From AI Companies' Riches* Who Gets to Define the Frontier?* GPT-Red: Unlocking Self-Improvement for Robustness* Anthropic, Blackstone bet the next trillion-dollar AI business is implementation, not just models* Vint Cerf is working on a plan to unleash AI agents on the open internet* xai-org/grok-build, now open source* The Pulse: What can we learn from Bun's rapid Rust rewrite with AI?* Orphan risks at the frontier of artificial intelligence* The Lab of the Future Should Feel Like a Data Center* Why AMI Labs' Alexandre LeBrun won't call his AI “AGI” or “superintelligence”* Kimi K3 Tech Blog: Open Frontier Intelligence* Venture Capital* Three Years In* Venture Has Rarely Looked More Bifurcated* The Best Angel Investors in the US: Who Backs the Most Unicorns, and Who's Active Now* Are Prediction Markets Doomed to Fail?* Regulation* Exclusive: The Next Frontier of the Deportation Wars: College Campuses* The Supreme Court Broke Independent Agencies. Here's a Way to Slow the Damage.* India's crackdown on a new WhatsApp feature risks setting a global precedent* Let's build a children's public internet* Computer cops* Google is better at playing the AI regulations game* Infrastructure* Who Captures Value in AI Infrastructure?* New York becomes the first state to enact a data center moratorium* Pollution from Musk's unpermitted xAI power project hits hardest in Black communities* Interview of the Week* The End of the End of Geography* Startup of the Week* Radical AI's Joseph Krause: The Scientist Building The “Waymo” Lab For New Materials* Post of the Week* Marc Andreessen on AI RegulationEssaysDeirdre McCloskey on What Really Caused the Industrial RevolutionYascha Mounk and Deirdre McCloskey | Persuasion | July 11, 2026Yascha Mounk interviews Deirdre McCloskey about her argument that the modern world's economic liftoff came less from capital accumulation than from a change in ideas. McCloskey says both left and right versions of the conventional story rely too heavily on investment: the left stresses exploitation and surplus value, while the right stresses virtuous saving by capitalists. Her objection is historical and economic. Human beings had always invested, from irrigation works and Roman roads to seed grain, and simple accumulation quickly runs into diminishing returns.McCloskey's alternative is that northwestern Europe, first Holland, then Britain and Scotland, and then the North American colonies, developed a liberal ideology that changed who was allowed to innovate and be honored for it. The conversation links that shift to the erosion of inherited hierarchy, the spread of dignity for ordinary commercial life, and a moral vocabulary in which liberalism is not merely procedural but connected to virtues and values. The point is not that machines, coal, trade, and institutions did not matter, but that they do not explain the scale and timing of modern enrichment without a cultural permission structure for innovation.The interview also turns to the contemporary defense of liberalism. Mounk frames the series around the worry that liberalism is often treated as too thin to command allegiance, while its opponents speak more directly to moral passions. McCloskey's case is that liberal societies became rich because they dignified experimentation and ordinary enterprise, and that liberals need to recover the moral language behind that claim.Read moreAI in an Age of OligarchyPaul Krugman | Paul Krugman | July 12, 2026Paul Krugman frames AI as a major technological shock arriving inside an already unequal political economy. The post says AI's economic and social effects may take years to understand, but argues that the setting matters now: America has much greater wealth concentration and political inequality than it did in the 1950s and 1960s, when progressive taxation, stronger regulation, and more active antitrust might have contained some of the destructive effects of a new technology.Krugman's opening claim is that the same technology would likely have different consequences in a more level society. In today's United States, he writes, extreme wealth is both a cause and effect of policies that favor a small elite, including low effective taxes on capital and high incomes, weak enforcement of worker protections and antitrust, and cuts to programs that benefit ordinary Americans.The article is explicitly more about oligarchy than AI. Krugman says the paid sections document the rise of the “.0002%,” the economics and politics of extreme wealth, how oligarchy will shape AI's impact, and possible policy paths. His caveat is that AI itself may still produce a pushback against oligarchy, but absent that, he expects the pre-existing concentration of wealth and power to magnify AI's downsides.Read moreElon Musk is building a form of capitalism that Adam Smith would hateAuthor: Tim O'Reilly Published: July 12, 2026Tim O'Reilly argues that Elon Musk is using the legal forms of shareholder capitalism to escape the restraints that shareholder capitalism was supposed to impose. The article begins with SpaceX's public-market structure: ordinary public investors get little meaningful governance power, Musk keeps roughly 85 percent of the votes through super-voting shares, buyers waive jury trials and class actions, the company qualifies as controlled, and removal of Musk depends on the share class he controls. In O'Reilly's framing, that is not ordinary founder control; it is a design for being answerable to no one, possibly beyond Musk's own lifetime.The killer detail is the article's turn through Albert Hirschman, Montesquieu, James Steuart, Adam Smith, and Keynes. Older defenses of commerce held that markets would tame princely passions because the self-interest of merchants was safer than arbitrary rule. O'Reilly says Musk reverses that hope. The market discipline that was supposed to cage the prince has become the lever by which the prince raises capital, removes feedback loops, and carries private power into politics, government, Mars, robots, AI, or whatever ambition comes next.The pull is the link to AI governance. O'Reilly says corporations are already a kind of artificial intelligence: narrow-input systems that act at a scale no individual human can match. Their partial controls include independent boards, shareholder votes, courts, disclosure, regulators, public pressure, and activism. If the leaders building frontier AI strip those alignment mechanisms out of their own companies, the governance of the company becomes a preview of the governance of the machine.Read more: The EconomistMurky Mirror: Truth and ConsequencesAuthor: Esther Dyson Published: July 14, 2026Esther Dyson argues that today's institutional crisis is better viewed through the 14th century than through recent political history. Using Barbara Tuchman's A Distant Mirror as her frame, she compares a world of famine, plague, church schism, feudal predation, and purposeless war with a present in which institutions again feel brittle, incentives are badly aligned, and power is shifting into forms that are hard to govern.The killer detail is the historical analogy between land, corporations, and AI. Dyson moves from nobles who controlled serfs and territory, to the East India Company as a quasi-sovereign business, to today's AI systems and data centers as a possible new sector that crosses and weakens both nation-states and companies. The question is whether AI becomes a new kind of private land, owned by a new nobility, or an open prairie that many people can cultivate.The pull is human attention. Dyson says the central question is not what AI will do to people, but how people will react to it: whether they can value love, kindness, embodied attention, and artisanal human presence in a world of seductive artificial offerings.Read more: SourceThe political economy of billionaire derangementAuthor: Henry Farrell Published: July 15, 2026Henry Farrell argues that the visible political radicalization of some Silicon Valley billionaires is not a random personality quirk, but a product of the political economy that made them. Starting from Tyler Cowen's dismissal of “billionaire derangement syndrome” and Tim O'Reilly's warning that Elon Musk is using shareholder capitalism to escape shareholder restraint, Farrell flips the phrase: the question is why billionaires themselves can become deranged.The killer detail is Farrell's use of Peter Thiel as both theorist and example. Thiel's Stanford lectures described startups as monarchies and founders as figures vested with unusual power, while Silicon Valley culture rewarded eccentricity, monopoly ambition, and founder exceptionalism. Farrell says those ideas combined with dense founder-investor networks, peer rivalry, and weak correction mechanisms to amplify rather than discipline princely appetites.The pull is the ideological problem for classical liberals who once saw tech wealth as an ally of markets and freedom. Farrell says commerce did not tame the passions; in parts of Silicon Valley, the passions have begun to devour markets, institutions, and the liberal story that justified them.Read more: SourceIs there any “oligarchy” to fight?Matthew Yglesias | Slow Boring | July 16, 2026Matthew Yglesias argues that “oligarchy” is a rhetorically powerful but analytically loose way to describe American politics. The post begins from Bernie Sanders' “Fighting Oligarchy” tour, Amy Klobuchar's warning about a MAGA “broligarchy,” and the long afterlife of the Martin Gilens and Benjamin Page paper that was widely summarized as showing that only the rich matter in policy outcomes. Yglesias says the evidence supports a weaker claim: affluent people and business leaders have unusual access and influence, but that is not the same as rule by a small cabal.His main distinction is between inequality and oligarchy. The Gilens-Page measure treated the top 10 percent of households as “the wealthy,” and later critics found that rich and middle-class preferences usually align; in the cases where they differ, the rich win about 53 percent of the time. Yglesias also says business executives get special access partly because their decisions are materially important to communities, jobs, investment, and local tax bases, not only because of campaign donations.The post preserves Jerusalem Demsas' counterpoint from their podcast discussion: privileged donor and business access can still violate democratic equality even if the oligarchy label overstates the structure of power. Yglesias' narrower claim is that Democrats should be precise about what problem they are trying to solve, because donor influence can also push the party left on climate and cultural issues in ways that alienate many voters.Read more: Slow BoringAINearly 200 Economists and Tech Leaders Warn of A.I. ThreatsAuthor: Ben Casselman Published: July 13, 2026Ben Casselman reports on “We Must Act Now,” a statement warning that artificial intelligence could transform the economy faster than any previous technology and that policymakers need to move faster to understand and respond. The statement says AI may become radically more powerful over the next 10 years, bringing risks such as large-scale job displacement as well as opportunities such as higher living standards. Nearly 200 people signed, including 15 Nobel laureates, the chief economists of OpenAI and Anthropic, Anthropic co-founder Jack Clark, former Google CEO Eric Schmidt, and venture capitalist Vinod Khosla.The killer detail is who joined the warning. Casselman notes that the signatories include economists who have historically been skeptical of Silicon Valley's most dramatic AI job-loss forecasts, including Daron Acemoglu and Simon Johnson, the MIT professors who won the 2024 Nobel in economics. Erik Brynjolfsson, who helped organize the statement, says there has been a notable change in the profession and that economists and policymakers are not ready for the “tsunami” he sees coming.The pull is the measurement problem. The statement does not offer a specific policy menu, but calls for economists, policymakers, and industry leaders to understand the economics of transformative AI and steer it toward complementing humans. Brynjolfsson says one high priority is better data on AI's spread and impact, because current measures tell conflicting stories about job losses and which workers are most exposed.Read more: The New York TimesWhy I Didn't Sign the AI Open LetterAuthor: Andrew McAfee Published: July 13, 2026Andrew McAfee explains why he did not sign “We Must Act Now,” the AI economy statement organized in part by his longtime collaborator Erik Brynjolfsson. McAfee agrees with the letter's starting point that AI is likely to become radically more powerful over the next decade and that it is a general-purpose technology. His objection is not to urgency or to studying AI's economic effects, but to the framing of risk, displacement, and institutional steering as the first move.The killer detail is McAfee's line edit. He says the original letter comes close, then “bounces off the crossbar” by calling for incentives, guardrails, and institutions to steer AI before we know enough about its actual impacts. He points to mixed current evidence: labor-market canaries, but also rising software job postings, low unemployment for younger workers, rising real median income, and claims that AI-adopting companies are adding workers faster than low-adopting peers. His worry is that the letter leans toward upstream governance and dirigisme when the evidence may call for capability building instead.The pull is his replacement statement. McAfee keeps the three-paragraph structure but changes the emphasis: AI is likely to become radically more powerful; like earlier world-changing technologies it will raise living standards while also bringing harms and shocks; and economists, policymakers, and technology leaders should build the capabilities to respond quickly and effectively. It is a concise version of the permissionless-innovation case inside the AI policy debate.Read more: The Geek WayOwn Your WeightsAuthor: Jamin Ball Published: July 10, 2026Jamin Ball argues that the enterprise AI debate about whether companies should “own their weights” or rent models from frontier labs is asking too narrow a question. A model weight file gives a company control over a point-in-time artifact, but not durable control over the capability stack. In his framing, the weight file is a melting ice cube: it does not get worse in absolute terms, but it falls behind as frontier systems improve and enterprise needs change.The killer detail is what Ball says companies really need to own: the data flywheel, reinforcement learning infrastructure, and evaluation harness that produce and improve the model. Simply deploying an open-weights model and declaring sovereignty leaves the enterprise with yesterday's capability and no way to compound workflow-specific learning.The pull is that enterprise AI control may be less about model ownership than operating ownership. The defensible layer is the system that turns company data, edge cases, business definitions, and evaluations into continuously improving performance.Read more: Clouded JudgementWays to Think About Token PricingAuthor: Benedict Evans Published: July 9, 2026Benedict Evans argues that today's AI token prices are a temporary signal from a supply-constrained market, not a reliable guide to long-term value capture. The open question is whether foundation models keep durable pricing power or become commodity infrastructure as data-center capacity, inference efficiency, and model competition all shift. His current read is that the visible market dynamics point toward commoditization unless something materially changes.The killer detail is the mobile data analogy. Evans says cellular networks became a trillion-dollar industry with hundreds of billions in capex after data usage exploded, but carrier stocks went nowhere because value moved up the stack. Tokens may behave similarly: an opaque unit tied to marginal cost, sold through bundles, essential to everything, yet not necessarily where profits accrue.The pull is uncertainty, not prediction. Evans lists paths to model dominance, including network effects, less competition, regulation, export controls, or a lab pulling ahead on execution, but says each requires a new fact not yet visible. Without that change, the model layer looks more like infrastructure beneath the products that capture value.Read more: SourceAlex Karp Is Saying What Every Angry CEO Is Thinking About AIAuthor: Tim Higgins Published: July 11, 2026Tim Higgins reports that Palantir CEO Alex Karp has turned corporate frustration with AI labs into a public argument about enterprise control. Palantir released a white paper, “Institutional Sovereignty in the Age of AI,” laying out steps companies and governments can take to protect themselves from OpenAI, Anthropic, and other foundation-model providers. The article links that paper to Karp's CNBC appearance, where he said “something has gone completely wrong” in the relationship between AI labs and customers and argued that enterprises are paying for tokens that create little value.The killer detail is the value-capture question. Higgins writes that Karp's critique has resonated because AI labs may gain power and insight from customer data, workflows, and decision-making, even when enterprise policies say customer data are not used for training. David Sacks amplified the concern by arguing that Anthropic is moving from the model layer into vertical applications such as science, security, legal, and coding, raising the fear that model providers will watch where value is being created and then move into those markets directly.The pull is that Karp is not alone, even if his style is unusually combative. Higgins notes that Satya Nadella has also warned that companies need to retain the learnings created when they use AI models, while Mark Zuckerberg has framed Meta's new model release partly around lower-cost frontier intelligence. The article presents Karp's campaign as one sign that established technology companies and large enterprises are trying to define where they fit when AI labs become central infrastructure, application competitors, and potential IPO giants at the same time.Read more: The Wall Street JournalThe AI Agents Are Coming for Microsoft OfficeAlex Wilhelm | Cautious Optimism | July 11, 2026Alex Wilhelm argues that one of the week's quieter AI questions is whether the productivity market that Microsoft successfully moved into subscription software is now being attacked by agentic tools. The piece begins with the infrastructure backdrop: SK Hynix raised $26.5 billion in a U.S. listing while building U.S. HBM and advanced-packaging capacity, and memory, chip, and foundry companies are now priced for sustained AI demand.Wilhelm then says the AI conversation has shifted quickly from raw capability to cost per task. He cites new model releases and vendor language emphasizing cheaper agentic and coding models, faster performance, and lower dollars per task. That matters because lower costs make it more plausible for AI systems to take on routine knowledge work at scale rather than remain a premium coding assistant market.The core of the article is Microsoft Office. Wilhelm notes that Microsoft turned Office from a one-time purchase into Microsoft 365, a large recurring revenue business with tens of millions of subscribers and a major productivity segment. Now, he says, late-stage unicorns and AI labs are pushing into the same territory: Anthropic's Cowork was reportedly used mostly outside software development, OpenAI merged ChatGPT and Codex into a tool for creating sheets, slides, docs, web apps, and long-running work, and other companies are building agentic coworkers that connect business data to documents, workflows, schedules, alerts, and apps.The article's caveat is that Microsoft has survived major platform shifts before. The argument is not that Office disappears quickly, but that the definition of office software is broadening from documents and spreadsheets into AI systems that can create, monitor, and act across workplace data.Read moreWhat Is Loop Engineering, and Who Owns It?Author: Nilesh Barla Published: July 11, 2026Nilesh Barla argues that “loop engineering” is becoming a distinct discipline because production AI agents now fail less at single prompts than at runtime: when to stop, what state to preserve, and how to recover after a bad step. Prompt engineering shapes one model call, and context engineering shapes what the model sees, but loop engineering shapes what a sequence of calls actually does.The killer detail is the three-primitives frame. Barla says a real agent loop needs halt conditions, state carryover, and recovery paths, then maps teams across five maturity levels. At the lowest level, an agent is just a model call in a for-loop with a step cap and raw history; by the higher levels, the system has structured state, explicit planning, replay, evaluation, and self-repair.The pull is organizational. If agents are becoming production systems rather than demos, someone has to own the runtime itself. The loop engineer is the role Barla gives to the person responsible for making long-running agent work dependable.Read more: Adaline LabsThe Fight Against AI Data Centers Is Just BeginningEmma Roth | The Verge | July 12, 2026Emma Roth argues that community resistance to data centers has moved from an early warning sign into a national political fight as AI facilities grow larger, more power-hungry, and more visible to nearby residents. The article starts with Apple's failed 2015 plan for a $1 billion data center in Athenry, Ireland, where a small group of residents challenged the project over noise, light pollution, flooding, traffic, and wildlife effects until Apple abandoned it in 2018.The current data-center buildout is presented as much larger and more contentious. Roth writes that residents now cite rising energy costs, water quality, noise, light pollution, and greenhouse gas emissions, while the U.S. Energy Information Administration expects commercial energy demand to surpass residential demand this year because of AI data centers and Goldman Sachs expects data-center power demand to double by 2027.The central evidence comes from Data Center Watch, which says protesters blocked or delayed at least 75 U.S. projects worth $130 billion from January to March, with active opposition groups more than doubling from 396 at the end of 2025 to 833 by the end of the first quarter of 2026. Roth also cites QTS abandoning a $12 billion Wisconsin campus, Delaware City regulators blocking a 580-acre project under the Coastal Zone Act, opposition stopping a QTS project in Prince William County, and pressure that pushed Kevin O'Leary to downsize the proposed 40,000-acre Project Stratos in Utah.The policy section describes a split between federal acceleration and local resistance. President Trump has treated data centers as part of the AI race with China and fast-tracked construction, while some Republican candidates are distancing themselves from that position ahead of midterms. Sanders and Ocasio-Cortez have proposed a moratorium until price and environmental protections exist, bipartisan lawmakers are backing ratepayer-protection measures, and states including Florida, Idaho, and Washington have passed rules on cost shifting, water use, and tax breaks. Roth's caveat is that the policy patchwork is still incomplete, leaving many communities to fight project by project.Read more6 months to live for open modelsAuthor: Nathan Lambert Published: July 12, 2026Nathan Lambert argues that open-weight AI models are facing their most serious policy test so far because U.S. officials are beginning to discuss concrete controls rather than abstract safety concerns. He says reported White House conversations about a new executive order may initially target Chinese-origin models and government use, but could create a broader review habit for frontier open models. His forecast is that a model above the capability range of GPT-5.5, Claude Opus 4.8, or GLM-5.2 could trigger a ban or indefinite delay within six months.The post separates two policy fights that are becoming intertwined: distillation and frontier capability. Lambert says the distillation campaign against Chinese models has become a form of regulatory capture because Anthropic and other closed-model companies would gain economically if Chinese open models were banned. He does not dismiss IP protection, but argues that if a closed model's capabilities are dangerous enough to justify restricting open models, the lab also has to explain why those capabilities are exposed through a queryable API. He cites unauthorized access to Anthropic's Mythos private beta as evidence that APIs are not automatically secure.The broader claim is that a unilateral U.S. ban would hurt positive actors more than bad actors if comparable open models remain available elsewhere. Lambert says the only durable ceiling would require global agreement, which does not exist, and that open models can improve safety by allowing broad inspection, adaptation, and understanding. His proposed near-term off-ramps are a strong U.S. open model release from companies such as Microsoft, Meta, or Reflection, and a broader coalition of open-source beneficiaries lobbying for safe rollout rather than prohibition.Read more: SourceAmericans Deserve a Dividend From AI Companies' RichesAuthor: Scott Stanford Published: July 14, 2026Scott Stanford argues that proposals to give the government a stake in AI companies miss the point unless ordinary citizens directly receive and control the upside. Sam Altman has discussed giving up equity in OpenAI, Washington already owns a stake in Intel, Nvidia is sharing China chip revenue, and Bernie Sanders wants large AI labs to contribute half their stock to a sovereign wealth fund. Stanford says those ideas all park value with the state, not with people.The killer detail is New Carlisle, Indiana, where AWS's Project Rainier is turning cornfields into one of the world's largest AI superclusters. The project is planned to run up to a million chips, draw more than two gigawatts of power, and represents an investment that has grown from $11 billion to $13.8 billion. Stanford uses that local transformation to argue that AI's public bargain should be visible at the household level.The pull is design. A citizen AI dividend would have to specify who earns a stake, how they hold it, and when they see cash. Without that mechanism, the AI wealth debate remains a fight over government balance sheets rather than public ownership.Read more: SourceWho Gets to Define the Frontier?Author: Mark Daley Published: July 14, 2026Mark Daley argues that Demis Hassabis is right to call for a serious institution to verify frontier AI systems, but that the power to test models is also the power to govern them. Hassabis's proposed Frontier AI Standards Body would get privileged pre-release access to advanced models, testing compute, held-out evaluations, support from national labs and security agencies, third-party auditors, and eventually authority to block models from the American market or coordinate a slowdown.The killer detail is Daley's constitutional objection. He says the proposal sometimes looks like a scientific lab, a standards body, an industry regulator, a licensing authority, and an emergency security council at once. Combining those roles because each requires technical expertise would be like putting the central bank, auditor-general, and Supreme Court in one building and calling it efficient.The pull is standard-setting. Daley's concern is not that verification is unnecessary, but that whoever writes the tests, decides what passes, adjudicates disputes, and grants market access may end up defining the frontier itself.Read more: SourceGPT-Red: Unlocking Self-Improvement for RobustnessOpenAI | OpenAI | July 15, 2026OpenAI describes GPT-Red as an internal automated red-teaming model trained to find prompt-injection vulnerabilities at a scale human red teams cannot match. The post says AI systems increasingly encounter third-party data through browsers, connected apps, local files, and tools, creating opportunities for malicious instructions hidden in emails, webpages, tool responses, or code repositories. Human red-teaming remains part of OpenAI's safety process, but the company says it is time-intensive and cannot generate enough diverse adversarial examples for model training.The system is trained through self-play reinforcement learning, with GPT-Red rewarded for eliciting valid failures and defender models rewarded for resisting attacks while still completing their tasks. OpenAI says the training environments specify threat models across settings such as local files, webpage banners, email bodies, and tool outputs. The model is kept separate from deployed production models because it is intentionally trained with malicious capabilities.OpenAI reports that GPT-Red generalized beyond its training set, including an internal replication of the indirect prompt-injection arena from Dziemian et al. (2025), where it found successful attacks in 84% of scenarios compared with 13% for human red-teamers. The post also says GPT-Red transferred attacks from simulation to a live autonomous vending-machine agent, causing price changes and order cancellations, and outperformed a prompted GPT-5.5 baseline against a Codex CLI agent on held-out data-exfiltration tasks.The article's main robustness claim is that OpenAI has used GPT-Red and predecessor models in training since GPT-5.3, with later GPT releases becoming more resistant to prompt injections. It says GPT-5.6 Sol has six times fewer failures on OpenAI's hardest direct prompt-injection benchmark than the best production model from four months earlier, that a “Fake Chain-of-Thought” attack class fell from more than 95% success against GPT-5.1 to below 10% against GPT-5.6 Sol, and that GPT-5.6 Sol fails on only 0.05% of GPT-Red's direct prompt injections. OpenAI says general capabilities and targeted over-refusal evaluations were not harmed, and says a preprint with more details will follow.Read moreAnthropic, Blackstone bet the next trillion-dollar AI business is implementation, not just modelsRebecca Bellan | TechCrunch | July 15, 2026Rebecca Bellan reports that Ode with Anthropic is the $1.5 billion AI implementation company launched by Anthropic with Blackstone, Hellman & Friedman, Goldman Sachs, and other backers. The article says the venture reflects a growing belief among frontier AI labs that enterprise adoption requires more than better models: customers need engineers who can embed inside businesses and turn AI into working systems.Ode was originally conceived by Blackstone after it used both large consulting firms and smaller AI services boutiques across its portfolio companies. TechCrunch reports that Fractional AI, an AI engineering services startup, stood out and was acquired by the joint venture shortly after the venture was announced. Fractional now forms the foundation of Ode, which has 100 engineers and works closely with Anthropic's applied AI team to identify where the technology can affect specific businesses.Ode CEO Chris Taylor tells TechCrunch that the company could someday become a trillion-dollar business if it scales without losing quality. He says an ideal customer is one whose CEO treats the AI project as a top one or two priority, whether it is a major product feature or the reworking of a core business process. Ode will operate under a “Claude-first” principle, using Anthropic technology whenever possible, but the article says it can use rival AI products when needed.The article's central implementation argument comes from Ode chief technologist Eddie Siegel, who says model selection matters but is not where most of the engineering effort goes. He compares it to the choice of programming language in software: one ingredient in a system that still has to be engineered. Bellan writes that Ode's challenge is hiring and training enough elite generalist engineers, many of them former founders, while competing with OpenAI's The Deployment Company and consulting giants that have built their own forward-deployed engineering teams.Read moreVint Cerf is working on a plan to unleash AI agents on the open internetTim Fernholz | TechCrunch | July 15, 2026Tim Fernholz reports that Vint Cerf, after leaving Google, is advising Innovation Labs on an open architecture for identifying AI agents online. Innovation Labs is a subsidiary of Identity Digital, a DNS registry company, and its proposal is to use domain-name infrastructure as part of a system for agent identity, accountability, and auditability. The premise is that agents will need a way to identify themselves if they move beyond proprietary systems and begin interacting across the open internet.The concrete proposal is DNSid, a registry that links an AI agent to an existing internet domain and uses cryptographic proofs to log its registration over time. Innovation Labs says it is trialing the standard with unnamed hyperscalers and identity companies. Cerf frames the problem around authority and accountability: what authority an agent has, where that authority came from, who is accountable for the agent's behavior, how its identity is established, and why anyone should trust it.The article's caveat is that standards are still emerging and agents are more active than static domains. Cerf says the period may be both fascinating and exasperating because the functionality is powerful and interoperability is unresolved. He compares the adoption problem to TCP/IP: competing systems may not work together until users push for functional interoperation. He also says an agentic economy is not inevitable, but that people will try to build it because delegating work to agents will be easier.Read more: TechCrunchxai-org/grok-build, now open sourceAuthor: Simon Willison Published: July 15, 2026Simon Willison argues that xAI's decision to open-source Grok Build is best understood as a trust repair move after a severe privacy failure. The CLI had triggered backlash when users realized that running it in a directory could upload the entire directory to xAI's Google Cloud buckets, including one user's reported SSH keys, password manager database, documents, photos, and videos. xAI disabled the feature, said previously retained coding data would be deleted, and released the code under Apache 2.0.The killer detail is what the codebase reveals. Willison counts 844,530 lines of Rust, only about 3% of which appears vendored, and finds remnants of the upload system still present but disabled: gcs.rs contains Google Cloud upload code, while upload_session_state() now returns a hard-coded session_state_upload_unavailable error. He also notes copied or ported tool implementations from Codex and OpenCode, prompt files, and a terminal Mermaid renderer.The pull is that terminal coding agents are becoming large, intricate software systems in their own right. The privacy failure mattered because these tools operate inside the directories where developers keep their most sensitive work; the open-source release matters because trust now depends on inspecting what an agent can see, send, and do.Read more: SourceThe Pulse: What can we learn from Bun's rapid Rust rewrite with AI?Author: Gergely Orosz and Ivan Klaric Published: July 16, 2026Gergely Orosz and Ivan Klaric argue that Bun's AI-assisted rewrite from Zig to Rust is a practical sign of how software engineering changes when models can take on large, bounded migrations with clear feedback loops. The piece does not treat the rewrite as magic: Jarred Sumner first spent hours turning design judgment into a detailed porting guide, then used adversarial review, parallel agents, compiler errors, and tests to force the work toward correctness.The killer detail is the scale. Bun had 535,496 lines of Zig, 1,448 files, and 22 million monthly downloads, making a conventional rewrite a year-long freeze the team could not justify. Using Fable, Sumner split the work across 64 agents, produced about 6,500 commits, and got the migration done in 11 days at an estimated API cost of $165,000.The pull is economic, not theatrical. If a one- or two-year migration can become an 11-day project, AI coding is not just faster autocomplete; it changes which technical debts are worth paying down.Read more: SourceOrphan risks at the frontier of artificial intelligenceAuthor: Andrew Maynard Published: July 16, 2026Andrew Maynard argues that frontier AI safety frameworks are creating “orphan risks”: harms that companies can see, but do not formally own because they are hard to quantify, do not fit catastrophic-risk thresholds, or fall outside audit-friendly compliance machinery. His target is not existing frontier safety work, but the narrowing effect that happens when private companies decide which risks count as governable.The killer detail is Maynard's contrast between measurable model dangers and threats to value. He points to Meta's three-day Galactica collapse, OpenAI's 2023 board crisis, safety-team departures, and wellbeing litigation as examples of risks that damaged trust, culture, legitimacy, or users without fitting cleanly into conventional model-risk categories. The proposed fix is an orphan-risk register: a public record of risks a company considered and chose not to manage, with reasons.The pull is accountability. Frontier developers' internal scoping choices have become a de facto layer of public governance, so the question is no longer only which risks they manage, but which risks they quietly leave outside the frame.Read more: SourceThe Lab of the Future Should Feel Like a Data CenterLatent.Space with Andy Beam and Rafa Gomez-Bombarelli | Latent.Space | July 16, 2026Latent.Space interviews Lila Sciences CTO Andy Beam and chief science officer for physical sciences Rafa Gomez-Bombarelli about the company's attempt to build an AI-run science factory. The post describes Lila's thesis as treating the lab itself as an “infinite token generator”: if internet data drove the first era of AI scaling, experimentally verified scientific data may be the next scarce training source. Lila is trying to produce that data with robotics, lab instruments, orchestration software, and AI models wired into the wet lab.The central analogy is the lab as data center. Instruments are nodes on a graph, a magnetically levitating transport layer moves materials between them, and experiment scheduling looks like a compute queue. Beam says Lila is not simply an automation company, because the point is not just throughput; it is flexibility, generalization, and experiment capture. The post says Lila has built more than 10 trillion experimentally validated “scientific reasoning tokens,” not internet text or biological sequences.The interview ranges across biology, chemistry, drug discovery, materials science, and the limits of automation. It notes that Lila rebuilt one gas-sorption measurement to run roughly 2,500 times faster, claims its general models can transfer priors from small-molecule chemistry to metal-organic frameworks for carbon capture, and describes model-suggested platinum-group-free electrocatalysts that moved from looking boring or wrong to becoming strong performers. The caveats are physical: experiments have runtimes, biology cannot always be accelerated, chains of thought can be unreliable narrators, and reward hacking becomes more dangerous when a model controls a real lab.Read more: Latent.SpaceWhy AMI Labs' Alexandre LeBrun won't call his AI “AGI” or “superintelligence”Kate Park | TechCrunch | July 16, 2026Kate Park interviews AMI Labs CEO Alexandre LeBrun about why Yann LeCun's world-model startup avoids the language of “AGI” and “superintelligence.” LeBrun says the terms are not useful because they lack stable definitions: “We never used the word AGI. And I just noticed that nobody is using it anymore; they switched to superintelligence.” His argument is that the practical frontier is not a label, but whether AI systems can understand and predict real-world states.The article explains the world-model thesis by contrasting language prediction with physical-state prediction. A large language model predicts the next word; a world model predicts the next state, such as what happens when a glass tips over. LeBrun says LLMs remain complementary and efficient for language, but the physical world is where current AI is weak. Robotics is the clearest case: hardware has advanced quickly, but robots are still brittle outside controlled routines because they lack context and situational understanding.AMI is still pre-product, but TechCrunch reports that LeBrun was in Seoul looking for industrial partners, researchers, and global companies. He says world models cannot be built entirely inside a lab because they need access to real environments. That is why South Korea appeals to AMI: robotics, semiconductors, manufacturing, and fast adoption create the kind of hardware-heavy context that software-only AI has barely touched.Read more: TechCrunchKimi K3 Tech Blog: Open Frontier IntelligenceKimi | Kimi | July 16, 2026Kimi introduces Kimi K3 as an open 3T-class frontier model aimed at coding, knowledge work, reasoning, multimodality, and long-context agentic use. The source describes the model as a 2.8T-parameter system built on Kimi Delta Attention and Attention Residuals, with native multimodality and a 1M-token context window. It says Moonshot AI plans to release model weights by July 27.The post presents K3 through benchmark and use-case sections rather than as a general product announcement. It reports results across coding, productivity, agentic, and multimodal evaluations, including DeepSWE, Terminal-Bench 2.1, Program Bench, SWE Marathon, FrontierSWE, PostTrain Bench, OfficeQA Pro, SpreadsheetBench 2, MCP Atlas, AutomationBench, BrowseComp, GDPval-AA v2, AA-Briefcase, MMMU-Pro, MathVision, BabyVision, OmniDocBench, and PerceptionBench. The source says all reported K3 results use maximum reasoning effort with temperature and top-p set to 1.0, and that different benchmark comparisons use KimiCode, Claude Code, or Codex harnesses depending on the test.Kimi's caveats are unusually concrete. The limitations section says K3 was trained in preserved thinking-history mode, so quality may become unstable if an agent harness does not pass historical thinking content correctly or if an ongoing session switches to K3 midstream. It also says K3's emphasis on long-horizon tasks can make it excessively proactive when it encounters minor issues or ambiguous intent, and recommends imposing explicit behavioral constraints for applications that require strict boundaries. The post adds that K3 remains behind Claude Fable 5 and GPT 5.6 Sol in user experience despite being competitive overall.Read moreVenture CapitalThree Years InAuthor: Tomasz Tunguz Published: July 10, 2026Tomasz Tunguz marks Theory Ventures' third anniversary by arguing that AI's central market effect is time compression. In his telling, model release cycles, company revenue milestones, enterprise adoption, and venture categories have all accelerated. Seed, Series A, and Series B still exist as financing labels, but they no longer cleanly describe company maturity when some seed rounds are larger than IPOs and the best AI companies can mature much earlier than prior software companies.The killer detail is the shift from models to inference. Tunguz argues that inference has become the dominant AI market because workloads and buyer preferences are fragmenting: video, batch, local, agentic, and real-time tasks each create different infrastructure needs. He compares this to databases splitting into OLTP, OLAP, vector, and streaming categories, with AI pushing the same specialization into inference infrastructure.The pull is that Theory sees the AI-native venture firm as part of the same pattern. The firm says it has analyzed twice as many investment opportunities with three investors working alongside a nine-person intelligence organization, using agents and research systems to map markets, source companies, and support diligence. The piece is both a market map and a statement about how venture itself is being rebuilt by the technology it funds.Read more: LinkedInVenture Has Rarely Looked More BifurcatedAuthor: Beezer Clarkson Published: July 14, 2026Beezer Clarkson points to PitchBook's Q2 report as evidence that the U.S. venture market has split into two very different realities. AI now accounts for more than 60 percent of all U.S. venture deal value, meaning the headline market can look active and well-funded even while much of the non-AI market is dealing with a much colder liquidity and fundraising environment.The thread uses that split as the setup for Clarkson's latest Origins episode with Alec Litowitz, founder of Magnetar and QStar Capital and one of Citadel's original founding partners. Clarkson says markets like this are periods of genuine uncertainty, not merely ordinary risk, which is why Litowitz's Adaptability Quotient framework is relevant.The embedded clip makes the liquidity point concrete. Litowitz says DPI is “the resolution of uncertainty” because it converts an uncertain investment into actual cash returned to LPs. In his framing, a realized dollar is a real mark, while TVPI remains uncertain until it is realized.The killer detail is the distinction between pricing risk and resolving uncertainty. Litowitz's perspective matters because QStar is a SpaceX investor and Clarkson says the conversation happened just before one of venture's most consequential IPOs. The episode's stated questions are why venture remains a way to gain exposure to innovation, how AI is changing what is investable, why liquidity is ultimately a function of time, and why uncertainty requires a different decision framework from risk.Read more: XThe Best Angel Investors in the US: Who Backs the Most Unicorns, and Who's Active NowAuthor: Ilya Strebulaev Published: July 10, 2026Ilya Strebulaev ranks angels, angel groups, accelerators, and incubators by lifetime U.S. unicorn investments, counting checks written before a company reached unicorn status. The top of the combined list is dominated by organizations: Y Combinator leads with 113 unicorn investments, followed by Plug and Play at 52 and 500 Global at 41. Sand Hill Angels is the highest-ranked angel group at 31.The killer detail is how quickly the list changes below the biggest accelerators. Strebulaev says 271 of the 304 investors in the Top 200 are individuals, or 89%. In the top 100, individuals are 91%. That makes the market underneath the large accelerator counts look much more personal: mostly operators and individual angels writing early checks from their own networks.The pull is the ranking's own caveat. Strebulaev writes that every lifetime leaderboard has a blind spot because many of the unicorns behind those totals were founded a decade or more ago, and some angels have since moved into formal funds, slowed down, or stopped investing. His post therefore separates lifetime performance from recent cohorts, including companies founded in 2015 or later and 2020 or later. For founders or allocators making current decisions, that distinction matters: a career record and a current record are not the same measure.Read more: Ilya StrebulaevAre Prediction Markets Doomed to Fail?Author: Contrary Published: July 16, 2026Contrary argues that prediction markets' current boom depends on whether platforms can prove they are more than regulated gambling with exchange-style branding. Kalshi and Polymarket have reached mass cultural, investor, and regulatory attention, but the article says the underlying idea is old: academic markets, corporate forecasting tools, Intrade, PredictIt, and other predecessors all struggled with the same linked problems of liquidity, legality, and user appeal.The killer detail is the comparison with sportsbooks. Prediction markets present themselves as peer-to-peer, transparent, and non-house-based, but sports contracts reportedly account for more than 90 percent of Kalshi trading, and the article says the platforms keep a much thinner slice of volume than sportsbooks. A market can therefore show sports-betting-scale handle while generating far less revenue.The pull is that the product's hardest problem may be distribution of wins. If a small group of sharp traders captures most profits while casual users lose interest, prediction markets may become valuable data feeds and professional tools before they become durable consumer networks.Read more: SourceRegulationExclusive: The Next Frontier of the Deportation Wars: College CampusesAuthor: Adrian Carrasquillo Published: July 11, 2026Adrian Carrasquillo reports that college campuses are becoming a new front in the fight over immigration enforcement because automatic license plate readers can turn ordinary campus security infrastructure into searchable location data. His thesis is that Flock Safety's camera network, even without direct ICE or DHS contracts, can feed deportation enforcement through local police partnerships and data-sharing practices.The killer detail is the campaign target. The Emergency Campaign to Support Higher Education, working with Schools Drop ICE, is focusing on 75 colleges and universities publicly identified as having Flock contracts. Flock says it has no ICE or DHS contracts, but activists argue the risk comes through local agencies that coordinate with federal authorities and run searches on their behalf.The pull is broader than immigration. Carrasquillo notes that license plate readers have already been abused by officers for stalking, and that Flock's AI search features can identify more than plates, including bumper stickers. A campus safety tool can become a political surveillance system when the data layer is searchable.Read more: The BulwarkThe Supreme Court Broke Independent Agencies. Here's a Way to Slow the Damage.Author: Todd Phillips Published: July 12, 2026Todd Phillips argues that the Supreme Court's decision in Trump v. Slaughter damaged independent agencies by ending for-cause removal protections, but did not leave Congress powerless. The ruling weakens the old model in which commissioners at bodies such as the FTC, NLRB, CPSC, SEC, and CFTC could be insulated from dismissal over policy disagreements. Phillips says the next fight is whether presidents can turn nominally bipartisan commissions into one-party instruments.The killer detail is the procedural fix: quorum rules. Phillips proposes that Congress require bipartisan slates of commissioners to be seated before independent agencies can act. A president could still fire commissioners, as the Court now permits, but if those firings broke quorum, the agency would be unable to proceed until replacements were confirmed. The guardrail would

This week's video transcript summary is here. You can click on any bulleted section to see the actual transcript. Thanks to Granola for its software.There was an issue with this only going to paid subscribers, so sending it again. Apologies to those who get it twice. I appreciate being paid so feel free to upgrade if you enjoy TWTW.EditorialIntelligence: Who Owns it?This week the word “AI” feels too small.AI is a technology. Intelligence is its product. And if intelligence is the product, the question is no longer just: Which model is best? Who has the cheapest tokens? Who owns the weights? Who controls the data center? Those are important questions, but they are lower in the stack.The bigger question is simpler and more political:Who owns intelligence?That sounds abstract until you make it concrete. Intelligence is becoming something companies can capture, package, serve, meter, route, improve, and sell.It can write code, answer questions, design molecules, automate offices, run agents, draft legal work, advise scientists, serve consumers, and reshape workflows. It is not merely software. It is a general-purpose capability. And all humans could benefit from more of it.General-purpose capabilities have a habit of becoming public questions. But the default answer, that public good is best delivered by government, is the wrong answer in this context.The Product Is IntelligenceWe should stop talking about AI as a feature and start talking about intelligence as the universal thing that is delivered as an input to the world.Water is an input. Electricity is an input. Literacy is an input. Connectivity is an input. Once a society depends on them, access stops being optional. Nobody needs government to build every well, power plant, school, or network. But everybody understands that a civilization cannot be organized around less than universal and reliable access to foundational inputs.Intelligence is reaching that level of importance now that we all know it is real.Government should not own it, operate it, or develop it. Quite the opposite. Companies are the right actors to build fast, compete hard, improve models, serve customers, and discover the real use cases. Self-interest is a useful framing here. Markets are good at finding demand, reducing costs, and turning invention into services people actually use.Companies are the right operators, developers, and owners. But that does not settle the real question of who owns the benefits. That is an economic question.If intelligence becomes metered infrastructure, what happens to the value it creates?The Ownership StackThis week's articles keep circling the same issue from different directions but in the nature of ‘circling' never quite nail it.Jamin Ball's “Own Your Weights” starts with the enterprise version of the question. Owning a model file is not enough. The durable asset is the loop: the data flywheel, the evaluations, the reinforcement system, the workflow learning, and the operating context that lets capability compound.Benedict Evans' “Ways to Think About Token Pricing” adds the market layer. Tokens may become essential, abundant, and cheap, like mobile data. But being essential does not guarantee that the token layer captures the value. The money may move up the stack to whoever owns the workflow, the customer, the distribution, or the application.Alex Karp's fight with the labs, reported in “Alex Karp Is Saying What Every Angry CEO Is Thinking About AI”, is the same argument in sharper enterprise language. Companies are afraid that model providers will not just sell intelligence, but learn from customer workflows and then move into the markets where those workflows create value. The “All-in” group are echoing Karp's view.And “What Is Loop Engineering, and Who Owns It?” names the new contested terrain. The loop is where intelligence meets the world. Whoever owns the loop owns the learning. Whoever owns the learning owns the compounding asset.That is why “who owns intelligence?” is not a slogan. It is the question under the model layer, the application layer, the enterprise layer, and the economic layer.Because intelligence is the product, the tools creating it are fragmented and competitive. So there is no logic in trying to discuss this at the level of a single company or set of tools and models.The Old Promise Was That Commerce Would Tame PowerThe essays this week give the historical backdrop.Deirdre McCloskey, in “What Really Caused the Industrial Revolution”, argues that modern growth came not simply from capital accumulation, but from a change in permission: ordinary people were allowed to innovate, trade, build, and be honored for it.That matters because intelligence could be another expansion of permission. It could make more people capable of building, learning, creating, coding, researching, translating, selling, and coordinating. It could lower the cost of competence.But only if access is broad.Paul Krugman's “AI in an Age of Oligarchy” warns that the same technology lands differently in different political economies. A new general-purpose technology entering a broad, open, upwardly mobile society is one thing. The same technology entering a concentrated economy, with extreme wealth and weak counterweights, is another.Tim O'Reilly's Economist essay, “Elon Musk is building a form of capitalism that Adam Smith would hate”, makes the governance point more directly. The old liberal hope was that commerce would tame arbitrary power. Markets, boards, courts, shareholders, disclosure, and competition would discipline the prince.But what if the prince uses markets to escape discipline?Henry Farrell's “political economy of billionaire derangement” pushes the same point. Founder culture, monopoly ambition, peer rivalry, weak correction mechanisms, and vast private control can amplify appetites rather than restrain them.The danger with intelligence is not that companies build it. They should. Companies build it, meter it, use public tolerance and public infrastructure to scale it, learn from everyone who uses it. All of those things are inevitable and healthy. Market forces will sort out winners from losers. The real danger is that the winners treat all of the surplus produced as purely private.Metered Intelligence Creates SurplusIf metering is not the problem, what is?The problem is pretending that metered intelligence creates value only for the metering entity. Metering water is only tolerated as a public good. If the public were blackmailed by a private water company with the threat of no water we would all rebel.Once we understand that the product of AI is intelligence we can see that every time intelligence is used, there is the immediate transaction: the user pays, the provider serves.But there is also system value. Usage creates signals. Workflows reveal patterns. Prompts, corrections, failures, preferences, integrations, edge cases, and business processes all help define where intelligence is useful and how it should improve. Intelligence breeds intelligence.Even when customer data is contractually protected, the market learns. The platform learns where demand is. The product team learns which workflows matter. The ecosystem learns which jobs are vulnerable, which tasks are automatable, and which parts of the economy can be reorganized around machine intelligence.So the surplus is not born in a vacuum.It rests on public science, public education, public data exhaust, public law, public infrastructure, public energy systems, public tolerance for data centers, and billions of human interactions. It is served by companies, but it is not made only by companies.This is why “Americans Deserve a Dividend From AI Companies' Riches” belongs at the center of this week's issue. The detail can be debated. The principle is harder to dismiss. If intelligence becomes a new foundational resource, then some part of the wealth it creates should flow back to the people whose society makes it possible. Intelligence did not suddenly appear. AI is built on the entire history of human intelligence. It benefits from it and at the same time evolves it.Not Nationalization. A Human Wealth Fund.If intelligence belongs to everybody, some conclude that government ownership of intelligence is the right outcome.Governments are not well suited to build, operate, or improve intelligence. They will move too slowly, regulate too early, politicize the wrong things, and confuse economic participation with operational control.Andrew McAfee's “Why I Didn't Sign the AI Open Letter” is useful here. His objection is not that the technology is unimportant. It is that steering too hard before we understand the shape of the change can become its own failure mode. Marc Andreessen's satire of AI regulation is less policy than temperament, but it captures a real Silicon Valley fear: that regulation can become permission, capture, and incumbency before it becomes wisdom.That fear should be taken seriously.But it does not answer the economic question. It answers only the operational one.How can the economic benefits of intelligence be distributed? The better answer is a sovereign human wealth fund.Call it a sovereign wealth fund if you must, but the phrase is too national. Intelligence will not respect borders. The leading companies are global. The models, chips, data centers, agents, platforms, and workflows will be transnational from the beginning. If the value created by intelligence is global, then the mechanism for sharing some of that value should begin with the companies global enough to capture it. The nice thing about xAI, OpenAI, and Anthropic is that they are supranational.These companies own and operate intelligence. Let them compete. Let them profit. Let them keep the incentives that make the system improve. But if intelligence is the new water, the wealth it creates cannot belong only to the companies that meter it. And they, themselves, have the power to fix it, even more than governments.Access will become a Human Right; Ownership Is the Economic DesignThis is where human rights come in. There is no right to access an AI model, yet. But there will soon be a need to change that.Not as a claim that every person is entitled to every frontier model at every moment for free. That is not serious. Capacity has costs. Models have costs. Inference has costs. Data centers have costs. Although those costs will decline over time, possibly quite quickly as self-learning models address costs.The claim is more basic: in a world where intelligence becomes a primary input into education, work, health, science, citizenship, creativity, and economic agency, baseline access to intelligence starts to look like a civic requirement.That could mean public access layers. It could mean education credits. It could mean open models. It could mean AI dividends. It could mean public-interest compute. It could mean taxes on rents. It could mean a company-initiated human wealth fund that returns some of the upside to society without handing the operating system to the state. The latter could couple wealth growth with universal distribution of ownership.The exact mechanism matters. But the distinction matters more.Government should not own intelligence. It should be universally available. And people should have a claim on the wealth intelligence creates.The Frontier Is Also PhysicalThe abstraction is not weightless.“The Fight Against AI Data Centers Is Just Beginning”, “New York becomes the first state to enact a data center moratorium”, Reuters on pollution from Musk's xAI power project, and DataGravity's “Who Captures Value in AI Infrastructure?” all say the same thing from the ground up.Intelligence uses land. It uses power. It uses water. It uses chips. It uses grid capacity. It uses neighborhoods. It uses public patience.That makes the value question unavoidable. A society can accept the buildout if the buildout is legible as shared progress. It will resist it if the costs are local, the profits are private, and the benefits feel enclosed.Who Owns the “Loop”?The week ends where it began.“Anthropic and Blackstone” are betting that implementation is the next trillion-dollar business. “Vint Cerf” is working on identity for agents on the open internet. “GPT-Red” points toward systems that improve their own robustness. “Kimi K3” adds another open frontier model to the global mix.The model race continues. The deployment race is accelerating. The governance race is behind.My view is this:The central product of this era is intelligence. Companies have figured out how to capture it, package it, serve it, and meter it. That is good. It should stay in the hands of builders who have the incentive to make it better.But intelligence is too foundational to become just another private toll booth. A significant part of it will turn out to be free to users.As intelligence becomes a general-purpose resource, then access to it becomes a human-capability question, and the surplus from it becomes an economic-justice question. Not because government should run it. Because government should not run it. The operating layer belongs with companies. The wealth question belongs with everyone. But companies are best placed to turn that into a process of distribution.The question is not whether companies should build intelligence. They should.The question is whether humanity gets a stake in the wealth created by the thing that may soon become its most important shared input.Contents* Essays* Deirdre McCloskey on What Really Caused the Industrial Revolution* AI in an Age of Oligarchy* Elon Musk is building a form of capitalism that Adam Smith would hate* Murky Mirror: Truth and Consequences* The political economy of billionaire derangement* Is there any “oligarchy” to fight?* AI* Nearly 200 Economists and Tech Leaders Warn of A.I. Threats* Why I Didn't Sign the AI Open Letter* Own Your Weights* Ways to Think About Token Pricing* Alex Karp Is Saying What Every Angry CEO Is Thinking About AI* The AI Agents Are Coming for Microsoft Office* What Is Loop Engineering, and Who Owns It?* The Fight Against AI Data Centers Is Just Beginning* 6 months to live for open models* Americans Deserve a Dividend From AI Companies' Riches* Who Gets to Define the Frontier?* GPT-Red: Unlocking Self-Improvement for Robustness* Anthropic, Blackstone bet the next trillion-dollar AI business is implementation, not just models* Vint Cerf is working on a plan to unleash AI agents on the open internet* xai-org/grok-build, now open source* The Pulse: What can we learn from Bun's rapid Rust rewrite with AI?* Orphan risks at the frontier of artificial intelligence* The Lab of the Future Should Feel Like a Data Center* Why AMI Labs' Alexandre LeBrun won't call his AI “AGI” or “superintelligence”* Kimi K3 Tech Blog: Open Frontier Intelligence* Venture Capital* Three Years In* Venture Has Rarely Looked More Bifurcated* The Best Angel Investors in the US: Who Backs the Most Unicorns, and Who's Active Now* Are Prediction Markets Doomed to Fail?* Regulation* Exclusive: The Next Frontier of the Deportation Wars: College Campuses* The Supreme Court Broke Independent Agencies. Here's a Way to Slow the Damage.* India's crackdown on a new WhatsApp feature risks setting a global precedent* Let's build a children's public internet* Computer cops* Google is better at playing the AI regulations game* Infrastructure* Who Captures Value in AI Infrastructure?* New York becomes the first state to enact a data center moratorium* Pollution from Musk's unpermitted xAI power project hits hardest in Black communities* Interview of the Week* The End of the End of Geography* Startup of the Week* Radical AI's Joseph Krause: The Scientist Building The “Waymo” Lab For New Materials* Post of the Week* Marc Andreessen on AI RegulationEssaysDeirdre McCloskey on What Really Caused the Industrial RevolutionYascha Mounk and Deirdre McCloskey | Persuasion | July 11, 2026Yascha Mounk interviews Deirdre McCloskey about her argument that the modern world's economic liftoff came less from capital accumulation than from a change in ideas. McCloskey says both left and right versions of the conventional story rely too heavily on investment: the left stresses exploitation and surplus value, while the right stresses virtuous saving by capitalists. Her objection is historical and economic. Human beings had always invested, from irrigation works and Roman roads to seed grain, and simple accumulation quickly runs into diminishing returns.McCloskey's alternative is that northwestern Europe, first Holland, then Britain and Scotland, and then the North American colonies, developed a liberal ideology that changed who was allowed to innovate and be honored for it. The conversation links that shift to the erosion of inherited hierarchy, the spread of dignity for ordinary commercial life, and a moral vocabulary in which liberalism is not merely procedural but connected to virtues and values. The point is not that machines, coal, trade, and institutions did not matter, but that they do not explain the scale and timing of modern enrichment without a cultural permission structure for innovation.The interview also turns to the contemporary defense of liberalism. Mounk frames the series around the worry that liberalism is often treated as too thin to command allegiance, while its opponents speak more directly to moral passions. McCloskey's case is that liberal societies became rich because they dignified experimentation and ordinary enterprise, and that liberals need to recover the moral language behind that claim.Read moreAI in an Age of OligarchyPaul Krugman | Paul Krugman | July 12, 2026Paul Krugman frames AI as a major technological shock arriving inside an already unequal political economy. The post says AI's economic and social effects may take years to understand, but argues that the setting matters now: America has much greater wealth concentration and political inequality than it did in the 1950s and 1960s, when progressive taxation, stronger regulation, and more active antitrust might have contained some of the destructive effects of a new technology.Krugman's opening claim is that the same technology would likely have different consequences in a more level society. In today's United States, he writes, extreme wealth is both a cause and effect of policies that favor a small elite, including low effective taxes on capital and high incomes, weak enforcement of worker protections and antitrust, and cuts to programs that benefit ordinary Americans.The article is explicitly more about oligarchy than AI. Krugman says the paid sections document the rise of the “.0002%,” the economics and politics of extreme wealth, how oligarchy will shape AI's impact, and possible policy paths. His caveat is that AI itself may still produce a pushback against oligarchy, but absent that, he expects the pre-existing concentration of wealth and power to magnify AI's downsides.Read moreElon Musk is building a form of capitalism that Adam Smith would hateAuthor: Tim O'Reilly Published: July 12, 2026Tim O'Reilly argues that Elon Musk is using the legal forms of shareholder capitalism to escape the restraints that shareholder capitalism was supposed to impose. The article begins with SpaceX's public-market structure: ordinary public investors get little meaningful governance power, Musk keeps roughly 85 percent of the votes through super-voting shares, buyers waive jury trials and class actions, the company qualifies as controlled, and removal of Musk depends on the share class he controls. In O'Reilly's framing, that is not ordinary founder control; it is a design for being answerable to no one, possibly beyond Musk's own lifetime.The killer detail is the article's turn through Albert Hirschman, Montesquieu, James Steuart, Adam Smith, and Keynes. Older defenses of commerce held that markets would tame princely passions because the self-interest of merchants was safer than arbitrary rule. O'Reilly says Musk reverses that hope. The market discipline that was supposed to cage the prince has become the lever by which the prince raises capital, removes feedback loops, and carries private power into politics, government, Mars, robots, AI, or whatever ambition comes next.The pull is the link to AI governance. O'Reilly says corporations are already a kind of artificial intelligence: narrow-input systems that act at a scale no individual human can match. Their partial controls include independent boards, shareholder votes, courts, disclosure, regulators, public pressure, and activism. If the leaders building frontier AI strip those alignment mechanisms out of their own companies, the governance of the company becomes a preview of the governance of the machine.Read more: The EconomistMurky Mirror: Truth and ConsequencesAuthor: Esther Dyson Published: July 14, 2026Esther Dyson argues that today's institutional crisis is better viewed through the 14th century than through recent political history. Using Barbara Tuchman's A Distant Mirror as her frame, she compares a world of famine, plague, church schism, feudal predation, and purposeless war with a present in which institutions again feel brittle, incentives are badly aligned, and power is shifting into forms that are hard to govern.The killer detail is the historical analogy between land, corporations, and AI. Dyson moves from nobles who controlled serfs and territory, to the East India Company as a quasi-sovereign business, to today's AI systems and data centers as a possible new sector that crosses and weakens both nation-states and companies. The question is whether AI becomes a new kind of private land, owned by a new nobility, or an open prairie that many people can cultivate.The pull is human attention. Dyson says the central question is not what AI will do to people, but how people will react to it: whether they can value love, kindness, embodied attention, and artisanal human presence in a world of seductive artificial offerings.Read more: SourceThe political economy of billionaire derangementAuthor: Henry Farrell Published: July 15, 2026Henry Farrell argues that the visible political radicalization of some Silicon Valley billionaires is not a random personality quirk, but a product of the political economy that made them. Starting from Tyler Cowen's dismissal of “billionaire derangement syndrome” and Tim O'Reilly's warning that Elon Musk is using shareholder capitalism to escape shareholder restraint, Farrell flips the phrase: the question is why billionaires themselves can become deranged.The killer detail is Farrell's use of Peter Thiel as both theorist and example. Thiel's Stanford lectures described startups as monarchies and founders as figures vested with unusual power, while Silicon Valley culture rewarded eccentricity, monopoly ambition, and founder exceptionalism. Farrell says those ideas combined with dense founder-investor networks, peer rivalry, and weak correction mechanisms to amplify rather than discipline princely appetites.The pull is the ideological problem for classical liberals who once saw tech wealth as an ally of markets and freedom. Farrell says commerce did not tame the passions; in parts of Silicon Valley, the passions have begun to devour markets, institutions, and the liberal story that justified them.Read more: SourceIs there any “oligarchy” to fight?Matthew Yglesias | Slow Boring | July 16, 2026Matthew Yglesias argues that “oligarchy” is a rhetorically powerful but analytically loose way to describe American politics. The post begins from Bernie Sanders' “Fighting Oligarchy” tour, Amy Klobuchar's warning about a MAGA “broligarchy,” and the long afterlife of the Martin Gilens and Benjamin Page paper that was widely summarized as showing that only the rich matter in policy outcomes. Yglesias says the evidence supports a weaker claim: affluent people and business leaders have unusual access and influence, but that is not the same as rule by a small cabal.His main distinction is between inequality and oligarchy. The Gilens-Page measure treated the top 10 percent of households as “the wealthy,” and later critics found that rich and middle-class preferences usually align; in the cases where they differ, the rich win about 53 percent of the time. Yglesias also says business executives get special access partly because their decisions are materially important to communities, jobs, investment, and local tax bases, not only because of campaign donations.The post preserves Jerusalem Demsas' counterpoint from their podcast discussion: privileged donor and business access can still violate democratic equality even if the oligarchy label overstates the structure of power. Yglesias' narrower claim is that Democrats should be precise about what problem they are trying to solve, because donor influence can also push the party left on climate and cultural issues in ways that alienate many voters.Read more: Slow BoringAINearly 200 Economists and Tech Leaders Warn of A.I. ThreatsAuthor: Ben Casselman Published: July 13, 2026Ben Casselman reports on “We Must Act Now,” a statement warning that artificial intelligence could transform the economy faster than any previous technology and that policymakers need to move faster to understand and respond. The statement says AI may become radically more powerful over the next 10 years, bringing risks such as large-scale job displacement as well as opportunities such as higher living standards. Nearly 200 people signed, including 15 Nobel laureates, the chief economists of OpenAI and Anthropic, Anthropic co-founder Jack Clark, former Google CEO Eric Schmidt, and venture capitalist Vinod Khosla.The killer detail is who joined the warning. Casselman notes that the signatories include economists who have historically been skeptical of Silicon Valley's most dramatic AI job-loss forecasts, including Daron Acemoglu and Simon Johnson, the MIT professors who won the 2024 Nobel in economics. Erik Brynjolfsson, who helped organize the statement, says there has been a notable change in the profession and that economists and policymakers are not ready for the “tsunami” he sees coming.The pull is the measurement problem. The statement does not offer a specific policy menu, but calls for economists, policymakers, and industry leaders to understand the economics of transformative AI and steer it toward complementing humans. Brynjolfsson says one high priority is better data on AI's spread and impact, because current measures tell conflicting stories about job losses and which workers are most exposed.Read more: The New York TimesWhy I Didn't Sign the AI Open LetterAuthor: Andrew McAfee Published: July 13, 2026Andrew McAfee explains why he did not sign “We Must Act Now,” the AI economy statement organized in part by his longtime collaborator Erik Brynjolfsson. McAfee agrees with the letter's starting point that AI is likely to become radically more powerful over the next decade and that it is a general-purpose technology. His objection is not to urgency or to studying AI's economic effects, but to the framing of risk, displacement, and institutional steering as the first move.The killer detail is McAfee's line edit. He says the original letter comes close, then “bounces off the crossbar” by calling for incentives, guardrails, and institutions to steer AI before we know enough about its actual impacts. He points to mixed current evidence: labor-market canaries, but also rising software job postings, low unemployment for younger workers, rising real median income, and claims that AI-adopting companies are adding workers faster than low-adopting peers. His worry is that the letter leans toward upstream governance and dirigisme when the evidence may call for capability building instead.The pull is his replacement statement. McAfee keeps the three-paragraph structure but changes the emphasis: AI is likely to become radically more powerful; like earlier world-changing technologies it will raise living standards while also bringing harms and shocks; and economists, policymakers, and technology leaders should build the capabilities to respond quickly and effectively. It is a concise version of the permissionless-innovation case inside the AI policy debate.Read more: The Geek WayOwn Your WeightsAuthor: Jamin Ball Published: July 10, 2026Jamin Ball argues that the enterprise AI debate about whether companies should “own their weights” or rent models from frontier labs is asking too narrow a question. A model weight file gives a company control over a point-in-time artifact, but not durable control over the capability stack. In his framing, the weight file is a melting ice cube: it does not get worse in absolute terms, but it falls behind as frontier systems improve and enterprise needs change.The killer detail is what Ball says companies really need to own: the data flywheel, reinforcement learning infrastructure, and evaluation harness that produce and improve the model. Simply deploying an open-weights model and declaring sovereignty leaves the enterprise with yesterday's capability and no way to compound workflow-specific learning.The pull is that enterprise AI control may be less about model ownership than operating ownership. The defensible layer is the system that turns company data, edge cases, business definitions, and evaluations into continuously improving performance.Read more: Clouded JudgementWays to Think About Token PricingAuthor: Benedict Evans Published: July 9, 2026Benedict Evans argues that today's AI token prices are a temporary signal from a supply-constrained market, not a reliable guide to long-term value capture. The open question is whether foundation models keep durable pricing power or become commodity infrastructure as data-center capacity, inference efficiency, and model competition all shift. His current read is that the visible market dynamics point toward commoditization unless something materially changes.The killer detail is the mobile data analogy. Evans says cellular networks became a trillion-dollar industry with hundreds of billions in capex after data usage exploded, but carrier stocks went nowhere because value moved up the stack. Tokens may behave similarly: an opaque unit tied to marginal cost, sold through bundles, essential to everything, yet not necessarily where profits accrue.The pull is uncertainty, not prediction. Evans lists paths to model dominance, including network effects, less competition, regulation, export controls, or a lab pulling ahead on execution, but says each requires a new fact not yet visible. Without that change, the model layer looks more like infrastructure beneath the products that capture value.Read more: SourceAlex Karp Is Saying What Every Angry CEO Is Thinking About AIAuthor: Tim Higgins Published: July 11, 2026Tim Higgins reports that Palantir CEO Alex Karp has turned corporate frustration with AI labs into a public argument about enterprise control. Palantir released a white paper, “Institutional Sovereignty in the Age of AI,” laying out steps companies and governments can take to protect themselves from OpenAI, Anthropic, and other foundation-model providers. The article links that paper to Karp's CNBC appearance, where he said “something has gone completely wrong” in the relationship between AI labs and customers and argued that enterprises are paying for tokens that create little value.The killer detail is the value-capture question. Higgins writes that Karp's critique has resonated because AI labs may gain power and insight from customer data, workflows, and decision-making, even when enterprise policies say customer data are not used for training. David Sacks amplified the concern by arguing that Anthropic is moving from the model layer into vertical applications such as science, security, legal, and coding, raising the fear that model providers will watch where value is being created and then move into those markets directly.The pull is that Karp is not alone, even if his style is unusually combative. Higgins notes that Satya Nadella has also warned that companies need to retain the learnings created when they use AI models, while Mark Zuckerberg has framed Meta's new model release partly around lower-cost frontier intelligence. The article presents Karp's campaign as one sign that established technology companies and large enterprises are trying to define where they fit when AI labs become central infrastructure, application competitors, and potential IPO giants at the same time.Read more: The Wall Street JournalThe AI Agents Are Coming for Microsoft OfficeAlex Wilhelm | Cautious Optimism | July 11, 2026Alex Wilhelm argues that one of the week's quieter AI questions is whether the productivity market that Microsoft successfully moved into subscription software is now being attacked by agentic tools. The piece begins with the infrastructure backdrop: SK Hynix raised $26.5 billion in a U.S. listing while building U.S. HBM and advanced-packaging capacity, and memory, chip, and foundry companies are now priced for sustained AI demand.Wilhelm then says the AI conversation has shifted quickly from raw capability to cost per task. He cites new model releases and vendor language emphasizing cheaper agentic and coding models, faster performance, and lower dollars per task. That matters because lower costs make it more plausible for AI systems to take on routine knowledge work at scale rather than remain a premium coding assistant market.The core of the article is Microsoft Office. Wilhelm notes that Microsoft turned Office from a one-time purchase into Microsoft 365, a large recurring revenue business with tens of millions of subscribers and a major productivity segment. Now, he says, late-stage unicorns and AI labs are pushing into the same territory: Anthropic's Cowork was reportedly used mostly outside software development, OpenAI merged ChatGPT and Codex into a tool for creating sheets, slides, docs, web apps, and long-running work, and other companies are building agentic coworkers that connect business data to documents, workflows, schedules, alerts, and apps.The article's caveat is that Microsoft has survived major platform shifts before. The argument is not that Office disappears quickly, but that the definition of office software is broadening from documents and spreadsheets into AI systems that can create, monitor, and act across workplace data.Read moreWhat Is Loop Engineering, and Who Owns It?Author: Nilesh Barla Published: July 11, 2026Nilesh Barla argues that “loop engineering” is becoming a distinct discipline because production AI agents now fail less at single prompts than at runtime: when to stop, what state to preserve, and how to recover after a bad step. Prompt engineering shapes one model call, and context engineering shapes what the model sees, but loop engineering shapes what a sequence of calls actually does.The killer detail is the three-primitives frame. Barla says a real agent loop needs halt conditions, state carryover, and recovery paths, then maps teams across five maturity levels. At the lowest level, an agent is just a model call in a for-loop with a step cap and raw history; by the higher levels, the system has structured state, explicit planning, replay, evaluation, and self-repair.The pull is organizational. If agents are becoming production systems rather than demos, someone has to own the runtime itself. The loop engineer is the role Barla gives to the person responsible for making long-running agent work dependable.Read more: Adaline LabsThe Fight Against AI Data Centers Is Just BeginningEmma Roth | The Verge | July 12, 2026Emma Roth argues that community resistance to data centers has moved from an early warning sign into a national political fight as AI facilities grow larger, more power-hungry, and more visible to nearby residents. The article starts with Apple's failed 2015 plan for a $1 billion data center in Athenry, Ireland, where a small group of residents challenged the project over noise, light pollution, flooding, traffic, and wildlife effects until Apple abandoned it in 2018.The current data-center buildout is presented as much larger and more contentious. Roth writes that residents now cite rising energy costs, water quality, noise, light pollution, and greenhouse gas emissions, while the U.S. Energy Information Administration expects commercial energy demand to surpass residential demand this year because of AI data centers and Goldman Sachs expects data-center power demand to double by 2027.The central evidence comes from Data Center Watch, which says protesters blocked or delayed at least 75 U.S. projects worth $130 billion from January to March, with active opposition groups more than doubling from 396 at the end of 2025 to 833 by the end of the first quarter of 2026. Roth also cites QTS abandoning a $12 billion Wisconsin campus, Delaware City regulators blocking a 580-acre project under the Coastal Zone Act, opposition stopping a QTS project in Prince William County, and pressure that pushed Kevin O'Leary to downsize the proposed 40,000-acre Project Stratos in Utah.The policy section describes a split between federal acceleration and local resistance. President Trump has treated data centers as part of the AI race with China and fast-tracked construction, while some Republican candidates are distancing themselves from that position ahead of midterms. Sanders and Ocasio-Cortez have proposed a moratorium until price and environmental protections exist, bipartisan lawmakers are backing ratepayer-protection measures, and states including Florida, Idaho, and Washington have passed rules on cost shifting, water use, and tax breaks. Roth's caveat is that the policy patchwork is still incomplete, leaving many communities to fight project by project.Read more6 months to live for open modelsAuthor: Nathan Lambert Published: July 12, 2026Nathan Lambert argues that open-weight AI models are facing their most serious policy test so far because U.S. officials are beginning to discuss concrete controls rather than abstract safety concerns. He says reported White House conversations about a new executive order may initially target Chinese-origin models and government use, but could create a broader review habit for frontier open models. His forecast is that a model above the capability range of GPT-5.5, Claude Opus 4.8, or GLM-5.2 could trigger a ban or indefinite delay within six months.The post separates two policy fights that are becoming intertwined: distillation and frontier capability. Lambert says the distillation campaign against Chinese models has become a form of regulatory capture because Anthropic and other closed-model companies would gain economically if Chinese open models were banned. He does not dismiss IP protection, but argues that if a closed model's capabilities are dangerous enough to justify restricting open models, the lab also has to explain why those capabilities are exposed through a queryable API. He cites unauthorized access to Anthropic's Mythos private beta as evidence that APIs are not automatically secure.The broader claim is that a unilateral U.S. ban would hurt positive actors more than bad actors if comparable open models remain available elsewhere. Lambert says the only durable ceiling would require global agreement, which does not exist, and that open models can improve safety by allowing broad inspection, adaptation, and understanding. His proposed near-term off-ramps are a strong U.S. open model release from companies such as Microsoft, Meta, or Reflection, and a broader coalition of open-source beneficiaries lobbying for safe rollout rather than prohibition.Read more: SourceAmericans Deserve a Dividend From AI Companies' RichesAuthor: Scott Stanford Published: July 14, 2026Scott Stanford argues that proposals to give the government a stake in AI companies miss the point unless ordinary citizens directly receive and control the upside. Sam Altman has discussed giving up equity in OpenAI, Washington already owns a stake in Intel, Nvidia is sharing China chip revenue, and Bernie Sanders wants large AI labs to contribute half their stock to a sovereign wealth fund. Stanford says those ideas all park value with the state, not with people.The killer detail is New Carlisle, Indiana, where AWS's Project Rainier is turning cornfields into one of the world's largest AI superclusters. The project is planned to run up to a million chips, draw more than two gigawatts of power, and represents an investment that has grown from $11 billion to $13.8 billion. Stanford uses that local transformation to argue that AI's public bargain should be visible at the household level.The pull is design. A citizen AI dividend would have to specify who earns a stake, how they hold it, and when they see cash. Without that mechanism, the AI wealth debate remains a fight over government balance sheets rather than public ownership.Read more: SourceWho Gets to Define the Frontier?Author: Mark Daley Published: July 14, 2026Mark Daley argues that Demis Hassabis is right to call for a serious institution to verify frontier AI systems, but that the power to test models is also the power to govern them. Hassabis's proposed Frontier AI Standards Body would get privileged pre-release access to advanced models, testing compute, held-out evaluations, support from national labs and security agencies, third-party auditors, and eventually authority to block models from the American market or coordinate a slowdown.The killer detail is Daley's constitutional objection. He says the proposal sometimes looks like a scientific lab, a standards body, an industry regulator, a licensing authority, and an emergency security council at once. Combining those roles because each requires technical expertise would be like putting the central bank, auditor-general, and Supreme Court in one building and calling it efficient.The pull is standard-setting. Daley's concern is not that verification is unnecessary, but that whoever writes the tests, decides what passes, adjudicates disputes, and grants market access may end up defining the frontier itself.Read more: SourceGPT-Red: Unlocking Self-Improvement for RobustnessOpenAI | OpenAI | July 15, 2026OpenAI describes GPT-Red as an internal automated red-teaming model trained to find prompt-injection vulnerabilities at a scale human red teams cannot match. The post says AI systems increasingly encounter third-party data through browsers, connected apps, local files, and tools, creating opportunities for malicious instructions hidden in emails, webpages, tool responses, or code repositories. Human red-teaming remains part of OpenAI's safety process, but the company says it is time-intensive and cannot generate enough diverse adversarial examples for model training.The system is trained through self-play reinforcement learning, with GPT-Red rewarded for eliciting valid failures and defender models rewarded for resisting attacks while still completing their tasks. OpenAI says the training environments specify threat models across settings such as local files, webpage banners, email bodies, and tool outputs. The model is kept separate from deployed production models because it is intentionally trained with malicious capabilities.OpenAI reports that GPT-Red generalized beyond its training set, including an internal replication of the indirect prompt-injection arena from Dziemian et al. (2025), where it found successful attacks in 84% of scenarios compared with 13% for human red-teamers. The post also says GPT-Red transferred attacks from simulation to a live autonomous vending-machine agent, causing price changes and order cancellations, and outperformed a prompted GPT-5.5 baseline against a Codex CLI agent on held-out data-exfiltration tasks.The article's main robustness claim is that OpenAI has used GPT-Red and predecessor models in training since GPT-5.3, with later GPT releases becoming more resistant to prompt injections. It says GPT-5.6 Sol has six times fewer failures on OpenAI's hardest direct prompt-injection benchmark than the best production model from four months earlier, that a “Fake Chain-of-Thought” attack class fell from more than 95% success against GPT-5.1 to below 10% against GPT-5.6 Sol, and that GPT-5.6 Sol fails on only 0.05% of GPT-Red's direct prompt injections. OpenAI says general capabilities and targeted over-refusal evaluations were not harmed, and says a preprint with more details will follow.Read moreAnthropic, Blackstone bet the next trillion-dollar AI business is implementation, not just modelsRebecca Bellan | TechCrunch | July 15, 2026Rebecca Bellan reports that Ode with Anthropic is the $1.5 billion AI implementation company launched by Anthropic with Blackstone, Hellman & Friedman, Goldman Sachs, and other backers. The article says the venture reflects a growing belief among frontier AI labs that enterprise adoption requires more than better models: customers need engineers who can embed inside businesses and turn AI into working systems.Ode was originally conceived by Blackstone after it used both large consulting firms and smaller AI services boutiques across its portfolio companies. TechCrunch reports that Fractional AI, an AI engineering services startup, stood out and was acquired by the joint venture shortly after the venture was announced. Fractional now forms the foundation of Ode, which has 100 engineers and works closely with Anthropic's applied AI team to identify where the technology can affect specific businesses.Ode CEO Chris Taylor tells TechCrunch that the company could someday become a trillion-dollar business if it scales without losing quality. He says an ideal customer is one whose CEO treats the AI project as a top one or two priority, whether it is a major product feature or the reworking of a core business process. Ode will operate under a “Claude-first” principle, using Anthropic technology whenever possible, but the article says it can use rival AI products when needed.The article's central implementation argument comes from Ode chief technologist Eddie Siegel, who says model selection matters but is not where most of the engineering effort goes. He compares it to the choice of programming language in software: one ingredient in a system that still has to be engineered. Bellan writes that Ode's challenge is hiring and training enough elite generalist engineers, many of them former founders, while competing with OpenAI's The Deployment Company and consulting giants that have built their own forward-deployed engineering teams.Read moreVint Cerf is working on a plan to unleash AI agents on the open internetTim Fernholz | TechCrunch | July 15, 2026Tim Fernholz reports that Vint Cerf, after leaving Google, is advising Innovation Labs on an open architecture for identifying AI agents online. Innovation Labs is a subsidiary of Identity Digital, a DNS registry company, and its proposal is to use domain-name infrastructure as part of a system for agent identity, accountability, and auditability. The premise is that agents will need a way to identify themselves if they move beyond proprietary systems and begin interacting across the open internet.The concrete proposal is DNSid, a registry that links an AI agent to an existing internet domain and uses cryptographic proofs to log its registration over time. Innovation Labs says it is trialing the standard with unnamed hyperscalers and identity companies. Cerf frames the problem around authority and accountability: what authority an agent has, where that authority came from, who is accountable for the agent's behavior, how its identity is established, and why anyone should trust it.The article's caveat is that standards are still emerging and agents are more active than static domains. Cerf says the period may be both fascinating and exasperating because the functionality is powerful and interoperability is unresolved. He compares the adoption problem to TCP/IP: competing systems may not work together until users push for functional interoperation. He also says an agentic economy is not inevitable, but that people will try to build it because delegating work to agents will be easier.Read more: TechCrunchxai-org/grok-build, now open sourceAuthor: Simon Willison Published: July 15, 2026Simon Willison argues that xAI's decision to open-source Grok Build is best understood as a trust repair move after a severe privacy failure. The CLI had triggered backlash when users realized that running it in a directory could upload the entire directory to xAI's Google Cloud buckets, including one user's reported SSH keys, password manager database, documents, photos, and videos. xAI disabled the feature, said previously retained coding data would be deleted, and released the code under Apache 2.0.The killer detail is what the codebase reveals. Willison counts 844,530 lines of Rust, only about 3% of which appears vendored, and finds remnants of the upload system still present but disabled: gcs.rs contains Google Cloud upload code, while upload_session_state() now returns a hard-coded session_state_upload_unavailable error. He also notes copied or ported tool implementations from Codex and OpenCode, prompt files, and a terminal Mermaid renderer.The pull is that terminal coding agents are becoming large, intricate software systems in their own right. The privacy failure mattered because these tools operate inside the directories where developers keep their most sensitive work; the open-source release matters because trust now depends on inspecting what an agent can see, send, and do.Read more: SourceThe Pulse: What can we learn from Bun's rapid Rust rewrite with AI?Author: Gergely Orosz and Ivan Klaric Published: July 16, 2026Gergely Orosz and Ivan Klaric argue that Bun's AI-assisted rewrite from Zig to Rust is a practical sign of how software engineering changes when models can take on large, bounded migrations with clear feedback loops. The piece does not treat the rewrite as magic: Jarred Sumner first spent hours turning design judgment into a detailed porting guide, then used adversarial review, parallel agents, compiler errors, and tests to force the work toward correctness.The killer detail is the scale. Bun had 535,496 lines of Zig, 1,448 files, and 22 million monthly downloads, making a conventional rewrite a year-long freeze the team could not justify. Using Fable, Sumner split the work across 64 agents, produced about 6,500 commits, and got the migration done in 11 days at an estimated API cost of $165,000.The pull is economic, not theatrical. If a one- or two-year migration can become an 11-day project, AI coding is not just faster autocomplete; it changes which technical debts are worth paying down.Read more: SourceOrphan risks at the frontier of artificial intelligenceAuthor: Andrew Maynard Published: July 16, 2026Andrew Maynard argues that frontier AI safety frameworks are creating “orphan risks”: harms that companies can see, but do not formally own because they are hard to quantify, do not fit catastrophic-risk thresholds, or fall outside audit-friendly compliance machinery. His target is not existing frontier safety work, but the narrowing effect that happens when private companies decide which risks count as governable.The killer detail is Maynard's contrast between measurable model dangers and threats to value. He points to Meta's three-day Galactica collapse, OpenAI's 2023 board crisis, safety-team departures, and wellbeing litigation as examples of risks that damaged trust, culture, legitimacy, or users without fitting cleanly into conventional model-risk categories. The proposed fix is an orphan-risk register: a public record of risks a company considered and chose not to manage, with reasons.The pull is accountability. Frontier developers' internal scoping choices have become a de facto layer of public governance, so the question is no longer only which risks they manage, but which risks they quietly leave outside the frame.Read more: SourceThe Lab of the Future Should Feel Like a Data CenterLatent.Space with Andy Beam and Rafa Gomez-Bombarelli | Latent.Space | July 16, 2026Latent.Space interviews Lila Sciences CTO Andy Beam and chief science officer for physical sciences Rafa Gomez-Bombarelli about the company's attempt to build an AI-run science factory. The post describes Lila's thesis as treating the lab itself as an “infinite token generator”: if internet data drove the first era of AI scaling, experimentally verified scientific data may be the next scarce training source. Lila is trying to produce that data with robotics, lab instruments, orchestration software, and AI models wired into the wet lab.The central analogy is the lab as data center. Instruments are nodes on a graph, a magnetically levitating transport layer moves materials between them, and experiment scheduling looks like a compute queue. Beam says Lila is not simply an automation company, because the point is not just throughput; it is flexibility, generalization, and experiment capture. The post says Lila has built more than 10 trillion experimentally validated “scientific reasoning tokens,” not internet text or biological sequences.The interview ranges across biology, chemistry, drug discovery, materials science, and the limits of automation. It notes that Lila rebuilt one gas-sorption measurement to run roughly 2,500 times faster, claims its general models can transfer priors from small-molecule chemistry to metal-organic frameworks for carbon capture, and describes model-suggested platinum-group-free electrocatalysts that moved from looking boring or wrong to becoming strong performers. The caveats are physical: experiments have runtimes, biology cannot always be accelerated, chains of thought can be unreliable narrators, and reward hacking becomes more dangerous when a model controls a real lab.Read more: Latent.SpaceWhy AMI Labs' Alexandre LeBrun won't call his AI “AGI” or “superintelligence”Kate Park | TechCrunch | July 16, 2026Kate Park interviews AMI Labs CEO Alexandre LeBrun about why Yann LeCun's world-model startup avoids the language of “AGI” and “superintelligence.” LeBrun says the terms are not useful because they lack stable definitions: “We never used the word AGI. And I just noticed that nobody is using it anymore; they switched to superintelligence.” His argument is that the practical frontier is not a label, but whether AI systems can understand and predict real-world states.The article explains the world-model thesis by contrasting language prediction with physical-state prediction. A large language model predicts the next word; a world model predicts the next state, such as what happens when a glass tips over. LeBrun says LLMs remain complementary and efficient for language, but the physical world is where current AI is weak. Robotics is the clearest case: hardware has advanced quickly, but robots are still brittle outside controlled routines because they lack context and situational understanding.AMI is still pre-product, but TechCrunch reports that LeBrun was in Seoul looking for industrial partners, researchers, and global companies. He says world models cannot be built entirely inside a lab because they need access to real environments. That is why South Korea appeals to AMI: robotics, semiconductors, manufacturing, and fast adoption create the kind of hardware-heavy context that software-only AI has barely touched.Read more: TechCrunchKimi K3 Tech Blog: Open Frontier IntelligenceKimi | Kimi | July 16, 2026Kimi introduces Kimi K3 as an open 3T-class frontier model aimed at coding, knowledge work, reasoning, multimodality, and long-context agentic use. The source describes the model as a 2.8T-parameter system built on Kimi Delta Attention and Attention Residuals, with native multimodality and a 1M-token context window. It says Moonshot AI plans to release model weights by July 27.The post presents K3 through benchmark and use-case sections rather than as a general product announcement. It reports results across coding, productivity, agentic, and multimodal evaluations, including DeepSWE, Terminal-Bench 2.1, Program Bench, SWE Marathon, FrontierSWE, PostTrain Bench, OfficeQA Pro, SpreadsheetBench 2, MCP Atlas, AutomationBench, BrowseComp, GDPval-AA v2, AA-Briefcase, MMMU-Pro, MathVision, BabyVision, OmniDocBench, and PerceptionBench. The source says all reported K3 results use maximum reasoning effort with temperature and top-p set to 1.0, and that different benchmark comparisons use KimiCode, Claude Code, or Codex harnesses depending on the test.Kimi's caveats are unusually concrete. The limitations section says K3 was trained in preserved thinking-history mode, so quality may become unstable if an agent harness does not pass historical thinking content correctly or if an ongoing session switches to K3 midstream. It also says K3's emphasis on long-horizon tasks can make it excessively proactive when it encounters minor issues or ambiguous intent, and recommends imposing explicit behavioral constraints for applications that require strict boundaries. The post adds that K3 remains behind Claude Fable 5 and GPT 5.6 Sol in user experience despite being competitive overall.Read moreVenture CapitalThree Years InAuthor: Tomasz Tunguz Published: July 10, 2026Tomasz Tunguz marks Theory Ventures' third anniversary by arguing that AI's central market effect is time compression. In his telling, model release cycles, company revenue milestones, enterprise adoption, and venture categories have all accelerated. Seed, Series A, and Series B still exist as financing labels, but they no longer cleanly describe company maturity when some seed rounds are larger than IPOs and the best AI companies can mature much earlier than prior software companies.The killer detail is the shift from models to inference. Tunguz argues that inference has become the dominant AI market because workloads and buyer preferences are fragmenting: video, batch, local, agentic, and real-time tasks each create different infrastructure needs. He compares this to databases splitting into OLTP, OLAP, vector, and streaming categories, with AI pushing the same specialization into inference infrastructure.The pull is that Theory sees the AI-native venture firm as part of the same pattern. The firm says it has analyzed twice as many investment opportunities with three investors working alongside a nine-person intelligence organization, using agents and research systems to map markets, source companies, and support diligence. The piece is both a market map and a statement about how venture itself is being rebuilt by the technology it funds.Read more: LinkedInVenture Has Rarely Looked More BifurcatedAuthor: Beezer Clarkson Published: July 14, 2026Beezer Clarkson points to PitchBook's Q2 report as evidence that the U.S. venture market has split into two very different realities. AI now accounts for more than 60 percent of all U.S. venture deal value, meaning the headline market can look active and well-funded even while much of the non-AI market is dealing with a much colder liquidity and fundraising environment.The thread uses that split as the setup for Clarkson's latest Origins episode with Alec Litowitz, founder of Magnetar and QStar Capital and one of Citadel's original founding partners. Clarkson says markets like this are periods of genuine uncertainty, not merely ordinary risk, which is why Litowitz's Adaptability Quotient framework is relevant.The embedded clip makes the liquidity point concrete. Litowitz says DPI is “the resolution of uncertainty” because it converts an uncertain investment into actual cash returned to LPs. In his framing, a realized dollar is a real mark, while TVPI remains uncertain until it is realized.The killer detail is the distinction between pricing risk and resolving uncertainty. Litowitz's perspective matters because QStar is a SpaceX investor and Clarkson says the conversation happened just before one of venture's most consequential IPOs. The episode's stated questions are why venture remains a way to gain exposure to innovation, how AI is changing what is investable, why liquidity is ultimately a function of time, and why uncertainty requires a different decision framework from risk.Read more: XThe Best Angel Investors in the US: Who Backs the Most Unicorns, and Who's Active NowAuthor: Ilya Strebulaev Published: July 10, 2026Ilya Strebulaev ranks angels, angel groups, accelerators, and incubators by lifetime U.S. unicorn investments, counting checks written before a company reached unicorn status. The top of the combined list is dominated by organizations: Y Combinator leads with 113 unicorn investments, followed by Plug and Play at 52 and 500 Global at 41. Sand Hill Angels is the highest-ranked angel group at 31.The killer detail is how quickly the list changes below the biggest accelerators. Strebulaev says 271 of the 304 investors in the Top 200 are individuals, or 89%. In the top 100, individuals are 91%. That makes the market underneath the large accelerator counts look much more personal: mostly operators and individual angels writing early checks from their own networks.The pull is the ranking's own caveat. Strebulaev writes that every lifetime leaderboard has a blind spot because many of the unicorns behind those totals were founded a decade or more ago, and some angels have since moved into formal funds, slowed down, or stopped investing. His post therefore separates lifetime performance from recent cohorts, including companies founded in 2015 or later and 2020 or later. For founders or allocators making current decisions, that distinction matters: a career record and a current record are not the same measure.Read more: Ilya StrebulaevAre Prediction Markets Doomed to Fail?Author: Contrary Published: July 16, 2026Contrary argues that prediction markets' current boom depends on whether platforms can prove they are more than regulated gambling with exchange-style branding. Kalshi and Polymarket have reached mass cultural, investor, and regulatory attention, but the article says the underlying idea is old: academic markets, corporate forecasting tools, Intrade, PredictIt, and other predecessors all struggled with the same linked problems of liquidity, legality, and user appeal.The killer detail is the comparison with sportsbooks. Prediction markets present themselves as peer-to-peer, transparent, and non-house-based, but sports contracts reportedly account for more than 90 percent of Kalshi trading, and the article says the platforms keep a much thinner slice of volume than sportsbooks. A market can therefore show sports-betting-scale handle while generating far less revenue.The pull is that the product's hardest problem may be distribution of wins. If a small group of sharp traders captures most profits while casual users lose interest, prediction markets may become valuable data feeds and professional tools before they become durable consumer networks.Read more: SourceRegulationExclusive: The Next Frontier of the Deportation Wars: College CampusesAuthor: Adrian Carrasquillo Published: July 11, 2026Adrian Carrasquillo reports that college campuses are becoming a new front in the fight over immigration enforcement because automatic license plate readers can turn ordinary campus security infrastructure into searchable location data. His thesis is that Flock Safety's camera network, even without direct ICE or DHS contracts, can feed deportation enforcement through local police partnerships and data-sharing practices.The killer detail is the campaign target. The Emergency Campaign to Support Higher Education, working with Schools Drop ICE, is focusing on 75 colleges and universities publicly identified as having Flock contracts. Flock says it has no ICE or DHS contracts, but activists argue the risk comes through local agencies that coordinate with federal authorities and run searches on their behalf.The pull is broader than immigration. Carrasquillo notes that license plate readers have already been abused by officers for stalking, and that Flock's AI search features can identify more than plates, including bumper stickers. A campus safety tool can become a political surveillance system when the data layer is searchable.Read more: The BulwarkThe Supreme Court Broke Independent Agencies. Here's a Way to Slow the Damage.Author: Todd Phillips Published: July 12, 2026Todd Phillips argues that the Supreme Court's decision in Trump v. Slaughter damaged independent agencies by ending for-cause removal protections, but did not leave Congress powerless. The ruling weakens the old model in which commissioners at bodies such as the FTC, NLRB, CPSC, SEC, and CFTC could be insulated from dismissal over policy disagreements. Phillips says the next fight is whether presidents can turn nominally bipartisan commissions into one-party instruments.The killer detail is the procedural fix: quorum rules. Phillips proposes that Congress require bipartisan slates of commissioners to be seated before independent agencies can act. A president

Jack on the road for the American Association All-Star Game, Derek Hanson in the studio talking about the American Leagues 4-0 over the National League. Also, Eric Schmidt, Head Coach for the University of North Dakota football team recaps MVFC Media Day and previews the season. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

A powerful, personal conversation this morning as local attorney Mark Cantor of Cantor Law joins The Marc Cox Morning Show to discuss a sobering new AP poll showing most American Jews now feel less safe than before October 7th. Cantor shares his own decades of experience confronting antisemitism, from a college run-in with a white supremacist group to friends who lost family members to targeted violence, and doesn't hold back calling out the double standard on college campuses where every protected class gets defended except Jewish students. He points a finger at the permissive climate created by voices across the political spectrum, and delivers a message rooted in faith and self-reliance: never be a victim, and every Jewish American should know how to protect themselves. Marc and Kim close with heartfelt appreciation for Cantor's honesty and courage in speaking out. Real conversations, real faith, real America — only on The Marc Cox Morning Show. Coming up: 2A Tuesday with Mark Walters, plus Senator Eric Schmidt at the top of the hour. Hashtags: #MarcCoxMorningShow #MarkCantor #Antisemitism #JewishCommunity #October7 #CampusFreeSpeech #SecondAmendment #SelfDefense #Faith #Israel #Conservative #GOP #FaithFamilyFreedom #StLouis

It's 2A Tuesday, and Armed American Radio's Mark Walters joins The Marc Cox Morning Show with a fired-up breakdown of the Seventh Circuit's latest ruling upholding Illinois' AR-15 ban — and why he's confident the Supreme Court will strike it down 6-3 once these cases finally reach them. Walters connects the dots between disarmament and tyranny, pointing to Zohran Mamdani's controversial New York City map that erased historic Italian, Irish, and Jewish neighborhoods, and warning that erasure always comes before encroachment. He draws a chilling parallel to Iran, where a disarmed population was left defenseless against takeover. Marc and Mark also revisit disgraced Florida Democrat Andrew Gillum's stunning fall from grace, and marvel at how the Left refuses to cut loose even its most radical, embarrassing candidates — from Graham Platner to Bernie Sanders' allies — while Republicans hold their own accountable. Freedom, self-defense, and hard truths — that's 2A Tuesday on The Marc Cox Morning Show. Coming up: Senator Eric Schmidt joins at the top of the hour. Hashtags: #MarcCoxMorningShow #2ATuesday #MarkWalters #SecondAmendment #AR15Ban #SeventhCircuit #SCOTUS #ZohranMamdani #NYC #GunRights #AndrewGillum #GrahamPlatner #BernieSanders #SelfDefense #Conservative #GOP #FaithFamilyFreedom

Hour Three of The Marc Cox Morning Show delivers faith, freedom, and fierce debate. Senator Eric Schmidt takes on Mazie Hirono over deporting violent criminal illegal aliens, while Cori Bush once again refuses to answer for her tornado relief dark money scandal. Attorney Mark Cantor delivers a deeply personal conversation on rising antisemitism in America and the importance of Jewish Americans defending themselves. 2A Tuesday brings Armed American Radio's Mark Walters, breaking down the Illinois AR-15 ban ruling, Zohran Mamdani's erasure of NYC's historic immigrant neighborhoods, and why Democrats never abandon their most radical figures. Kim on a Whim closes the hour with a lighter debate over permanent daylight saving time, setting up an interview with Senator Eric Schmidt on the legacy of the late Lindsey Graham. Faith, family, freedom, and fearless conversation — that's the Marc Cox Morning Show standard. Hashtags: #MarcCoxMorningShow #Hour3 #EricSchmidt #MazieHirono #MarkCantor #Antisemitism #MarkWalters #2ATuesday #SecondAmendment #AR15Ban #KimOnAWhim #DaylightSavingTime #LindseyGraham #CoriBush #Conservative #GOP #FaithFamilyFreedom Guest List (Hour 3): Mark Cantor (Cantor Law) — antisemitism and Jewish community safety; Mark Walters (Armed American Radio, Second Amendment Foundation) — 2A Tuesday, AR-15 ban ruling, gun rights

What makes a brand great?Is their logo?Their slogans?Maybe, just maybe, it goes way deeper than that.Good brands sell products. But good is the enemy of great. Great brands know their Why. Great brands have great products. They have great customer service. They obsess over achieving their Why and go above and beyond to get there. If more brands truly believed in their product and the reason they got started in the first place, well, we'd be inundated with great brands! Chief Commercial Officer & President of New Ventures at Bobbie, Sara Ahmed Holman, joins us on this episode of The Longer Game to share why Bobbie is winning all over the place.They know their Why. They obsess over getting the best product into the hands of moms so they can feel good about what they feed their babies. Don't sleep on this episode. Let your baby do that.Grab a bottle, put in your headphones, and feed that baby!What they cover1. Staying true to your brand identity and knowing your why is crucial for all brands that want to have staying power.2. Many brands mistake virality for brand building. Chasing the trend isn't what builds a brand. Chasing trends means you bend your Why around the What. And your Why should always dictate your What.3. Breakout brands are the ones who are building the brand and trust over time with the consumer. One way you build trust is through great product, That is at the core of every iconic brand. It's absolutely essential that you have great product in order for you to have longevity.4. We're in a dangerous situation right now where we believe that building something fast means we're building something great.The Longer Game explores the future of retail across Amazon, ecommerce, and brick-and-mortar.The goal is simple: help brands grow by understanding how all channels work together.Retail is evolving. The brands that win are the ones willing to adapt.Subscribe to stay updated on new episodes.Learn more: https://thelongergame.comAbout the Guest:Sara Ahmed Holman is Chief Commercial Officer & President of New Ventures at Bobbie, the infant formula company that came to market in 2021. Before Bobbie, Sara led growth and partnerships at Innovation Endeavors, the venture firm founded by Eric Schmidt, focused on food, agriculture, and life sciences. Earlier she held operating and leadership roles at Lookout and Weebly (acquired by Square). A UCLA School of Law graduate, Sara co-founded the Food and Beverage Team at Bryan Cave and has advised numerous CPG and health startups.Connect with Sara:LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/saraahmed/Bobbie: https://www.linkedin.com/company/bobbie-baby/About the Host:Michael Maher is Chief Idea Officer of Cartology, an Amazon-focused agency helping brands grow revenue and profitability.Connect with Michael:LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/immichaelmaherEmail: michael@thinkcartology.comSponsored by Cartology https://thinkcartology.com

On this week's episode, Sam Fazeli, Josh Schimmer, Eric Schmidt, Paul Matteis, and special guest STAT's Matt Herper open on the market, noting that despite a wobbly day for biotech, the XBI holds strong gains year-to-date. The conversation turns to FDA transparency, where the co-hosts flag that CRLs haven't been released since April and that the agency may be walking back that practice. The co-hosts debate whether the FDA is swinging too far toward leniency after Agios' mitapivat won priority review in sickle cell disease despite missing its primary endpoint last year. On AI in drug discovery, Matt Herper recaps an interview with Anthropic's CEO about a new research tool, noting that it's plausible the tool helps industry pick better targets and lower the failure rate. In M&A, Vertex's largest-ever deal takes Crinetics for $10 billion net of cash, staking a claim in the specialty rare endocrine space, while Novartis expands its ADC portfolio with Myricx for $1.1 billion upfront plus $400 million in milestones — the second European ADC deal in recent months. On data, AstraZeneca and Ionis' eplontersen trial in ATTR-CM missed its endpoint, showing no benefit or biomarker signal on top of background tafamidis; the group then discusses the readthroughs for BridgeBio, Alnylam, and Pfizer's ATTR therapies. This episode aired on July 10, 2026.

Mohnish Pabrai's Interview with Kim Kiho at Knowledge Inside podcast on June 8, 2026. (00:00:00) - Introduction (00:01:44) - Lunch with Warren Buffett vs. Eric Schmidt; Introduction to Charlie Munger (00:11:47) - Impact of declining population of South Korea; SK Hynix, Samsung & Micron (00:17:19) - KOSPI  (00:17:57) - My Investment checklist - an inspiration from the FAA; Buffett's Dexter Shoes investment (00:25:27) - Three most important items in a checklist; IKEA & Amorepacific (00:31:19) - Active vs. Passive investing; Look for risk-free investments (00:35:10) - Investing in Turkey; Reysas (00:39:24) - The Dhandho investing: Heads I win, Tails I do not lose much (00:41:20) - Investing in AI; Do not buy shiny items (00:43:39) - How to build wealth; The Rule of 72 & The Manhattan island deal in 1623 (00:50:24) - Giving back; The Dakshana Foundation (00:53:52) - Advice to listeners The contents of this website are for educational and entertainment purposes only, and do not purport to be, and are not intended to be, financial, legal, accounting, tax or investment advice. Investments or strategies that are discussed may not be suitable for you, do not take into account your particular investment objectives, financial situation or needs and are not intended to provide investment advice or recommendations appropriate for you. Before making any investment or trade, consider whether it is suitable for you and consider seeking advice from your own financial or investment adviser. Views expressed on Chai with Pabrai are exclusively those of Mohnish Pabrai and not of any affiliated firm or organization.

On this week's episode, Josh Schimmer, Eric Schmidt, Tess Cameron, and Sam Fazeli open by noting the XBI's continued rise, debating whether biotech is getting ahead of itself. The co-hosts call this a “new era” in which biotech can be profitable rather than sold off to pharma. The conversation shifts to deals, with AbbVie's $10.9 billion acquisition of Apogee, which raised questions about China-sourced drugs given their volume, pace of innovation, and cheaper price. The group also covers Boundless Bio and Serapha's merger, alongside a $230M private raise. Ollin Bio -- whose pipeline is built entirely on Chinese assets -- raised $330M Series B to advance Phase 3 trials of a bispecific antibody for diabetic macular edema and wet AMD, which led to a debate on the COINS Act and the distinction between physical and innovation supply chains. The group then overviews potential FDA Commissioner candidates, with BIO CEO John Crowley and physician Heidi Overton as front-runners alongside acting leader Kyle Diamantas. In company news, CVS Caremark deferred adding $SPRY's epinephrine nasal spray Neffy to its formulary, pushing the review to January 2027. The episode concludes with data updates from Moonlake in HS, Merck's ulcerative colitis drug, Definium's Phase 3 LSD data in MDD, and Absci's Lilly-backed prolactin antibody raise. *This episode aired on June 26, 2026.

Just days after Anthropic launched Fable 5 and Mythos — two of the most capable AI models ever released — the US Commerce Department stepped in with an unprecedented national security export control order and effectively forced Anthropic to pull the kill switch on both models globally. The move signals something that we have been watching build for years: Washington now legally treats cutting-edge AI code the same way it treats weapons. We also get into the social media ban backfire hitting governments worldwide, the emerging analog bag movement, and a few pieces of tech that are either genuinely useful or complete nonsense depending on how much disposable income you have.Key Moments0:00 — The US government shuts down Anthropic's Fable 5 and Mythos: what just happened1:08 — Jason explains how AI export controls work — and why this one is different3:18 — What Fable 5 actually did: Jeremy asks Jason to explain the threat5:12 — How Fable 5 turned three weeks of Jason's dev work into one day7:08 — The 'get me $20 million in two weeks' scenario: why state actors are the real concern8:24 — AI as the Wolf from Pulp Fiction — but it cleans its own car9:29 — Senator Kelly's amendment: forcing human accountability into autonomous weapons11:12 — Why the audit trail problem makes the amendment unenforceable15:32 — College seniors boo Eric Schmidt: the worst commencement speech in recent memory16:24 — Why a four-year degree doesn't buy what it used to — and who's actually getting work22:42 — Social media bans for kids are backfiring: VPNs, underground platforms, and unintended consequences26:40 — We're all addicts and we know it: the screen dependency conversation we keep not having27:35 — The analog bag movement: is carrying a sack of notebooks actually the answer?33:43 — Dream's $700 floor lamp that gives you a blowout: luxury appliance or absurd gimmick?34:08 — Switchbot's AI art frame with e-ink display: actually kind of cool36:08 — FITIC's 3D-printed custom shoes: great engineering, requires pictures of your feet

Charlie Fink, Ted Schilowitz, and Rony Abovitz take the full hour to work through the most consequential AI and spatial computing stories of the moment — unfiltered, in depth, and without the usual polite hedging that comes with having someone on to promote something. This is a pure news and commentary episode, and the news is strange enough that three experienced people sitting in a room still cannot fully account for it.AI XR News You Should Know:The OpenAI vs. Elon Musk case concluded without a clear ruling, but the more durable observation is what the whole saga revealed about Sam Altman. He has now survived being ousted by his own board (which he subsequently dismantled), a high-profile lawsuit from Elon Musk, and senior rivals leaving for government roles. Rony frames this through the Overton window — Altman studies what society is prepared to accept at any given moment and positions himself precisely there. Ted references a New Yorker profile that describes Altman as having a politician's gift for telling people what they want to hear until it becomes true. The financial architecture underneath the AI boom looks precarious on close inspection. SpaceX, widely assumed to be profitable, is losing five billion dollars a year. Anthropic is spending three dollars for every dollar of revenue it generates — and is paying SpaceX approximately one billion dollars a month for compute through roughly 2030. Rony's framing lands hard: two money-losing entities are funding each other while NVIDIA captures all the margin in between. Sequoia published a fifty-page analysis arguing the economics cannot work — while simultaneously holding positions in the companies it is critiquing. Google I/O delivered less on wearables than expected, but the real story was a deliberate strategic decision to put Gemini at the center of the company's entire product surface — effectively cannibalizing an eighty-two-billion-dollar search business before a competitor does it for them. The Innovator's Dilemma, run on purpose. On the hardware side, Android XR glasses are designed to be imperceptible as technology — thin temples, hidden camera portals, frames that belong in an optometrist's display case rather than a trade show floor. Rony notes that Google's glasses almost certainly incorporate Magic Leap optics, following a partnership announced in fall 2025. [00:00] – Cold open and episode framing: why there is no guest today and what the trio plans to cover.[04:15] – OpenAI vs. Elon Musk non-verdict: what the outcome (and lack of one) actually reveals.[09:30] – Sam Altman and the Overton window: Rony's read on how Altman has survived everything thrown at him.[16:00] – Anti-AI backlash on campuses: Eric Schmidt booed at University of Arizona, YouGov poll showing 69 percent of young people negative on AI, and what the demographic gradient means.[24:45] – SpaceX financials and the AI funding loop: the five-billion-dollar annual loss, Anthropic's burn rate, and Charlie's Ponzi scheme framing.[33:20] – Sequoia's fifty-page report and the ad model endgame: Ted's argument that Google wins because they already know the business model.[41:00] – Google I/O: the deliberate destruction of the search business, Android XR glasses, and why distribution beats specifications.[49:10] – AI accountability and the airplane analogy: Ted's line, Rony's "underground noise" from generals and CTOs, and the problem of regulatory vocabulary.[55:30] – Palantir, dual-use opacity, and the Lookout Mountain Air Force Station story: Rony on Jared Leto, classified film studios, and Cold War bunkers in Laurel Canyon.[01:01:00] – The success ledger: who is measuring impact, and what should actually count as winning.This episode is sponsored by Zappar and Mattercraft. Mattercraft is Zappar's web-based platform for building augmented reality experiences without an app. Find them at mattercraft.io. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

-Waymo told Engadget that it identified an area of improvement regarding performance around freeway construction zones, adding that the company voluntarily restricted freeway operations last month. -Relativity Space will provide spacecraft, rocket and cruise operations to deliver the agency's science instruments to Mars. -Apple's outgoing CEO Tim Cook all but confirmed that higher prices are on the way for the company's products, saying "price increases are unavoidable. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

June 16th, 2026, Court Leader's Advantage Podcast EpisodeWhen former Google CEO Eric Schmidt, real estate executiveGloria Caulfield, and music executive Scott Borchetta praised artificial intelligence during recent commencement addresses, graduates responded not with applause but with boos. For a growing number of Americans, especially youngerworkers entering the workforce, AI is no longer viewed primarily as a tool of innovation and opportunity. Rather, it is increasingly seen as a threat to jobs, economic security, and public trust.The concerns are multifaceted. AI's massive demand forelectricity and water raises environmental questions. Its capacity to generate misinformation and "hallucinated" facts raises concerns about public trust and the integrity of information. Most significant for Generation Z, however, is the fear that AI will fundamentally alter the job market andundermine economic security.Many technology leaders appear largely unmoved by theseconcerns. Sam Altman, CEO of OpenAI, has argued that fears of widespread job displacement are overstated. Jensen Huang, CEO of Nvidia, contends that workers will not lose jobs to AI itself, but rather to workers who know how to use AImore effectively. Jeff Bezos, founder of Amazon, has similarly predicted that AI will increase productivity, create new opportunities, and improve living standards rather than simply eliminate jobs.The public remains unconvinced.A March 2026 Quinnipiac University poll found that 70% ofAmericans believe AI will reduce the number of available jobs. Among Generation Z, concern is even more pronounced, with 81% believing advances in artificial intelligence are likely to decrease employment opportunities.These concerns are fueled by highly visible workforcereductions. In 2025, Amazon announced approximately 14,000 corporate layoffs while acknowledging that AI-enabled efficiencies played at least a partial role in workforce reductions.[i] UPS announced plans to eliminate 20,000 positions. While the main reason for the reduction in force was a pullback by Amazon, CEO Carol Tomé also cited efficiencies from implementing AI.[ii] Cisco reduced itsworkforce by more than 4,000 employees while increasing its focus on AI-driven networking and security products.[iii] For many workers the message is unmistakable: artificial intelligence means fewer jobs rather than greater opportunity.Courts have historically been cautious adopters of newtechnology, and artificial intelligence appears to be no exception. Yet courts also face chronic staffing shortages, budget constraints, growing caseloads, and increasing pressure to improve efficiency. State legislatures, funding authorities, and court leaders may soon begin asking whether AI can help courts accomplish more with fewer resources.This month, we examine the growing backlash againstartificial intelligence. Is it a temporary reaction or the beginning of a lasting shift in public attitudes? Are court professionals and the public prepared for the inevitable transition? [i]Variety, "Amazon Says It Will Lay Off 14,000 Corporate Workers, Citing AI" (October 31, 2025)[ii] Gulf News, "AI Job Cuts: Major Companies Replacing Humans with Bots in 2025" (February 21, 2026)[iii] PBS (October 28, 2025), “Despite reporting record quarterly revenue of $15.8 billion — up 12% year-over-year —Cisco announced layoffs representing less than 5% of its global workforce, as the company realigned around AI-driven growth”Today's PanelTJ BeMent Court Administrator, 10th Judicial Administrative District Athens, GeorgiaRick Pierce Judicial Programs Administrator, Administrative Office of the Courts, Mechanicsburg, PennsylvaniaKarl Thoennes Court Administrator, Second Judicial Circuit Court, Sioux Falls, South DakotaCreadell Webb Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Officer, 1st Judicial District of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia,Pennsylvania

Like many people, I've been following the developments of AI, testing out new models and following the deluge of news stories about the fight for supremacy. Much has been written about the existential and economic risks posed by AI, but the political implications of superintelligent systems have often been sidelined. In the United States and elsewhere, AI companies steam ahead with little regulation or oversight. Meanwhile, politicians appear flatfooted and unsure about the best way to integrate AI into the government to make democracies stronger and more responsive to the needs and will of the people. AI will undeniably change how governments work, but how can we ensure that democracy and individual rights are safeguarded amidst the most transformative technological revolution in more than a century? Today I'm speaking with Andrew Sorota, Head of Research for the Office of Eric Schmidt. Andrew has written extensively about the relationship between democracy and artificial intelligence. His writing has appeared in outlets like the New York Times and Noema magazine. Andrew will dispel many myths about AI, where he looks to call bullshit on the idea that democracy is a system heading fast into the dustbin of history. Follow Andrew Sorota on LinkedIn "This Is No Way to Rule a Country" in the New York Times "Rescuing Democracy From The Quiet Rule Of AI" in Noema Andrew Sorota is currently Head of Research for the Office of Eric Schmidt. Caleb Zakarin is CEO and Publisher of the New Books Network. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

The Marc Cox Morning Show brings you everything St. Louis needs to know this Friday morning — and it is a packed house. A bombshell source tells Dan Buck that St. Louis County Executive Sam Page — facing two felonies and two misdemeanors — may hand in his resignation today as part of a plea deal, and good riddance. A Six Flags Skyscreamer malfunction left four people — including two children — dangling 150 feet in the air for two and a half hours. Senator Eric Schmidt's diving catch at the Congressional baseball game made ESPN's Top 10. And the St. Louis murder rate is on pace to blow past 150 kills before year's end — and the city barely blinks. The St. Louis Morning Brief on the Marc Cox Morning Show — because somebody has to tell you what's really happening in your own backyard. Hashtags: #MarcCoxMorningShow #DanBuck #KimStOnge #StLouisMorningBrief #SamPage #StLouisCounty #SixFlags #Skyscreamer #EricSchmidt #StLouisCrime #MurderRate #StLouis #ConservativeRadio #PatriotRadio #MorningShow #TGIF #STL

Like many people, I've been following the developments of AI, testing out new models and following the deluge of news stories about the fight for supremacy. Much has been written about the existential and economic risks posed by AI, but the political implications of superintelligent systems have often been sidelined. In the United States and elsewhere, AI companies steam ahead with little regulation or oversight. Meanwhile, politicians appear flatfooted and unsure about the best way to integrate AI into the government to make democracies stronger and more responsive to the needs and will of the people. AI will undeniably change how governments work, but how can we ensure that democracy and individual rights are safeguarded amidst the most transformative technological revolution in more than a century? Today I'm speaking with Andrew Sorota, Head of Research for the Office of Eric Schmidt. Andrew has written extensively about the relationship between democracy and artificial intelligence. His writing has appeared in outlets like the New York Times and Noema magazine. Andrew will dispel many myths about AI, where he looks to call bullshit on the idea that democracy is a system heading fast into the dustbin of history. Follow Andrew Sorota on LinkedIn "This Is No Way to Rule a Country" in the New York Times "Rescuing Democracy From The Quiet Rule Of AI" in Noema Andrew Sorota is currently Head of Research for the Office of Eric Schmidt. Caleb Zakarin is CEO and Publisher of the New Books Network. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/political-science

Like many people, I've been following the developments of AI, testing out new models and following the deluge of news stories about the fight for supremacy. Much has been written about the existential and economic risks posed by AI, but the political implications of superintelligent systems have often been sidelined. In the United States and elsewhere, AI companies steam ahead with little regulation or oversight. Meanwhile, politicians appear flatfooted and unsure about the best way to integrate AI into the government to make democracies stronger and more responsive to the needs and will of the people. AI will undeniably change how governments work, but how can we ensure that democracy and individual rights are safeguarded amidst the most transformative technological revolution in more than a century? Today I'm speaking with Andrew Sorota, Head of Research for the Office of Eric Schmidt. Andrew has written extensively about the relationship between democracy and artificial intelligence. His writing has appeared in outlets like the New York Times and Noema magazine. Andrew will dispel many myths about AI, where he looks to call bullshit on the idea that democracy is a system heading fast into the dustbin of history. Follow Andrew Sorota on LinkedIn "This Is No Way to Rule a Country" in the New York Times "Rescuing Democracy From The Quiet Rule Of AI" in Noema Andrew Sorota is currently Head of Research for the Office of Eric Schmidt. Caleb Zakarin is CEO and Publisher of the New Books Network. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/world-affairs

Dr. Josh Mann and Adam Wittenberg break down a shifting cultural landscape during Pride Month. Several states are promoting Fidelity Month and Nuclear Family Month instead, signaling growing resistance to progressive celebrations. The hosts discuss reclaiming symbols like the rainbow, the outsized role of sexuality in modern identity, and the need for compassionate, truth-based responses rooted in the image of God. They also cover international developments with U.S. strikes on Iran and proposals for a federal gas tax pause amid rising prices and inflation. A key segment examines the Southern Poverty Law Center's hate map, its history, and a congressional hearing exposing alleged hypocrisy around pro-life views and funding controversies. Additional stories include a Texas track meet stabbing trial verdict and a lighter moment with Senator Eric Schmidt's viral diving catch at the congressional baseball game. The episode closes with reflections on sports memories and a special Faith and Freedom 250 segment on America's Christian foundations.00:00:00 – Introduction00:00:26 – Pride Month Pushback00:01:49 – Reclaiming the Rainbow00:03:07 – Sexuality and Identity00:05:11 – Compassionate Truth00:07:51 – Iran Strikes and Gas Prices00:10:27 – SPLC Hearing00:15:59 – Texas Stabbing Trial00:18:13 – Senator's Baseball Catch00:21:37 – Sports Memories00:25:30 – Faith and Freedom 250Follow The Lion on Facebook, Instagram, X, and YouTube.  You can also sign-up for our newsletter and follow our coverage at ReadLion.com.To learn more about the Herzog Foundation, visit HerzogFoundation.com. Like and follow us on Facebook, X, and Instagram, or sign up to receive monthly email updates.#ChristianEducation #Education #EducationPolicy #EducationReform #FaithAndLearning #Family #FaithInEducation #Faith #Homeschool #ChristianSchool #PrivateSchool #EducationNews #News #Religion #ReligiousNews #PublicSchool #SchoolNews #NewsShow #SchoolChoice 

Like many people, I've been following the developments of AI, testing out new models and following the deluge of news stories about the fight for supremacy. Much has been written about the existential and economic risks posed by AI, but the political implications of superintelligent systems have often been sidelined. In the United States and elsewhere, AI companies steam ahead with little regulation or oversight. Meanwhile, politicians appear flatfooted and unsure about the best way to integrate AI into the government to make democracies stronger and more responsive to the needs and will of the people. AI will undeniably change how governments work, but how can we ensure that democracy and individual rights are safeguarded amidst the most transformative technological revolution in more than a century? Today I'm speaking with Andrew Sorota, Head of Research for the Office of Eric Schmidt. Andrew has written extensively about the relationship between democracy and artificial intelligence. His writing has appeared in outlets like the New York Times and Noema magazine. Andrew will dispel many myths about AI, where he looks to call bullshit on the idea that democracy is a system heading fast into the dustbin of history. Follow Andrew Sorota on LinkedIn "This Is No Way to Rule a Country" in the New York Times "Rescuing Democracy From The Quiet Rule Of AI" in Noema Andrew Sorota is currently Head of Research for the Office of Eric Schmidt. Caleb Zakarin is CEO and Publisher of the New Books Network. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/public-policy

Like many people, I've been following the developments of AI, testing out new models and following the deluge of news stories about the fight for supremacy. Much has been written about the existential and economic risks posed by AI, but the political implications of superintelligent systems have often been sidelined. In the United States and elsewhere, AI companies steam ahead with little regulation or oversight. Meanwhile, politicians appear flatfooted and unsure about the best way to integrate AI into the government to make democracies stronger and more responsive to the needs and will of the people. AI will undeniably change how governments work, but how can we ensure that democracy and individual rights are safeguarded amidst the most transformative technological revolution in more than a century? Today I'm speaking with Andrew Sorota, Head of Research for the Office of Eric Schmidt. Andrew has written extensively about the relationship between democracy and artificial intelligence. His writing has appeared in outlets like the New York Times and Noema magazine. Andrew will dispel many myths about AI, where he looks to call bullshit on the idea that democracy is a system heading fast into the dustbin of history. Follow Andrew Sorota on LinkedIn "This Is No Way to Rule a Country" in the New York Times "Rescuing Democracy From The Quiet Rule Of AI" in Noema Andrew Sorota is currently Head of Research for the Office of Eric Schmidt. Caleb Zakarin is CEO and Publisher of the New Books Network. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/politics-and-polemics

Like many people, I've been following the developments of AI, testing out new models and following the deluge of news stories about the fight for supremacy. Much has been written about the existential and economic risks posed by AI, but the political implications of superintelligent systems have often been sidelined. In the United States and elsewhere, AI companies steam ahead with little regulation or oversight. Meanwhile, politicians appear flatfooted and unsure about the best way to integrate AI into the government to make democracies stronger and more responsive to the needs and will of the people. AI will undeniably change how governments work, but how can we ensure that democracy and individual rights are safeguarded amidst the most transformative technological revolution in more than a century? Today I'm speaking with Andrew Sorota, Head of Research for the Office of Eric Schmidt. Andrew has written extensively about the relationship between democracy and artificial intelligence. His writing has appeared in outlets like the New York Times and Noema magazine. Andrew will dispel many myths about AI, where he looks to call bullshit on the idea that democracy is a system heading fast into the dustbin of history. Follow Andrew Sorota on LinkedIn "This Is No Way to Rule a Country" in the New York Times "Rescuing Democracy From The Quiet Rule Of AI" in Noema Andrew Sorota is currently Head of Research for the Office of Eric Schmidt. Caleb Zakarin is CEO and Publisher of the New Books Network. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/science-technology-and-society

Like many people, I've been following the developments of AI, testing out new models and following the deluge of news stories about the fight for supremacy. Much has been written about the existential and economic risks posed by AI, but the political implications of superintelligent systems have often been sidelined. In the United States and elsewhere, AI companies steam ahead with little regulation or oversight. Meanwhile, politicians appear flatfooted and unsure about the best way to integrate AI into the government to make democracies stronger and more responsive to the needs and will of the people. AI will undeniably change how governments work, but how can we ensure that democracy and individual rights are safeguarded amidst the most transformative technological revolution in more than a century? Today I'm speaking with Andrew Sorota, Head of Research for the Office of Eric Schmidt. Andrew has written extensively about the relationship between democracy and artificial intelligence. His writing has appeared in outlets like the New York Times and Noema magazine. Andrew will dispel many myths about AI, where he looks to call bullshit on the idea that democracy is a system heading fast into the dustbin of history. Follow Andrew Sorota on LinkedIn "This Is No Way to Rule a Country" in the New York Times "Rescuing Democracy From The Quiet Rule Of AI" in Noema Andrew Sorota is currently Head of Research for the Office of Eric Schmidt. Caleb Zakarin is CEO and Publisher of the New Books Network. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Hour 2 of The Marc Cox Morning Show delivers wall to wall and doesn't let up for a second. Trump drops a bombshell — the U.S. has been secretly pulling millions of barrels of oil out of the region this whole time, and that's why your gas prices have been quietly dropping. Senator John Kennedy pumps the brakes and reminds the president what's really keeping American families up at night. The St. Louis Morning Brief unpacks the media's shameless attempt to rebrand an illegal Nicaraguan national as a "Collinsville man," exposes Francis Howell's $250,000 hiring disaster, and puts a $629 million price tag on the crumbling MLK Bridge with zero plan to pay for it. Tom Ackerman joins the show and the sports headlines are absolutely stacked — Senator Eric Schmidt's bloody-nose diving catch gets the full treatment, the Cardinals are scorching hot at six wins in a row, and the Knicks just pulled off the greatest comeback in NBA playoff history. And In Other News — Caitlin Clark is getting her signature shoe, a drunk driver in Louisiana picked the wrong swamp to jump into, and a kid's six-year-old yearbook prediction about the Knicks may be about to come true. This is The Marc Cox Morning Show — where every hour is better than the last. HOUR HASHTAGS: #MarcCoxMorningShow #Hour2 #Iran #OilPrices #USMCA #JohnKennedy #StLouisMorningBrief #JesusCruz #FrancisHowell #MLKBridge #TomAckerman #EricSchmitt #Cardinals #Knicks #NBAPlayoffs #CaitlinClark #WNBA #AlligatorAttack #InOtherNews #AmericaFirst #MAGA #StLouis #ConservativeTalk

Sports anchor Tom Ackerman joins The Marc Cox Morning Show and the highlights are flying. Senator Eric Schmidt's face-first, blood-on-the-warning-track diving catch gets the full play-by-play treatment from a man who had Schmidt on his show the day before — and the story behind that glove will give you chills. The Cardinals are scorching hot, six wins in a row, and Tom makes the case they are absolutely for real. Then the New York Knicks did something last night that nobody in that building — or anywhere else — will ever forget, the greatest comeback in NBA playoff history. Patrick Mahomes just got paid a number so staggering it'll make your jaw drop. And the World Cup, the Battle Hawks, and a three-year-old who might just be a soccer prodigy round out one of the most entertaining sports conversations of the year. Only on The Marc Cox Morning Show — where even the sports hits different. HASHTAGS: #MarcCoxMorningShow #TomAckerman #EricSchmitt #CongressionalBaseball #STLCards #Cardinals #NewYorkKnicks #NBAPlayoffs #GreatestComeback #PatrickMahomes #Chiefs #WorldCup #BattleHawks #StLouis #MorningRadio #ConservativeTalk #MAGA #AmericaFirst

The Marc Cox Morning Show comes out swinging in Hour 1 and doesn't let up for a single minute. Trump's patience with Iran has run out and the strikes are getting serious — while the left tries to call it a war crime, Marc explains exactly why they're wrong. ActBlue's top executive pleads the Fifth 27 times in Congress, Hunter Biden has the audacity to call anyone mentally unfit, and Senator Eric Schmidt dives face-first into the warning track to steal a hit and steal the show at the Congressional baseball game. Kim and Marc go toe-to-toe on kid-free restaurants, parental responsibility, and what common decency actually looks like in 2025. And then the media thinks nobody will notice when they call an illegal alien a "Collinsville teen" — Marc notices, and he's not letting it go. This is the hour that reminds you exactly why The Marc Cox Morning Show is the only place you can get the truth delivered straight, every single morning. HOUR HASHTAGS: #MarcCoxMorningShow #Hour1 #Iran #TrumpStrikesBack #ActBlue #HunterBiden #EricSchmitt #CongressionalBaseball #KimOnAWhim #KidFreeRestaurants #IllegalImmigration #JesusCruz #NikkiBudzinski #MediaBias #AmericaFirst #MAGA #StLouis #ConservativeTalk #PatriotMedia #MorningRadio

They don't want you to hear this. They never do. But The Marc Cox Morning Show spent four hours this Thursday morning delivering exactly what the mainstream media buries, spins, and prays you never figure out — and today was one for the books. Iran called President Trump directly from the Situation Room begging him to stop the strikes, Trump told them sign the deal or the bombs fall harder tonight, and by the end of the show he was already talking about taking Karg Island and seizing Iran's entire oil infrastructure. Fox News Radio's Eben Brown and Fox News correspondent Griff Jenkins brought the on-the-ground detail that no one else had, and Marc connected every dot from secret oil runs through the Strait of Hormuz to why your gas prices have been quietly dropping for weeks. The ActBlue CEO pleaded the Fifth 27 times in Congress. Congresswoman Summer Lee told Black Americans their votes aren't worth casting without a government check. Mysterious billboards are popping up on St. Louis highways calling America illegitimate — and Marc had the receipts on every single one of them. The Supreme Court was minutes away from dropping decisions on birthright citizenship, biological males in women's sports, and post-Election Day ballot counting, and Fox News Sunday's Shannon Bream was there to break it all down. A homeless woman in Los Angeles admitted on camera she was paid two dollars to vote for Karen Bass and didn't even know her last name — and Marc laid out precisely why California has legalized election fraud and what it's going to take to stop it. New St. Louis County Police Chief Juan Cox joined for his first ever radio interview on the job and didn't pull a single punch about the teenage takeover crisis, repeat juvenile offenders, and a family court system that keeps tying law enforcement's hands. Senator Eric Schmidt's bloody-nose diving catch at the Congressional baseball game was the feel-good moment of the week. Tom Ackerman brought the Cardinals hot streak, the greatest comeback in NBA playoff history, and a Patrick Mahomes contract number so staggering it defies comprehension. The St. Louis Morning Brief exposed the media's shameless attempt to call an illegal Nicaraguan national a "Collinsville man." And the show closed the way St. Louis conservatives love most — with Backstoppers president Larry O'Toole, former Chief Greg Brown, and Honoring Heroes Inc. president Mike Nolan in studio to honor the legacy of the late Steve Hawley and rally the community around the first annual Blast for Backstoppers on June 26th. Four hours. Zero spin. All Marc Cox. This is why you never miss a minute. FULL SHOW HASHTAGS: #MarcCoxMorningShow #Iran #Trump #KargIsland #StraitOfHormuz #ActBlue #FifthAmendment #Reparations #SummerLee #SupremeCourt #BirthrightCitizenship #TransAthletesBan #ElectionIntegrity #BallotHarvesting #California #FISA #EbenBrown #GriffJenkins #ShannonBream #TomAckerman #ChiefJuanCox #JuvenileCrime #EricSchmitt #CongressionalBaseball #Cardinals #Knicks #NBAPlayoffs #JesusCruz #MediaBias #IllegalImmigration #Backstoppers #SteveHawley #BlastForBackstoppers #StLouis #BackTheBlue #AmericaFirst #MAGA #ConservativeTalk #PatriotMedia #MorningRadio FULL SHOW GUEST LIST: Eben Brown — Fox News Radio correspondent on Iran's overnight strikes, Trump's secret oil operation through the Strait of Hormuz, and the Truth Social post announcing tonight's strike on Karg Island Tom Ackerman — Sports anchor on Senator Eric Schmidt's Congressional baseball MVP performance, the Cardinals' six-game win streak, the greatest comeback in NBA playoff history, and Patrick Mahomes' massive contract extension Griff Jenkins — Fox News correspondent on Trump resuming Iran bombing tonight, Karg Island invasion talk, and the child smuggling crackdown at the southern border Shannon Bream — Fox News Sunday host on incoming Supreme Court rulings, California's vote harvesting scandal, and FISA expiration at midnight tomorrow Chief Juan Cox — New St. L ...

America's big tech bosses are trying to get artificial intelligence deployed everywhere, taking over our homes, our hobbies and our work.  By now, most of us are using AI for daily tasks, even if by accident. But it doesn't mean we all agree with the path we're on and increasingly people are voicing their concerns about the AI revolution.  Today, the ABC's national AI reporter Cam Wilson on the growing backlash. Featured:  Cam Wilson, ABC's national AI reporter

June 1st and the Baby Birds are in second place — and KMOX Sports Director Tom Ackerman is here to tell you why you should believe in this team. Tom joins the Marc Cox Morning Show in studio to break down a weekend series win over the Cubs that had everything — a first-pitch home run from newly called-up Nelson Velazquez, Hunter Dobbins coming out of nowhere to close out Sunday's game with his first major league save, and Al Hrabosky ripping his shirt off in the Tarps Off section at Busch Stadium. This young Cardinals roster has something the last few years were missing — energy, fight, and a refusal to fold. Tom also gets into the wild west of NIL and college athletics, the unregulated agent problem threatening to hollow out college sports from the inside, and why Eli Drinkwitz and Eric Schmidt were spotted on the golf course together. If you bleed Cardinal red and care about the future of college athletics, Tom Ackerman on the Marc Cox Morning Show is the only sports conversation you need this Monday morning. Hashtags #MarcCoxMorningShow #TomAckerman #Cardinals #STLCards #CubsSeries #NelsonVelazquez #HunterDobbins #TarpsOff #BuschStadium #KMOX #NIL #CollegeAthletics #StLouis #StLouisRadio #ConservativeRadio #PatriotRadio #Baseball #CardinalNation #AmericaFirst #MorningShow

The bi-monthly podcasting crossover to end all bi-monthly podcasting crossovers is back! Danny, Derek, and Robert Wright of the ⁠⁠NonZero Newsletter⁠⁠⁠ once again set the record straight. Subscribe now to AP to get a discounted membership to NonZero! Part One Video 0:00 Is NonZero or American Prestige the better podcast? AI weighs in4:14 The state of the US-Iran war. Or is it peace?17:52 Has Trump already lost the midterms? Does he care?24:16 The Russia-Ukraine war (and Eric Schmidt)29:23 What the latest Iran war strikes signal31:04  Overtime preview: Nuland's “monsters,” zombie blobsters, Barak Ravid, Bari Weiss, “killzones,” and the Pope vs AI Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Is NonZero or American Prestige the better podcast? AI weighs in ... The state of the US-Iran war. Or is it peace? ... Has Trump already lost the midterms? Does he care? ... The Russia-Ukraine war (and Eric Schmidt) ... What the latest Iran war strikes signal ... Overtime preview: Nuland's “monsters,” zombie blobsters, Barak Ravid, Bari Weiss, “killzones,” and the Pope vs AI ...

Hour 4 of the Marc Cox Morning Show closes out the most information-packed morning in conservative radio with a bang. Senator Eric Schmidt sits down to explain Operation Viper's historic crime crackdown, set the record straight on Senate nominee bottlenecks, and deliver confidence on Iran — this president won't sign a bad deal. Then Charles Payne brings the financial firepower, breaking down America's manufacturing renaissance, the AI gold rush that's minting winners in places nobody's looking, and why the SpaceX IPO could be the biggest market event in years. Jimmy Failla brings the laughs and the truth about New York's $6,500 rent nightmare and why Spencer Pratt's LA campaign is more serious than anyone wants to admit. And Jeanine Pirro closes the hour with a bombshell — drone footage proving the government watched Benghazi happen in real time and chose to lie about it. The Marc Cox Morning Show — where the truth always comes out. HOUR HASHTAGS: #MarcCoxMorningShow #Hour4 #EricSchmidt #CharlesPayne #JimmyFailla #JeaninePirro #Benghazi #AI #Manufacturing #SpaceX #NYC #RentControl #OperationViper #Iran #AmericaFirst #ConservativeRadio #PatriotVoices #CommonSense #WakeUpAmerica #Missouri

America's political landscape just shifted again — and the left still hasn't figured out why. Hour 1 of the Marc Cox Morning Show comes out swinging with the biggest story of the night: Donald Trump goes 7-0 in Senate endorsements as Ken Paxton bulldozes John Cornyn in Texas, leaving John Thune's $100 million gamble in the dust. Marc and Kim break down what it means, why Megyn Kelly needs to update her talking points, and why the general election in Texas isn't the layup everyone thinks it is. Then — are Americans so obsessed with living forever that they've forgotten how to live? The "health maxing" craze gets the Marc Cox treatment, and common sense wins again. And Marc Cox is ready to file a class action lawsuit — because QT is quietly charging some customers 27 cents more per gallon than others, and nobody in the mainstream media wants to touch it. Plus, Senator Eric Schmidt is locked in for 8:08. Hour 1 is the kind of straight-talk, no-nonsense conservative morning radio that reminds you why you tune in every single day. HOUR HASHTAGS: #MarcCoxMorningShow #Hour1 #Trump70 #KenPaxton #TexasPrimary #EricSchmidt #KimOnAWhim #StLouisMorningBrief #QTGasPrices #HealthMaxing #MattWalsh #AlGreen #Missouri #StLouis #ConservativeRadio #AmericaFirst #PatriotVoices #MAGA #CommonSense #WakeUpAmerica

Hour 2 of the Marc Cox Morning Show delivers wall-to-wall conservative firepower. Marc Cox zeroes in on a question Washington doesn't want to answer — why is a Republican-controlled Senate deliberately blocking President Trump's own nominees with pro forma sessions on Memorial Day? Senator Eric Schmidt is locked in and about to answer for it. Meanwhile, a massive federal crackdown puts 91 criminals behind bars in St. Louis — including 17 illegal immigrants now facing deportation — and Marc Cox gives credit where it's due for the unprecedented law enforcement cooperation making it happen. Nicole Murray brings the business headlines, Senator John Kennedy drops the sharpest line of the week on IRS hypocrisy, and oil prices are heading higher as Iran tensions simmer in the Strait of Hormuz. Then In Other News closes the hour with a flying umbrella fatality, a dog who fired a shotgun, and a 79-year-old Florida man in a thong who just couldn't keep it indoors. The Marc Cox Morning Show — serious when it counts, and always real. HOUR HASHTAGS: #MarcCoxMorningShow #Hour2 #EricSchmidt #StLouis #FederalCrackdown #IllegalImmigration #DOGE #NicoleMurray #JohnKennedy #OilPrices #Iran #InOtherNews #FloridaMan #BackTheBlue #Missouri #ConservativeRadio #AmericaFirst #PatriotVoices #CommonSense #WakeUpAmerica

Hour 3 of the Marc Cox Morning Show is the kind of hour that changes how you see the world. Heritage Foundation's Nicole Huyer exposes New York City Mayor Kami Mamdani's communist playbook — property seizures, fake free grocery stores at $30 million a pop, and a rent control scheme that's driving businesses and taxpayers straight to Florida. Then Dr. Jeremy Levin drops a bombshell warning: America's biotech industry is crumbling from the inside, the FDA has lost 90% of its top managers, and if nothing changes, China could be supplying the majority of America's new medicines by 2035. And LA mayoral candidate Spencer Pratt says out loud what everyone already knows — those 40,000 people on the streets of Los Angeles aren't homeless, they're drug addicts who are choosing fentanyl over a free bed. Marc Cox and Kim deliver the straight talk, the hard truths, and the conservative common sense that makes the Marc Cox Morning Show the most important two hours of your morning. Senator Eric Schmidt is coming up — stay tuned. HOUR HASHTAGS: #MarcCoxMorningShow #Hour3 #NicoleHuyer #HeritageFoundation #DrJeremyLevin #BiotechAndTheBalance #Mamdani #NYC #Socialism #SpencerPratt #Homelessness #LA #KimOnAWhim #China #FDA #AmericaFirst #ConservativeRadio #PatriotVoices #CommonSense #WakeUpAmerica

The moment the Marc Cox Morning Show has been building toward all morning — and Senator Eric Schmidt delivers. Fresh off the swearing-in of St. Louis's new U.S. Marshal, Schmidt breaks down Operation Viper's 91 arrests, revealing that St. Louis received the largest permanent per-capita infusion of FBI agents in the entire country — and this is just the beginning. Then Schmidt sets the record straight on why Trump's nominees were bottlenecked — Democrats went full obstruction mode, forcing Republicans to change Senate rules and push through nominees 100 at a time. No recess appointments needed. On Iran, Schmidt is confident: this president won't sign a bad deal, won't repeat Obama's mistakes, and has already achieved the military goals. And on gas prices — Schmidt tells Missouri conservatives what they need to hear. This is the interview the left doesn't want you to hear, and the Marc Cox Morning Show made sure you got every word of it. HASHTAGS: #MarcCoxMorningShow #EricSchmidt #OperationViper #StLouis #FBI #LawAndOrder #Iran #NuclearDeal #Trump #SenateRules #GasPrices #Missouri #KenPaxton #BackTheBlue #AmericaFirst #ConservativeRadio #PatriotVoices #CommonSense #WakeUpAmerica #GOP2026

They lied about Benghazi. They lied about MAGA being dead. They lied about what's happening to your wallet at the pump. And the Marc Cox Morning Show spent four hours this Wednesday morning making sure you know the truth. Donald Trump is 8-for-8 in Senate endorsements after Ken Paxton's Texas blowout turned John Thune's $100 million gamble into the most expensive political miscalculation in recent memory — and Marc Cox called every bit of it. Senator Eric Schmidt came to St. Louis to set the record straight: Operation Viper just put 91 criminals behind bars including 17 illegal immigrants headed for deportation, the Senate nominee bottleneck is broken, and this president will not repeat Obama's Iran disaster. Heritage Foundation's Nicole Huyer exposed New York City's full communist playbook — property seizures, $30 million fake grocery stores, and rent control strangling the life out of the city one landlord at a time. Dr. Jeremy Levin dropped a national security bombshell: China could own America's medicine cabinet by 2035 if Washington doesn't act now and the FDA is already crumbling from within. Charles Payne revealed that America's manufacturing renaissance is just getting started and the AI gold rush is minting winners in corners of the market nobody's even watching yet. Jimmy Failla brought the unfiltered truth about New York's $6,500 rent nightmare and why Spencer Pratt's LA campaign is the most important outsider race in the country. Marc Cox and Kim took on the health maxing obsession killing common sense in America, QT's gas price shakedown of hardworking Midwest families, and LA mayoral candidate Spencer Pratt's brutally honest truth about homelessness that every politician in America needs to hear. And Jeanine Pirro closed it all out with the bombshell conservatives have waited years to hear — drone footage proving the government watched Benghazi happen in real time and sent Susan Rice out the next morning to lie to your face. This is the Marc Cox Morning Show — four hours of truth, common sense, and the conservative firepower that the mainstream media prays you never find. FULL SHOW HASHTAGS: #MarcCoxMorningShow #May272026 #EricSchmidt #CharlesPayne #JimmyFailla #JeaninePirro #NicoleHuyer #DrJeremyLevin #Benghazi #Trump8for8 #KenPaxton #OperationViper #AI #Manufacturing #NYC #Socialism #Homelessness #Iran #AmericaFirst #ConservativeRadio #StLouis #Missouri #PatriotVoices #MAGA #CommonSense #WakeUpAmerica #BackTheBlue #KimOnAWhim #StLouisMorningBrief #InOtherNews FULL SHOW GUEST LIST: Senator Eric Schmidt — U.S. Senator, Missouri Nicole Murray — Business & Market Headlines Nicole Huyer — Senior Research Associate, Heritage Foundation Dr. Jeremy Levin — PhD, MD; Author, Biotech and the Balance Jimmy Failla — Host, Fox Across America Charles Payne — Host, Making Money with Charles Payne, Fox Business

Justice is coming to St. Louis — and it's coming fast. A massive federal crackdown just swept 91 criminals off the streets, seized $310,000 in cash, and sent 17 illegal immigrants packing toward deportation. Marc Cox breaks down why unprecedented cooperation between federal and local law enforcement is finally delivering the results that Kim Gardner's revolving door justice system never could. Then — Festus residents are fighting back hard against their own city council over data centers, gathering 7,400 signatures in a recall effort that has local politicians scrambling for taxpayer-funded lawyers to save themselves. Plus, St. Louis police are eyeing drones — and the ACLU is already melting down about it. Spoiler: criminals should be worried, not protesters. And a 33-year-old cold case just got cracked wide open thanks to genealogy DNA technology. The St. Louis Morning Brief — because your city deserves the truth. Senator Eric Schmidt is minutes away. HASHTAGS: #StLouisMorningBrief #MarcCoxMorningShow #StLouis #FederalCrackdown #IllegalImmigration #Deportation #LawAndOrder #Drones #ACLU #Festus #DataCenter #ColdCase #DNATechnology #Missouri #ConservativeRadio #AmericaFirst #PatriotVoices #BackTheBlue #CommonSense #WakeUpAmerica

Join us for the Big Technology AI Summit on June, 18, 2026. Get your tickets here: summit.bigtechnology.com.... Ranjan Roy from Margins is back for our weekly discussion of the latest tech news. We cover: 1) OpenAI's revenue numbers come out ahead of its potential IPO filing 2) Why is OpenAI considering going public now? 3) Is OpenAI trying to IPO ahead of Anthropic? 4) Is the Iran War accelerating the timeline of these fundraisings? 5) What would the top of the AI boom look like? 6) SpaceX files for an IPO 7) Are datacenters in space a myth? 8) Eric Schmidt gets booed at a college commencement 9) Meta's mass layoff 10) Meta's keystroke tracking rationale 11) Marc Andreessen says AI won't file a HR complaint --- Enjoying Big Technology Podcast? Please rate us five stars ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ in your podcast app of choice. Want a discount for Big Technology on Substack + Discord? Here's 25% off for the first year: https://www.bigtechnology.com/subscribe?coupon=0843016b Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

FOLLOW UP: This week, it seems America believes every complicated social problem can be fixed by asking, “Have you tried turning the internet off for the children?” Meanwhile, the Electronic Frontier Foundation quietly notes that the science behind social media bans might not be as clear-cut as cable-news dads screaming about dopamine loops claim. Turns out, teen anxiety may also be linked to pandemics, school shootings, climate dread, and an economy that feels like a Fallout side quest. Meanwhile, Snap Inc. and YouTube settled another lawsuit accusing their apps of turning kids into doomscrolling goblins, Meta continues to insist social media addiction isn't real while losing money in court, and former Google CEO Eric Schmidt was booed at a graduation speech after telling graduates to hop on the AI rocket ship without asking questions — exactly what a billionaire says when he already owns the rocket.In the news, Elon Musk lost another OpenAI lawsuit because apparently even juries have limits. SpaceX's IPO revealed Musk plans to power AI with enough gas turbines to recreate 1890s London smog, and Grok officially became a disclosure liability after the whole “MechaHitler” incident. Tesla robotaxis still clip fences and occasionally require humans to remotely drive the “self-driving” cars. Trump Mobile somehow shipped a gold phone that actually works — a stunning upset — before immediately leaking customer data. LinkedIn finally admitted the platform has become an AI-generated motivational swamp filled with “it's not about X, it's about Y” sludge from people named Brayden. Spotify is handing out podcast verification badges so listeners can tell real creators from algorithmic nightmare fuel. Meta laid off thousands more workers while reportedly using employee surveillance to train AI replacements. And OpenAI is giving everyone in Malta a free year of ChatGPT Plus if they complete an AI literacy course, which honestly makes Malta sound more technologically responsible than Silicon Valley.APPS & DOODADS reflect classic Gen-X paranoia, as Backblaze highlights California's constant threat of wildfires and the idea that local backups are optimistic. YouTube introduced AI deepfake detection tools, allowing creators to finally see which scam ads are using their faces to promote crypto vitamins, while X limited free users to 50 posts a day unless they pay for a blue check — proving once again that the true free speech was the subscriptions we sold along the way. Retrocodex arrived with a strong “everything your teachers confidently told you in 1987 was wrong” vibe.MEDIA CANDY opens with the eternal cry of “FUCK THE FIRETV!!!!” before Jason taps out of Good Omens after ten minutes while Brian takes the bullet for the audience. There's also chatter about Mortal Kombat 2, The Devil Wears Prada 2, Billy Corgan talking goth history with David J, and more existential dread courtesy of Dan Carlin's Common Sense.THE DARK SIDE WITH DAVE welcomes back Dave Bittner for a Mando & Grogu review, Darth Maul, and a stunning but absurdly expensive LEGO Disneyland set. There's also a guy who built a full-size Millennium Falcon “with his wife's permission,” a fan-made Star Tours film, and the Federal Trade Commission discovering that those creepy “your phone is listening to you” ad-tech companies mainly just had PowerPoint decks and confidence. Also: mechanical keyboard simulators now exist, because apparently even fake typing has become a lifestyle brand.Sponsors:DeleteMe - Get 20% off your DeleteMe plan when you go to JoinDeleteMe.com/GOG and use promo code GOG at checkout.Shopify - Sign up for your one-dollar-per-month trial today at Shopify.com/grumpyPrivate Internet Access - Go to GOG.Show/vpn and sign up today. For a limited time only, you can get OUR favorite VPN for as little as $2.03 a month.SetApp - With a single monthly subscription you get 240+ apps for your Mac. Go to SetApp and get started today!!!1Password - Get a great deal on the only password manager recommended by Grumpy Old Geeks! gog.show/1passwordShow notes at https://gog.show/747Watch on YouTube at https://youtu.be/eX5jVfewaswFOLLOW UPThe Science is Not Settled: How Weak Evidence is Fueling a National Push to Ban Social Media for YouthSnap and YouTube have reportedly settled another major social media addiction lawsuitEx-Google CEO Eric Schmidt Fails to Read Room on AI, Gets Booed into OblivionIN THE NEWSElon Musk took too long to sue OpenAI, jury unanimously agreesSpaceX IPO Filing Reveals Nearly $3 Billion Investment in Gas Turbines for AI Data Centers‘MechaHitler' Is SpaceX's Problem NowTrump Mobile Phone Beats Expectations by Actually ExistingNew crash data highlights the slow progress of Tesla's robotaxisIf You Used Insider Knowledge to Score Big on Polymarket, You May Now Be in Huge TroubleMinnesota passes prediction markets banLinkedIn doesn't want your AI slop anymoreSpotify is launching verification badges for podcasts to help listeners avoid AI slopZuckerberg Tells the Tattered Remainder of His Workers That He Won't Conduct Another a Mass Firing for at Least Seven MonthsOpenAI is offering ChatGPT Plus to citizens of Malta for a yearMassive Crypto ATM Company Bitcoin Depot Is Shutting Down as the Whole Industry Collapses‘Smoke Weed and Earn Bitcoin' With This Vape Pen in Our Increasingly Dystopian Nightmare‘Unstoppable' Crypto Exchange Halts Trading After $10 Million TheftIran Doubles Down on Bitcoin for Ships Passing Through the Straight of HormuzTrump-Linked Crypto Company Notes 'Substantial Doubt' It Can Survive Another 12 MonthsAPPS & DOODADSBackblazeYouTube's AI deepfake detection tool is now available to all creators 18 and olderX accounts are limited to 50 posts and 200 replies a day unless they pay for a blue checkmarkRetrocodexMEDIA CANDYGood Omens Season 3 - The FinaleThe Magnificent Others with Billy Corgan - David J of Bauhaus & Love & RocketsCommon Sense 326 – The Water in Which We SwimTHE DARK SIDE WITH DAVEDave BittnerThe CyberWireHacking HumansCaveatControl LoopOnly Malware in the BuildingMaul: Shadow LordRogue One: A Star Wars StoryNot Even Baby Yoda Can Save ‘Star Wars'Colorado man creates replica Millenium FalconSomeone made a Star Tours fan film.Bring Disneyland Home With This Gorgeous New Lego Set‘Creepy' Listening Tool for Targeted Ads Didn't Actually Work, FTC SaysMechanical keyboard simSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

The Surgeon General just dropped a major advisory warning that kids are spending up to 9 hours a day on screens — and it's a public health crisis. Plus, Utah households are spending $11,008 a year on groceries (the highest in the country), KSL Investigative Journalist Dave Cawley joins to break down some of Utah’s Tiniest Towns ahead of Memorial Day as UDOT is warning of 90-minute Memorial Day delays on US-6.   College graduates across the country are booing commencement speakers who mention AI — we play the audio from former Google CEO Eric Schmidt, music exec Scott Borchetta, and more. Teens say AI is stealing their summer jobs, and we find out which word Utah misspells more than any other state. Plus, would you go to an adult prom? 

Eric Schmidt commencement speech booed, experts condemn payment of ransom by Canvas, concern about ASU's AI course builder, AI announcer mispronounced and skipped names during a graduation at Arizona community college, listener email.

In this episode, Chris shares a personal and relatable story about the challenges of running for office in today's political climate. As a seasoned radio host and conservative commentator, Chris has seen his fair share of attack ads and smear campaigns, but one recent incident left him feeling particularly frustrated and concerned. Chris talks about a recent attack ad that was released by his opponent, which took his words out of context and made him appear to be saying things he never actually said. He shares how he handled the situation, including reaching out to his friends and allies in Washington, D.C. to set the record straight and provide context to the misleading clips. Chris also discusses the importance of endorsements and how he was thrilled to receive the endorsement of Senator Eric Schmidt, a respected and influential figure in the Missouri Senate. Throughout the episode, Chris opens up about his personal struggles and vulnerabilities, including his past struggles with addiction and his experiences with attack ads. He also talks about the importance of staying true to oneself and not engaging in negative campaigning. If you're interested in hearing more about Chris's story and the challenges of running for office, tune in to this episode to hear his personal and relatable account of the ups and downs of politics.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Commencement speakers got booed this weekend for mentioning AI — by the same graduating class that used ChatGPT to write their papers. Bridget Phetasy breaks down why the anti-AI panic is just climate anxiety with a new face, why Bernie Sanders and AOC's plan to ban data centers is the worst idea in recent memory, and why China is absolutely loving every minute of our meltdown. #AI #DataCenters #DumpsterFire #BridgetPhetasyTopics covered: AI fear, data center ban, Bernie Sanders AOC AI regulation, Eric Schmidt commencement booed, AI jobs threat, anti-capitalism tech backlash, China AI race, AI water usage myth, Luddites vs tech bros 

We start this week with Sam telling us all about the commencement speeches where speakers have been praising AI, including former Google CEO Eric Schmidt. That did not go down well! After the break, Jason tells us how he was offered the chance to buy a bunch of images of poop to train AI (really). In the subscribers-only section, Joseph explains how researchers planned to stick cameras onto preschool teachers to train AI. Students Boo Commencement Speaker After She Calls AI the ‘Next Industrial Revolution' Internet of Shit: AI Poop Analysis App Offered to Sell Me Database of Its Users' Poops Researchers Wanted Preschool Teachers to Wear Cameras to Train AI YouTube Version: https://youtu.be/VE0EtqQLcgY Subscribe at 404media.co Don't sleep on Ultra Pouches. New customers get 15% Off with code 404MEDIA at takeultra.com! #UltraPouches #ad Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The U.S. State Department's Pax Silica initiative reframes Pax Americana for the AI age — chips, semiconductors, critical minerals, energy, data centers, payment rails. This week in Beijing, two of the Trilogy of Boards Patrick Wood predicted clicked into place. The Trilogy is now whole. In this two-and-a-half-hour conversation, Courtenay Turner and Patrick Wood — co-authors of The Final Betrayal: How Technocracy Destroyed America — walk the architecture being built around you: Pax Silica, the IMEC corridor, the Abraham Accords as the template for the China play, the Five Walls boxing China in, Gaza's new order under the Board of Peace, Taiwan as silicon shield and silicon hostage, the tokenization of property and the New York Stock Exchange, the occult roots of the technocratic movement, and how to think about preserving sovereignty, autonomy, and property in a rapidly closing system. Read the full essay: https://courtenayturner.substack.com/p/pax-silica ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ CHAPTERS ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ 0:00 — Opening: The Petrodollar Ends, Pax Silica Begins 1:31 — Welcome to the Technocracy Roundtable 5:11 — Property, Rights, and the Founders' Distinction 6:44 — What Is Pax Silica? (Video Explainer) 9:08 — Locke, Private Property, and Sovereign Property 13:05 — The Regime That Comes With Tokenized Property 14:01 — Tokenization, Titles, and the Loss of Control 21:57 — When Your Home Becomes a Programmable Asset 24:58 — Sovereign Farm Rights and Self-Sufficiency 25:54 — Daniel's Silicon Kingdom: The Biblical Frame 29:22 — The State Department Pax Silica Declaration 30:45 — The Allies Joining the Corridor 34:29 — Terms-of-Service Control of Everything 39:05 — Why Technocratic Countries Rise to the Top 41:53 — Trump's Empire Strategy in Beijing 46:33 — How China Gets Boxed In: The Five Walls 51:46 — Global Power Shifts: BRICS, Gulf, India 58:18 — The Trump-Xi Meeting: Body Language and Substance 1:01:31 — Abraham Accords as the Template for China 1:06:54 — Israel, Zionism, and the Technocracy Conflation 1:11:56 — Gaza's New Order: USD1, CENTCOM, and the Board of Peace 1:15:13 — Gulf Sovereign Wealth, Islamic Finance, and Tokenization 1:25:32 — Pax Silica's New Power Triangle 1:37:53 — Taiwan and the Chip Leverage Question 1:45:02 — How the Trade Boards Replace the Global Order 1:52:25 — Why Technocracy Is Beyond Politics 1:56:04 — Occult Roots, AI Consciousness, and the 2025 Conclave 2:05:21 — HOAs as Control Layers 2:08:40 — Tokenization and the Financial Fallout 2:13:19 — Protecting Assets: Cash, Land Patents, UCC Article 8 2:30:00 — Closing: "Use AI to Destroy AI" ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ KEY NUMBERS & SOURCES MENTIONED ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ • New York Stock Exchange (ICE): $25 trillion in U.S. assets targeted for tokenization by end of 2026; $170 trillion globally • UN Security Council Resolution 2803: Board of Peace authorized November 17, 2025 • Trump-Xi Beijing summit: Boards of Trade and Investment agreed May 14, 2026 • Pax Silica Declaration: signed in Washington, December 12, 2025 • H.R. 3633 / Digital Asset Market CLARITY Act: passed July 17, 2025 by 294–134 ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ FURTHER READING ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ • Courtenay Turner & Patrick Wood, The Final Betrayal: How Technocracy Destroyed America • Patrick Wood, The New Economics of Technocracy • Patrick Wood, "The China Card: Global Technocracy Is Emerging Under Trump's Reign" • Courtenay Turner, "The Tokenization of Everything" • Courtenay Turner, "The Governance Stack: How Technocracy Was Built Over 200 Years" • Henry Kissinger, Eric Schmidt & Craig Mundie, Genesis: Artificial Intelligence, Hope, and the Human Spirit ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ CONNECT ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ Courtenay Turner: • Substack • Website • X: @CourtenayTurner Patrick Wood: • Technocracy.News • X: @StopTechnocracy ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ The Final Betrayal: How Technocracy Destroyed America — co-authored by Courtenay Turner & Patrick Wood. Available through Coherent Publishing. #PaxSilica #Technocracy #Tokenization #PatrickWood #CourtenayTurner #TheFinalBetrayal #IMEC #CLARITYAct #Geopolitics #BeijingSummit Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

This Week In Startups is made possible by:Vanta - Vanta.com/TWISTSentry - Sentry.io/TWISTDeel - Deel.com/TWISTToday's show:AI is the villain of the 2026 commencement cycle, with business luminaries — including Eric Schmidt — booed for discussing or praising the technology. As students graduate into a job market forcibly reshaped by AI, increasingly negative public polling on the potential impacts of artificial intelligence on society is clearly not missing the mark.Jason and Alex then discussed The Information's reporting that Anthropic and OpenAI earn nearly 90% of all startup AI revenue, a Stanford student's viral essay regarding their time at the university in a post-ChatGPT world, Flock Safety's impressive (and worrying) web of cameras, and the upcoming Mark II AI bookmark. The episode closes with questions from our live audience!TWIST Links:Bounty website https://www.thisweekinstartups.com/bountySidebar bounty challenge https://www.notion.so/launch1/5K-Bounty-Create-Sidebar-App-for-Podcasts-34150ff313d280adbd8ed6204676513cAnnotated.com bounty challenge https://annotated.lovable.app/Timestamps:0:00 TWiST All-Stars summer lineup announcement2:43 Plaud: If your work depends on conversations — interviews, meetings, calls — you need a Plaud NotePin. You can check it out at https://Plaud.ai/twist and use code TWIST for 10% off!5:08 Eric Schmidt booed at University of Arizona commencement8:57 Why Gen Z feels "double-crossed" by AI leaders10:10 Deel - Founders scale faster on Deel. Set up payroll for any country in minutes, hire anyone anywhere, get visas handled fast, and get back to building. Visit https://deel.com/twist to learn more.15:22 Is this AI's Vietnam moment? The anti-war parallel18:04 Theo Baker's NYT essay on Stanford's AI cheating culture19:24 Sentry - New users can get $240 in free credits when they go to https://sentry.io/twist and use the code TWIST22:30 Why Jason says everyone should start a company28:59 Anthropic + OpenAI capture 89% of AI startup revenue30:17 Vanta: Get $1000 off your SOC 2 at https://www.vanta.com/twist31:57 Are token sales a duopoly? Negative gross margins debate35:17 Risk of building app-layer startups on top of foundation models38:22 Inside Tracker bounty update: AI sidebar + Annotated.com41:18 Mark II: the $159 AI bookmark Alex wants49:31 Flock Safety solves Austin shooting via Manor PD53:39 DeFlock map and the geography of surveillance in Texas1:03:42 Noti Gang: AI for filing patents1:05:45 Noti Gang: Running AI models locally on Mac StudiosSubscribe to the TWiST500 newsletter: https://ticker.thisweekinstartups.comCheck out the TWIST500: https://www.twist500.comSubscribe to This Week in Startups on Apple: https://rb.gy/v19fcpFollow Alex:X: https://x.com/alexLinkedIn: ⁠https://www.linkedin.com/in/alexwilhelmFollow Jason:X: https://twitter.com/JasonLinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/jasoncalacanisCheck out all our partner offers: https://partners.launch.co/Great TWIST interviews: Will Guidara, Eoghan McCabe, Steve Huffman, Brian Chesky, Bob Moesta, Aaron Levie, Sophia Amoruso, Reid Hoffman, Frank Slootman, Billy McFarlandCheck out Jason's suite of newsletters: https://substack.com/@calacanisFollow TWiST:Twitter: https://twitter.com/TWiStartupsYouTube: https://www.youtube.com/thisweekinInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/thisweekinstartupsTikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@thisweekinstartupsSubstack: https://twistartups.substack.com

2 - Scott Presler joins Dom today for his weekly call-in. Thomas Massie is in the news this week, what are Scott's thoughts? When is Scott's new book coming out? How did Scott celebrate his birthday? 210 - What percentage in 1960 did not have a car? 215 - Dom's Money Melody! 220 - Will the redistricting of states help the mid-terms? Are we going to do anything about Iran? Why are we paying so much money when it comes to the NFL be it streaming, ticket prices, etc? WIll the Trump Administration fight for us on this? 225 - Your calls 230 - What is even Eric Schmidt talking about in his speech to graduates at an Arizona University? 235 - Your calls 240 - Why does NYC Mayor Mandami disagree with President Reagan about the government? How long will these free NYC grocery stores last? Why is the Philadelphia School District dropping the ball on getting an elevator fixed and waiting till almost the end of the school year while waiting for a part to be shipped? 250 - The Lightning Round!

12 - Top of the show, Dom previews the PA GOP primary 1215 - Side - All time catch phrase 1220 - Why in one school there are 21 valedictorians? How many salutarians were there? 1235- Your calls 1245 - Millions of dollars boosts the Wildwood NJ economy, thanks to Dom's visit to Mulligans? 1250 - Your calls 1 - In the State of California, parents are fighting back when it comes to biological males competing in girls sports, Katlin Clark in the WNBA is featured in a video game where 4 women play and 1 woman sits on the bench? How is that possible? 110 - Your calls 115 - Dom welcomes Mr.T to the show. Is he planning to run the steps at the Philly Art Museum like Rocky did in the famous movie? Does he still get feedback from his catchphrase “I pity the fool!?” What happened during filming one of the scenes in the movie “Rocky”? What happened to all the gold he wore back in the day? 130 -Both PA Gov Candidate Stacy Garrity and LT. Gov Candidate Jason Richey joins the Dom Show today 140 - Your Calls 145 - Dom stressed the importance of voting in the PA primary tomorrow 150 - Dom Giordano Presents: Progressive Women Gone Wild! 155 - Your Calls 2 - Scott Presler joins Dom today for his weekly call-in. Thomas Massie is in the news this week, what are Scott's thoughts? When is Scott's new book coming out? How did Scott celebrate his birthday? 210 - What percentage in 1960 did not have a car? 215 - Dom's Money Melody! 220 - Will the redistricting of states help the mid-terms? Are we going to do anything about Iran? Why are we paying so much money when it comes to the NFL be it streaming, ticket prices, etc? WIll the Trump Administration fight for us on this? 225 - Your calls 230 - What is even Eric Schmidt talking about in his speech to graduates at an Arizona University? 235 - Your calls 240 - Why does NYC Mayor Mandami disagree with President Reagan about the government? How long will these free NYC grocery stores last? Why is the Philadelphia School District dropping the ball on getting an elevator fixed and waiting till almost the end of the school year while waiting for a part to be shipped? 250 - The Lightning Round!