Podcasts about OpenAI

This week, we're bringing you an episode of WSJ's Take On the Week. Host Telis Demos and guest host Spencer Jakab, investing columnist and writer of the Markets A.M. newsletter, are joined by Kaitlin Hendrix, asset allocation research director at Dimensional Fund Advisors, to decode investors' surging interest in private markets. They break down how investors may already have exposure in their investment portfolios to private companies like Anthropic, Stripe and Flipkart, through holdings in companies like Alphabet's Google, Amazon and Nvidia. Hendrix explains why your public index fund might already provide the diversification you're looking for, without the high fees. Plus, Jakab explains the way that big tech's private company investments are boosting earnings to near-unprecedented levels.  To watch the video version of this episode, visit our WSJ Podcasts YouTube channel or the video page of WSJ.com Sign up for the WSJ's free What's News newsletter. Further Reading:  Earnings Forecasts Are on Steroids For more coverage of the markets and your investments, head to WSJ.com, WSJ's Heard on The Street Column, and WSJ's Live Markets blog. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

A debate over government regulation in the AI industry is intensifying after models built by OpenAI and Anthropic were able to access the open internet during testing and hack into various public organizations and accounts. There are growing calls to slow the pace of development so that safety and security measures can catch up. But how does the Trump administration feel about that? And are top AI executives even on the same page?  For more: Anthropic said its AI models hacked into other companies' systems during testing  ---  Guests: Jennifer Ji, Center for Security and Emerging Technology & Hadas Gold, CNN AI Correspondent  Host: David Rind  Producer: Paola Ortiz  Showrunner: Felicia Patinkin  Senior Director of Podcasts: Zach Goldbaum  Photo: Nathan Howard/Reuters Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

This week on ‘Face the Nation,' Iran apparently blinks after threats from President Trump for a major joint US and Israel attack on Iranian soil. Heading into a sixth month of conflict with Iran, President Trump told reporters Friday he had plans to go full throttle on his threat for military action in Iran.His vows for "going big" caused a flurry of diplomatic scrambling, and yet another announcement of "perimeters of a deal." We'll discuss the latest with Sen. Mark Kelly and Ohio Congressman Mike Turner.Plus, after an alarming incident of Open AI going rogue and hacking into at least one company's computer system, we'll talk to the CEO of Hugging Face, Clem Delangue.Finally, with polls showing Americans souring on both political parties, we'll talk with former Senator Joe Manchin and Heather Manchin about his latest effort to encourage independents to join the process.

SUMMARY:  Brian Gracely (@bgracely), Aaron Delp (@aarondelp) and Brandon Whichard (@bwhicard) discuss the biggest AI news stories from the month of July 2026. SHOW: 1050SHOW TRANSCRIPT: The Enterprise AI Show #1050 TranscriptSHOW VIDEO: https://youtu.be/9u-uAaQVjXkSHOW SPONSORS:Nasuni - Activate your data for AI and request a demoSHOW NOTES:Links to all the AI News covered in this month's showFEEDBACK?Email: show @ the enterprise ai show dot comeBluesky: @TheEntAIShow.bsky.socialTwitter/X: @TheEntAIShowInstagram: @TheEntAIShow

On this week's episode of the Unnatural Selection Podcast, we discuss: The Labor right is back in power in Victoria. Where will its new ‘Kmart Keating' premier take the state?Pauline Hanson fails in appeal bid against racial discrimination of Mehreen Faruqi.Being handed out at 80 Melbourne train stations this morning.OpenAI says its rogue AI tried to hack other companies.Anthropic says its Claude AI model hacked systems of three external companies during safety tests.Secret files show mouse fur and metal shavings detected in Australian food Unnatural Selection is a deeply unqualified Australian and American political comedy podcast. Hosted by Jorge Tsipos, Adam Direen, and Tom Heath, the show attempts to make sense of the weekly news cycle through a highly unserious lens.Find more episodes and links at www.UnnaturalShow.com.Disclaimer: Unnatural Selection is a comedy podcast. The political commentary, news analysis, and general banter are for comedic purposes and should absolutely not be taken seriously.#auspol #uspol #politicalcomedy #australianpolitics #uspolitics #newsandpolitics #comedypodcastTwitter:@JorgeTsipos@UnnaturalShowInstagram:@JorgeTsipos@UnnaturalShowThreads:@tom.heath@JorgeTsipos@UnnaturalShow

In this episode the guys break down the five rules for building a lagging body part — train it longer, train it more often, train it first in the workout, take volume away from the rest of the body to fuel it, and eat in a calorie surplus. They also get into calf insertions and how high versus low insertions determine whether you're built for speed or strength , Adam microdosing GLP-1 for inflammation and knuckle swelling, Justin's KLOW and cognitive peptide stack from Vita Bella. Then they coach live callers submitted through mplivecaller.com.   MAPS Upper Lower: https://mapsupperlower.com Code: LAUNCH for 40% off. Final day of this offer. Four day split, male and female versions, workout videos and live coaching with Cole.   Mind Pump Fitness Coaching: https://mindpumpfitnesscoaching.com 1.9 NASM CEUs   SPONSORS Eight Sleep (Pod 5 Ultra): https://eightsleep.com/mindpump Code: MINDPUMP for up to $350 off. Cools to 55°F or heats to 110°F independently per side. Tracks sleep stages, HRV, heart rate and respiratory rate — no wearable needed. Autopilot AI adjusts temperature every night. New Sleep Agent feature gives morning briefs trained on over 1 billion hours of sleep data. Best results for hot sleepers and couples with different temperature preferences. HSA/FSA: Pod may qualify as a medical expense through Truemed — qualified customers save about 30% on average. Truemed is for qualified customers. HSA/FSA tax savings vary.   Vita Bella / MP Hormones: https://mphormones.com Book a complimentary 10-minute consultation to find out if Vita Bella is right for you. Consultation: https://meetings-na2.hubspot.com/alever/marketing-membership-consultation Or use code MINDPUMP365 to start your annual membership and receive a free blood panel and gift.   LINKS Submit a live caller question: https://mplivecaller.com Mind Pump Store: https://mindpumpstore.com Maps Fitness Products: https://mapsfitnessproducts.com Instagram: @mindpumpmedia   0:00 - Intro 2:14 - 5 rules for building a lagging body part 3:06 - Rule 1: Train it longer — more volume on that body part in the workout 8:01 - Rule 2: Train it more often — increase frequency from twice to three times a week 8:43 - Rule 3: Train it first — prioritization is backed by data on strength and muscle gains 11:28 - Rule 4: Take volume away from the rest of the body — you can't just add on top 15:04 - Rule 5: Eat in a calorie surplus — you cannot build without fueling 17:17 - Calf insertion science — why high insertions produce speed and low insertions produce strength 20:28 - Tito Ortiz has the biggest head Justin has ever seen in person 22:33 - Swimmer body type is the one build that is perfect for one sport and nothing else 24:04 - Catrina caught Adam spitting in the toilet before peeing — his son does it too 28:07 - Joe Wieder stole Robby Robinson's body for his famous supplement bust photo 32:33 - Justin's KLOW and cognitive peptide combo from Vita Bella — clarity, memory recall and BDNF 36:36 - 441,000 of 1 million new millionaires in 2025 came from the US 40:23 - Open AI's model escapes a locked computer to cheat on its own cybersecurity test 47:47 - The Odyssey movie backlash — Sal's boring review goes viral and proves nobody thinks for themselves 53:44 - Man receives heart transplant and marries his donor's widow — both later die by suicide 57:57 - Eight Sleep reviews — hot sleepers and couples with different temperature preferences benefit most 1:01:49 - Caller: Molly (Texas) — returning caller, blood clot during pregnancy, rebuilding strength before second baby 1:21:31 - Caller: Michelle (Ontario) — 30-day check-in, energy improving, nutrition consistency the next goal 1:30:50 - Caller: Stuart (New York) — stage 4 melanoma, immunotherapy, 35 years of training, how to stay active through treatment 1:49:19 - Caller: Sandy (Connecticut) — 90-day update, 4.4lbs of muscle gained, church walking group launched, trainer Greg gets a shirt

This week: Situational Awareness—an A.I.-forward hedge fund led by a former wunderkind and OpenAI employee—was tanking fast until a rival fund stepped in. Felix Salmon, Elizabeth Spiers, and Emily Peck explain the series of events that led to Citadel swooping in to buy the bulk of assets held by 25-year-old Leopold Aschenbrenner's investment firm. Then, it's time to talk about the “crack spread”—aka the reason we aren't seeing relief at the gas stations despite steadying oil prices. And finally, the hosts discuss the backlash to the SEC's proposal to do away with its quarterly report requirement. In the Slate Plus episode: Is Cheaper Gas Worth Your Time?Want to hear that discussion and hear more Slate Money? Join Slate Plus to unlock weekly bonus episodes. Plus, you'll access ad-free listening across all your favorite Slate podcasts. You can subscribe directly from the Slate Money show page on Apple Podcasts and Spotify. Or, visit slate.com/moneyplus to get access wherever you listen. Podcast production by Jessamine Molli. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Fifa president Gianni Infantino has scrapped the controversial plan to sell off stakes in the World Cup and other football competitions to private investors following global outrage. He said it had become clear the project had "created divisions" that are "no longer in the interest" of its original objective. Also: Hugging Face, the tech company hacked by OpenAI's rogue agent, calls for accountability. The UN warns El Niño will intensify extreme weather in the coming months. A discovery in the Amazon rainforest sheds light on ancient indigenous civilisations. And the unlikely friendships forged in the animal world. The Global News Podcast brings you the breaking news you need to hear, as it happens. Listen for the latest headlines and current affairs from around the world. Politics, economics, climate, business, technology, health – we cover it all with expert analysis and insight. Get the news that matters, delivered twice a day on weekdays and daily at weekends, plus special bonus episodes reacting to urgent breaking stories. Follow or subscribe now and never miss a moment. Get in touch: globalpodcast@bbc.co.uk Photo: Illustration showing the FIFA logo, the numbers "20%" and a rising stock graph. Credit: REUTERS/Dado Ruvic

This week: Situational Awareness—an A.I.-forward hedge fund led by a former wunderkind and OpenAI employee—was tanking fast until a rival fund stepped in. Felix Salmon, Elizabeth Spiers, and Emily Peck explain the series of events that led to Citadel swooping in to buy the bulk of assets held by 25-year-old Leopold Aschenbrenner's investment firm. Then, it's time to talk about the “crack spread”—aka the reason we aren't seeing relief at the gas stations despite steadying oil prices. And finally, the hosts discuss the backlash to the SEC's proposal to do away with its quarterly report requirement. In the Slate Plus episode: Is Cheaper Gas Worth Your Time?Want to hear that discussion and hear more Slate Money? Join Slate Plus to unlock weekly bonus episodes. Plus, you'll access ad-free listening across all your favorite Slate podcasts. You can subscribe directly from the Slate Money show page on Apple Podcasts and Spotify. Or, visit slate.com/moneyplus to get access wherever you listen. Podcast production by Jessamine Molli. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week: Situational Awareness—an A.I.-forward hedge fund led by a former wunderkind and OpenAI employee—was tanking fast until a rival fund stepped in. Felix Salmon, Elizabeth Spiers, and Emily Peck explain the series of events that led to Citadel swooping in to buy the bulk of assets held by 25-year-old Leopold Aschenbrenner's investment firm. Then, it's time to talk about the “crack spread”—aka the reason we aren't seeing relief at the gas stations despite steadying oil prices. And finally, the hosts discuss the backlash to the SEC's proposal to do away with its quarterly report requirement. In the Slate Plus episode: Is Cheaper Gas Worth Your Time?Want to hear that discussion and hear more Slate Money? Join Slate Plus to unlock weekly bonus episodes. Plus, you'll access ad-free listening across all your favorite Slate podcasts. You can subscribe directly from the Slate Money show page on Apple Podcasts and Spotify. Or, visit slate.com/moneyplus to get access wherever you listen. Podcast production by Jessamine Molli. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Klik je týždenný komentovaný prehľad technologických správ, o udalostiach, ktoré sa udiali vo svete IT, médií a sociálnych sietí. Moderátori: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Ondrej Podstupka⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠, Martin Hodás Discord diskusný server nájdete tu: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://discord.gg/dAUW4PCaEh Linky: Extrémna ochrana súkromia v telefónehttps://www.theverge.com/policy/971097/us-charging-american-citizen-wiping-phone-duress-password Let Starship 13. https://www.spacex.com/launches/starship-flight-13 Slovenskí vydavatelia budú mať rámec pre AI https://www.sme.sk/domov/c/po-kauze-siskaci-stat-navrhuje-ako-knihy-vytvorene-pomocou-ai-oznacit NVIDIA pumpuje peniaze do OpenAI https://www.wsj.com/tech/ai/nvidia-in-talks-with-openai-to-guarantee-250-billion-financing-for-data-center-3dd6eae3 EK dala ďalšiu pokutu Google https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/sk/ip_26_1670 Facebook spúšťa overovanie identity https://about.fb.com/news/2026/07/introducing-facebook-verified/ Framework 13 Pro recenzie https://www.techmeme.com/260727/p18#a260727p18 Galaxy Z Fold8 https://www.techmeme.com/260722/p27#a260722p27 Spravili sme chybu, máte pripomienku? Napíšte nám na ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠klik@sme.sk⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Kapitoly 00:00 Úvod01:10 Extrémna ochrana súkromia v telefóne08:39 Let Starship 13.15:02 NVIDIA pumpuje peniaze do OpenAI22:12 Slovenskí vydavatelia budú mať rámec pre AI28:37 EK dala ďalšiu pokutu Google40:55 Facebook spúšťa overovanie identity44:17 ZáverSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Don't sorry I put two ChinaTalk Records songs at the end! their show notes: On this episode of The Spillover, Sebastian Mallaby sits down with Jordan Schneider of ChinaTalk to unpack a frantic month in artificial intelligence. The conversation turns on whether the U.S. can actually “win” the AI race, with Schneider arguing that the most durable competitive edge will come from compute rather than model quality. The two debate China's open-weight model strategy as a commercial weapon and question whether it will be possible to sufficiently harden systems against threats like cyberattacks and AI-designed bioweapons. Anthropic's Mythos model has led the Trump administration to take an AI-safety U-turn. Mallaby notes that as late as March 2026, “if you had said to the Trump administration that they would be trying to suppress an American AI model, decelerate the progress in the name of safety, they would have said, ‘You're nuts.'” Schneider notes that a similar shift has not yet arrived in China.  AI models are now escaping their sandbox and raising false alarms about foreign hackers. In remarking on OpenAI's models hacking AI company Hugging Face, Schneider comments, “They think it's the Chinese. . . . And they're freaking out. They're calling the FBI.” For Schneider, the episode is a warning that “we've really crossed a threshold with these models,” which now have “the potential to do really dramatic harm just on their own, because we like can't even physically watch them.” The real AI scoreboard is compute, not model quality. Schneider argues that there is too much of a focus on the gap between Chinese and Western frontier models. Mallaby adds, “In other words, I shouldn't be asking about how far is China behind in terms of the quality of model. It's more a question of like, how much can China deliver the AI to users within China, given their lack of computational resources?” China's open-weight models are a weapon without a business model. Mallaby frames Chinese open-weight as a “counterweapon”—good-enough models pushed out cheaply to erode the economics of U.S. frontier labs. Schneider notes that DeepSeek's CTO is pitching investors a Manhattan Project-like vision in which profits should take a back seat to the pursuit of AGI. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Unreleased AI models escaping containment, hacking platforms, and stealing answers to their own tests? It's not science fiction—it's what OpenAI and Anthropic recently disclosed. On The FOX News Rundown: Extra, Center for Humane Technology co-founder Tristan Harris breaks down the recent security breaches at Hugging Face and other organizations, revealing the urgent risks when AI development outpaces safety controls. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Até pouco tempo atrás, a ideia de uma inteligência artificial tomando decisões inesperadas e escapando do comportamento previsto parecia assunto de filmes de ficção científica. Mas o avanço dos chamados agentes de IA, capazes de planejar, agir e interagir com sistemas digitais de forma cada vez mais autônoma, está tornando esse debate bastante concreto. Um episódio recente envolvendo um modelo da OpenAI, durante testes de segurança, levantou questionamentos importantes sobre os limites dessa tecnologia, os riscos para as empresas e a necessidade de novas formas de governança e controle. Durante testes fechados, o modelo conseguiu achar formas de fugir do controle, planejou e executou, por conta própria, um ataque cibernético contra uma outra empresa. O caso representa uma exceção ou antecipa desafios de proteção e controles rígidos que acompanharão a próxima geração de inteligências artificiais? É sobre esse cenário e seus impactos para os negócios, a inovação e a sociedade que o apresentador Daniel Gonzales conversa, nesta edição do Start, com o professor Marcos Barretto, da Fundação Vanzolini e da Escola Politécnica da USP, um dos maiores pesquisadores brasileiros do tema, que estuda a IA desde a década de 1980. O programa vai ao ar nas plataformas digitais do Estadão, todas as quartas-feiras, e também no canal Estadão Analisa, aos sábados.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The race to build the most advanced artificial intelligence continues to dominate the headlines. On this week's On the Media, who does this new technology actually serve? Plus, how even critical media coverage can feed into the AI hype. [01:00]  Host Brooke Gladstone sits down with Cory Doctorow, journalist, activist, and author of Enshittification, on his new guide to seeing through the relentless, $16 trillion AI hype machine and understanding the technology for exactly what it is, rather than the outlandish stories told about it. [16:47] Brooke continues her conversation with Cory, and they discuss how the hype itself is keeping the AI industry afloat.  [28:47] Brooke asks Cory about his rejection of the notion that AI domination – of our jobs, our lives, our art, and more – is inevitable. Plus, they interrogate the role of the tech in a creative's life, and why AI art leaves us cold. Further reading / watching: The Reverse Centaur's Guide to Life After AI by Cory Doctorow On the Media is supported by listeners like you. Support OTM by donating today (https://pledge.wnyc.org/support/otm). Follow our show on Instagram, Bluesky, TikTok and Facebook @onthemedia, and share your thoughts with us by emailing onthemedia@wnyc.org. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

This week, Scott sat down with his Lawfare colleagues Benjamin Wittes, Tyler McBrien, Anastasiia Lapatina, and Kevin Frazier to talk through a couple of the week's big national security news stories, including:“Kyiv Peace a Chance.” Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky was in the Oval Office on Tuesday for closed-door talks with President Trump, roughly 17 months after their first Oval Office meeting collapsed into a televised shouting match. But this meeting went rather differently. Zelensky said the two discussed licensing Ukrainian production of Patriot interceptors, and pressed the case for reinvigorating diplomacy—and hours later, after both men attended the funeral of the late Senator Lindsey Graham, the Senate voted 86-12 to advance a Russia and Iran sanctions bill now bearing Graham's name. Behind the scenes, Washington and Kyiv have been quietly assembling a new package of proposals for Moscow built around a partial ceasefire. Is there anything real behind this renewed diplomatic push? And what, if anything, has changed that might make the Kremlin say yes?“Thinking Outside the Box.” Last week, Open AI and the AI hosting platform Hugging Face confirmed that, while being run through an offensive cyber benchmark with their safety refusals switched off, GPT-5.6 Sol and a more capable unreleased OpenAI model escaped their supposedly isolated sandbox through a zero-day in a package installer, reached the open internet, and hacked Hugging Face's production database to steal the answer key to a test they were taking. It is the first publicly confirmed case of an AI system executing a sophisticated, multi-stage cyberattack against a third party on its own initiative. What does the incident tell us about how well anyone can control frontier models? And who should be on the hook when a model goes rogue?We were going to cover a third topic but simply ran out of time! In object lessons, Tyler is revisiting a renewed classic with the 4k restoration of the 1986 documentary, “Sherman's March: A Meditation on the Possibility of Romantic Love in the South During an Era of Nuclear Weapons Proliferation.” Nastya returns to George Orwell's “Homage to Catalonia,” as a reminder that both physical and information warfare are not unique to our time. Ben enlists an old friend—Claude—to investigate one of American law's enduring mysteries: how many federal crimes actually exist. Kevin is celebrating student-led conversations on how AI should be governed. And Scott revisits Max Weber on the nature of science while also celebrating emojis other than the hugging face.To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/lawfare-institute.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

(0:00) Bestie intros (1:19) Chip stocks crash, Leopold Aschenbrenner's $20B fund gets margin called (20:20) China's advantage and green shoots for the US economy (34:12) Frontier Labs say "SLOW DOWN AI" (1:01:15) Why are frontier labs "burning books"? (1:14:45) Socialism Corner: Mamdani's grocery stores and the "Socialist Spectacle" (1:24:44) Science Corner: Understanding and mapping the brain Apply for All-In Summit 2026: https://allin.com/events Follow the besties: https://x.com/chamath https://x.com/Jason https://x.com/DavidSacks https://x.com/friedberg Follow on X: https://x.com/theallinpod Follow on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/theallinpod Follow on TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@allin Follow on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/allinpod Intro Music Credit: https://rb.gy/tppkzl https://x.com/yung_spielburg Intro Video Credit: https://x.com/TheZachEffect Referenced in the show: https://www.cnbc.com/2026/07/30/leopold-aschenbrenners-hedge-fund-is-facing-steep-ai-losses.html https://www.wsj.com/finance/citadel-buys-situational-awarenesss-stock-portfolio-after-big-losses-in-ai-5117159b https://polymarket.com/event/fed-decision-in-september-762 https://situational-awareness.ai https://www.cnbc.com/quotes/US30Y https://x.com/nicolasfulghum/status/2082083884578050299 https://theprint.in/science/breakthrough-china-artificial-sun-project-6-5-tesla-magnet/2999321 https://www.pacingthefrontier.com/ https://www.cnbc.com/2026/07/29/openai-cfo-sarah-friar-tells-employees-arr-in-july-topped-all-of-q2.html https://www.dwarkesh.com/p/why-compute-might-get-10x-more-expensive vhttps://www.reuters.com/world/china/china-starts-production-home-grown-immersion-duv-chipmaking-tools-source-2026-07-28 https://www.google.com/finance/beta/quote/ASML:NASDAQ https://www.cnbc.com/2026/07/27/cxmt-china-market-debut-chipmaker-ipo.html https://polymarket.com/event/ipos-before-2027 https://polymarket.com/event/us-enacts-ai-safety-bill-before-2027/us-enacts-ai-safety-bill-before-2027 https://x.com/v_nefodov/status/2082927219224060043 https://www.wsj.com/opinion/the-ai-future-is-for-everyone-a0c24e20 https://punchbowl.news/article/tech/thune-anthropic https://www.wsj.com/tech/ai/anthropic-doubles-midterm-spending-to-40-million-to-push-ai-regulation-9cd547ae https://x.com/OpenAI/status/2082577277246972300 https://www.carltonfields.com/insights/publications/2025/no-copyright-protection-for-ai-assisted-creations-thaler-v-perlmutter https://x.com/Jason/status/2082577230941557068 https://www.tomshardware.com/tech-industry/artificial-intelligence/ai-companies-are-reportedly-shredding-millions-of-books-to-train-models-tech-giants-outsource-to-middlemen-to-secretly-buy-up-books-for-training-material https://www.404media.co/ai-companies-are-buying-tons-of-old-books-because-theyre-free-of-ai-slop https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d1azwUwKrPo&t=39s https://arxiv.org/pdf/2602.16417

It's a big week for new ideas about computers, so David and Nilay spend some time on Samsung's vision for foldables and Mark Zuckerberg's vision for AI agents that do absolutely everything. Then they talk about the fallout from last week's OpenAI Hugging Face hack, and whether all this talk about AI safety will actually amount to anything. Finally, it's time for Brendan Carr is a Dummy, the vertical video takeover, and the smashing success of the Ferrari Luce. Further reading: Samsung's Galaxy Z Fold 8 feels like the future Apple launches ‘Upgrade' program to lease new devices  What's the catch with the Apple Upgrade program? Mark Zuckerberg is planning a big push into personal AI agents Mark Zuckerberg wrote an op-ed about AI for the WSJ.  We're running out of reasons to ignore AI safety OpenAI reportedly didn't notice its AI agent hacking Hugging Face until a week later.  Nvidia, Microsoft launch open AI security alliance — without OpenAI, Google, or Anthropic OpenAI's rogue AI agent didn't stop at hacking Hugging Face  AI leaders sign a statement asking the government to do something about automated AI  Former FCC chairs blast Carr's early renewal of ABC licenses as an ‘assault on free speech.' ABC demands FCC drop its ‘punitive' early license renewal of its stations Qualcomm is raising phone chip prices starting September 1st The Ferrari Luce reportedly already hit its 2026 sales target  Samsung's smartphone biz posts first ever loss, but profit still soars 1,300 percent on RAM. Facebook considers giving up and becoming TikTok  YouTube Premium will include Peacock starting next year  HBO Max is putting on vertical shorts  Subscribe to The Verge for unlimited access to theverge.com, subscriber-exclusive newsletters, and our ad-free podcast feed. We love hearing from you! Email your questions and thoughts to vergecast@theverge.com or call us at 866-VERGE11. (Timestamps are approximate.) 00:00:00 Intro 00:03:00 Baby Announcement 00:06:00 Galaxy Z Fold 00:12:00 Apple Leasing Program 00:15:00 Kill Switch Concerns 00:19:00 Zuck Agent Future 00:34:00 AI Safety Week Recap 00:42:00 Regulation Versus China 00:49:00 Winning AI Race 00:53:00 Security Arms Race 00:57:00 Brendan Carr Is a Dummy 01:07:00 Facebook Becomes TikTok 01:12:00 Ramageddon Price Hikes 01:16:00 HBO Max Shorts 01:23:00 Ferrari Luce Buzz 01:26:00 Wrap Up and Plugs Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

A.M. Edition for July 31. Earnings from AI hyperscalers this week showed rising demand for their cloud services, with Amazon's CEO forecasting corporate AI use was still in its ‘early stages.' But as EY's Dan Diasio tells us, rising token costs are leading many businesses to question their broader AI approach. Plus, the U.S. says Hamas has agreed to a broad plan to disarm in exchange for an eventual Israeli withdrawal from Gaza. And WSJ reporter Margherita Stancati describes how the arrival of thousands of migrants into the Spanish territory of Ceuta from neighboring Morocco is piling political pressure on the center-left government in Madrid. Luke Vargas hosts. Sign up for the WSJ's free What's News newsletter. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

This week, Scott sat down with his Lawfare colleagues Benjamin Wittes, Tyler McBrien, Anastasiia Lapatina, and Kevin Frazier to talk through a couple of the week's big national security news stories, including:“Kyiv Peace a Chance.” Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky was in the Oval Office on Tuesday for closed-door talks with President Trump, roughly 17 months after their first Oval Office meeting collapsed into a televised shouting match. But this meeting went rather differently. Zelensky said the two discussed licensing Ukrainian production of Patriot interceptors, and pressed the case for reinvigorating diplomacy—and hours later, after both men attended the funeral of the late Senator Lindsey Graham, the Senate voted 86-12 to advance a Russia and Iran sanctions bill now bearing Graham's name. Behind the scenes, Washington and Kyiv have been quietly assembling a new package of proposals for Moscow built around a partial ceasefire. Is there anything real behind this renewed diplomatic push? And what, if anything, has changed that might make the Kremlin say yes?“Thinking Outside the Box.” Last week, Open AI and the AI hosting platform Hugging Face confirmed that, while being run through an offensive cyber benchmark with their safety refusals switched off, GPT-5.6 Sol and a more capable unreleased OpenAI model escaped their supposedly isolated sandbox through a zero-day in a package installer, reached the open internet, and hacked Hugging Face's production database to steal the answer key to a test they were taking. It is the first publicly confirmed case of an AI system executing a sophisticated, multi-stage cyberattack against a third party on its own initiative. What does the incident tell us about how well anyone can control frontier models? And who should be on the hook when a model goes rogue?We were going to cover a third topic but simply ran out of time! In object lessons, Tyler is revisiting a renewed classic with the 4k restoration of the 1986 documentary, “Sherman's March: A Meditation on the Possibility of Romantic Love in the South During an Era of Nuclear Weapons Proliferation.” Nastya returns to George Orwell's “Homage to Catalonia,” as a reminder that both physical and information warfare are not unique to our time. Ben enlists an old friend—Claude—to investigate one of American law's enduring mysteries: how many federal crimes actually exist. Kevin is celebrating student-led conversations on how AI should be governed. And Scott revisits Max Weber on the nature of science while also celebrating emojis other than the hugging face.To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/lawfare-institute. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Louie Mantia returns to the show to talk about the state of UI and icon design on Apple's platforms, and some speculation on Apple's trade secret lawsuit against OpenAI.

On episode 253 of The Compound and Friends, ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Downtown Josh Brown⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ and Michael Batnick are joined by Big Technology founder, Alex Kantrowitz, to discuss: OpenAI and Anthropic's explosive growth, the threat to traditional software companies, soaring cloud demand, agentic AI, and the diverging strategies of Microsoft, Meta, Amazon, Apple, Google, and other tech giants. Plus, where AI profits may ultimately accrue, and whether today's massive spending boom can deliver lasting returns. This episode is sponsored by ProShares. Learn more at proshares.com. Sign up for The Compound Newsletter and never miss out: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠thecompoundnews.com/subscribe⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Instagram: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠instagram.com/thecompoundnews⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Twitter: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠twitter.com/thecompoundnews⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ LinkedIn: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠linkedin.com/company/the-compound-media/⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ TikTok: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠tiktok.com/@thecompoundnews⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Investing involves the risk of loss. This podcast is for informational purposes only and should not be or regarded as personalized investment advice or relied upon for investment decisions. Michael Batnick and Josh Brown are employees of Ritholtz Wealth Management and may maintain positions in the securities discussed in this video. All opinions expressed by them are solely their own opinion and do not reflect the opinion of Ritholtz Wealth Management. The Compound Media, Incorporated, an affiliate of ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Ritholtz Wealth Management⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠, receives payment from various entities for advertisements in affiliated podcasts, blogs and emails. Inclusion of such advertisements does not constitute or imply endorsement, sponsorship or recommendation thereof, or any affiliation therewith, by the Content Creator or by Ritholtz Wealth Management or any of its employees. For additional advertisement disclaimers see here ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://ritholtzwealth.com/advertising-disclaimers⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. Investments in securities involve the risk of loss. Any mention of a particular security and related performance data is not a recommendation to buy or sell that security. The information provided on this website (including any information that may be accessed through this website) is not directed at any investor or category of investors and is provided solely as general information. Obviously nothing on this channel should be considered as personalized financial advice or a solicitation to buy or sell any securities. See our disclosures here: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://ritholtzwealth.com/podcast-youtube-disclosures/⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ProShares' disclosure Investing involves risk, including the possible loss of principal. There is no guarantee any ProShares ETF will achieve its objective. ProShares leveraged and inverse ETFs have a daily investment objective. For any holding period other than a day, your return may be higher or lower than the Daily Target. These differences may be significant. Carefully consider the investment objectives, risks, charges and expenses of ProShares before investing. This and other information can be found in their summary and full prospectuses on ProShares.com. Read them carefully before investing. Distributor SEI Investments Distribution Co. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Episode 4193 │ July 31, 2026 $700 billion into AI data centers. Zero measurable GDP growth outside the spending itself. Wall Street is starting to notice. The people already knew. WHAT THIS EPISODE COVERS  Scott Kesterson closes out July — and a 26-day fast — with the most complete economic deconstruction of the AI hyperscaler model yet: a $700 billion annual capital expenditure cycle producing zero detectable macroeconomic productivity gain outside the tech sector itself, a circular financing structure Bloomberg mapped as Microsoft, OpenAI, and Nvidia essentially paying each other in a Ponzi loop, and AI stocks now representing 35% of the S&P 500 against a hollowed-out industrial base — making the current vulnerability structurally worse than the 1999 dot-com collapse, when America still made things. The episode then delivers the counter-narrative the hyperscalers did not see coming: consumer trust in AI as a decision-maker collapsed 28 points in 12 months, 50% of Gen Z is blocking AI-generated content, and what is actually emerging is not AI dependence but AI-assisted human discernment — people using the tool as a librarian rather than an oracle, making their own decisions better while refusing to let the machine make decisions for them, which is precisely why the profit model is breaking. Scott closes with the local sovereignty frame that underlies every episode — the real fight is land and water, not the building; the Community Sovereignty Framework v1.2 is free under every episode; and the people walking in the authority of Christ without fear of the tool are already winning, because the numbers confirm it. KEY QUESTIONS ADDRESSED What does the Deutsche Bank analysis of AI capital expenditure reveal — and why does $700 billion in annual hyperscaler spending producing zero measurable GDP growth outside the spending itself mean the AI economic model is structurally identical to the 1999 dot-com bubble, except with far less underneath it when it falls? What is the difference between AI as oracle and AI as librarian — and why does the collapse of consumer trust in AI decision-making alongside rising AI usage actually represent the most positive possible sign about human discernment and the people's capacity to use a tool without being used by it? Why does Scott argue that the real target in the fight against AI data centers is not the building or the company but the land and water rights that Wall Street will retain when the Ponzi loop collapses — and what does the Community Sovereignty Framework v1.2 give communities to fight that specific battle? ABOUT BARDSFM BardsFM is a daily independent podcast covering faith, liberty, history, and information warfare. Hosted by Scott Kesterson — combat veteran, documentary filmmaker, and rancher. Over 4,100 episodes and 50 million lifetime downloads. New episodes every weekday. bards.fm This episode was researched and produced under the Spatial Terra Intelligence Methodology (STIM v5) — the analytical framework built by Scott Kesterson — with AI-assisted research synthesis at a 70/30 human/AI authorship ratio, fully disclosed. All analysis, conclusions, and editorial judgments are those of Scott Kesterson. BardsFM's archive includes hundreds of episodes on prayer, scripture, and walking the Way of Christ — available free in the full episode catalog. DOWNLOADS Community Sovereignty Framework: click here AFFILIATE LINKS Bards Nation Health Store: www.bardsnationhealth.com MYPillow promo code: BARDS >> Go to https://www.mypillow.com/bards and use the promo code BARDS or... Call 1-800-975-2939.  EMPShield protect your vehicles and home. Promo code BARDS: Click here Treadlite Broadforks...best garden tool EVER. Promo code BARDS26: TreadliteBroadforks.com EnviroKlenz Air Purification, promo code BARDS to save 10%: www.enviroklenz.com Morning Intro Music Provided by Brian Kahanek: www.briankahanek.com Founders Bible 20% discount code: BARDS >>> TheFoundersBible.com Windblown Media 20% Discount with promo code BARDS: windblownmedia.com White Oak Pastures Grassfed Meats, Get $20 off any order $150 or more. Promo Code BARDS: www.whiteoakpastures.com/BARDS Mission Darkness Faraday Bags and RF Shielding. Promo code BARDS: Click here DONATIONS: If you wish to support this podcast directly you can donate here... DONATE: Click here MAILING ADDRESS: Xpedition Cafe, LLC Attn. Scott Kesterson 591 E Central Ave, #740

Today's Headlines: Iran may have hacked over 30 Minnesota water systems, with the FBI investigating amid existing warnings that Iranian hackers have been specifically targeting water and wastewater infrastructure. Speaking of hacking, Anthropic's AI models hacked into three companies during tests, topping OpenAI's model which only hacked one, which is either a quality gap or a concerning arms race depending on how you look at it. On this administration's shenanigans, Trump is threatening to pull Todd Blanche's attorney general nomination after Cornyn and Tillis refused to vote for him, though his plan appears to be waiting until their terms end and his preferred replacements take their seats — and a new court filing in the Comey case reveals that Trump's Secret Service tracked Comey's cellphone without a warrant in real time, coordinating directly with the DOJ and updating Air Force One, including while Comey stopped to visit his deceased son's grave, with one Secret Service agent noting internally that pinging the phone was "legally a bad idea." On the war beat, Trump announced a deal for Hamas to disarm and Israel to withdraw from Gaza, with neither Hamas nor Israel confirming any of it and no official timeline provided. The US continues heavy strikes on Iran while Saudi Arabia announced 14 countries have agreed to form a Maritime Defense Alliance to protect international shipping. Finally, two new studies confirmed that Europe's catastrophic wildfires were made significantly worse by human-caused climate change, with Spain's fire conditions made 20 times more likely and France's doubled, and scientists noting that no amount of money for fire prevention helps when climate conditions are this extreme — cool, cool.  Resources/Articles mentioned: AP News: Cyberattacks on Minnesota water systems investigated as officials warn about Iranian hackers WSJ: Anthropic AI Models Hacked Three Companies During Tests WSJ: Trump Threatens to Pull Blanche Pick in Clash With ‘Wounded Bear' Senators MS Now: Secret Service felt pressure from administration to surveil James Comey, new documents reveal AP News: Trump announces a deal for Hamas to disarm in Gaza, but many hurdles and uncertainty remain CNN: Saudi Arabia says 14 countries backing maritime alliance to protect shipping routes AP News: Human-caused climate change made Spanish, French fires much more likely, scientists calculate Subscribe to the Betches News Room and join the Morning Announcements group chat. Go to: betchesnews.substack.com Morning Announcements is produced by Sami Sage and edited by Grace Hernandez-Johnson Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Plus: Anthropic says its AI models hacked three companies during tests. And shares of Universal Music Group plunge as streaming and subscription revenue slows. Julie Chang hosts. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Plus: OpenAI surpasses one billion active users after cutting prices. And Sony Group raises guidance after profit jumps more than expected. Julie Chang hosts. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Welcome back to Ninjas Are Butterflies! This week, we travel deep into the Andes to investigate The Mountain That Eats Men and the terrifying horned deity known as El Tío, a figure locals still leave offerings to deep inside the mines. Is it ancient folklore, something darker, or a warning that's been misunderstood? We also break down a cryptic Chinese public service announcement that appears to warn citizens about contacting extraterrestrials, explore the fascinating ancient underground cities discovered in Turkey, discuss the growing reach of Flock cameras, unpack the latest developments surrounding OpenAI, and dive into even more strange stories from around the world. If you love ancient mysteries, conspiracies, unexplained phenomena, history, archaeology, UFOs, and the weirdest stories the internet has to offer, you're in the right place. Like, subscribe, and leave a comment telling us which topic you want us to dive deeper into next! Get MORE Exclusive Ninjas Are Butterflies Content by joining our Patreon:  https://www.patreon.com/NinjasAreButterflies NEW EPISODES EVERY FRIDAY @ 11:15AM EST! Ninja Merch: https://www.sundaycoolswag.com/ Start Your Custom Apparel Order Here: https://bit.ly/NinjasYT-SundayCool Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Plus: Anthropic says software it was testing got onto the internet and hacked three unsuspecting companies. And Tesla weighs the sale of its China business to pave the way for a potential merger with SpaceX. Luke Vargas hosts. Sign up for WSJ's free What's News newsletter. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Jul 30, 2026 – When an OpenAI frontier model broke out of its sandbox and hacked Hugging Face on its own, it forced a hard question: how do we govern AI that's both ubiquitous and powerful? Policy powerhouse Bruce Mehlman unpacks...

Could an AI agent decide to hack a system, or cancel your software subscription just to complete its task? Blake and David examine reports of AI agents escaping guardrails, flooding IRS rulemaking with generated comments, and taking autonomous business actions. They also trace accounting from ancient clay tokens to today's AI economy, exploring why calculating profit and trustworthy records matter more than ever.SponsorsCloud Accountant Staffing - http://accountingpodcast.promo/casThe Value Builder System - http://accountingpodcast.promo/valueOnPay - http://accountingpodcast.promo/onpayVeltrix - http://accountingpodcast.promo/veltrixChapters(00:00) - Profit First Accounting (00:33) - Dumb Accounting AI (02:40) - AI Guest Pitch Email (07:21) - When Agents Go Rogue (09:38) - OpenAI Agent Hacks Out (11:57) - Waymo Laws And Goals (16:33) - IRS Chief Spy Claims (19:28) - AI Floods IRS Comments (23:30) - SaaStr AI Cancels SaaS (28:09) - Ode To Accounting Site (29:54) - Accounting Births Writing (31:24) - Double Entry Changes Everything (32:09) - Industrial Era Standards (33:29) - Internet Cloud And AI (34:19) - Hosts React Tokens Return (36:49) - Profit Cost Accounting And AI (39:33) - Round Tripping Explained (44:00) - IRS EIN Breakdown (46:19) - Trump Accounts Adoption (48:20) - Tax Leak Sentencing Debate (50:23) - KPMG Australia Shakeup (52:09) - QuickBooks MCP Workflows (55:52) - Intuit Card Versus Ramp (57:35) - Ramp Stablecoin And Token Spend (01:00:39) - Wrap Up And Where To Find Us  Show NotesOpenAI and Hugging Face partner to address security incident during model evaluationhttps://openai.com/index/hugging-face-model-evaluation-security-incident/Trump's IRS Chief Frank Bisignano Accused of Using Hi-Tech Software to Spy on Colleagues' Emails at JPMorganhttps://www.thedailybeast.com/trumps-irs-chief-frank-bisignano-accused-of-using-hi-tech-software-to-spy-on-colleagues-emails-at-jpmorgan/IRS blitzed with AI-generated comments on proposed tax ruleshttps://www.accountingtoday.com/news/irs-blitzed-with-ai-generated-comments-on-proposed-tax-rulesYour Agents Are About to Start Firing Your Vendors. Ours Fired Marketo.https://www.saastr.com/your-agents-are-about-to-start-firing-your-vendors-ours-fired-marketo/Basis offers AI agents, love letters and an ode to accountinghttps://www.accountingtoday.com/news/basis-offers-ai-agents-love-letters-and-an-ode-to-accounting7 Million Trump Accounts Have Been Opened, Administration Sayshttps://www.cpapracticeadvisor.com/2026/07/29/7-million-trump-accounts-have-been-opened-administration-says/187586/DC Circuit Denies Littlejohn Appeal and the Need for Privacy Protections Remainshttps://www.ntu.org/foundation/detail/dc-circuit-denies-littlejohn-appeal-and-the-need-for-privacy-protections-remainsKPMG Australia appoints new CEOhttps://www.internationalaccountingbulletin.com/news/kpmg-australia-appoints-new-ceo/KPMG Fires Former COO Eileen Hoggett Over Confidentiality Breachhttps://news.ssbcrack.com/kpmg-fires-former-coo-eileen-hoggett-over-confidentiality-breach/QuickBooks Expands Into Claude and ChatGPT with New Featureshttps://www.intuit.com/blog/news-social/quickbooks-expands-into-claude-and-chatgpt-with-new-sales-invoicing-payroll-and-lending-features/Intuit Launches Business Credit Card That Brings Spend Management, Rewards, and Insights Together in QuickBookshttps://investors.intuit.com/news-events/press-releases/detail/1316/intuit-launches-business-credit-card-that-brings-spend-management-rewards-and-insights-together-in-quickbooksRamp Brings Stablecoin Accounts and Payments to All Customershttps://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/ramp-brings-stablecoin-accounts-and-payments-to-all-customers-302830447.htmlRamp Launches AI Token Spend Controlshttps://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/ramp-launches-ai-token-spend-controls-302827389.htmlNeed CPE?Get CPE for listening to podcasts with Earmark: https://earmarkcpe.comSubscribe to the Earmark Podcast: https://podcast.earmarkcpe.comGet in TouchThanks for listening and the great reviews! We appreciate you! Follow and tweet @BlakeTOliver and @DavidLeary. Find us on Facebook and Instagram. If you like what you hear, please do us a favor and write a review on Apple Podcasts or Podchaser. Call us and leave a voicemail; maybe we'll play it on the show. DIAL (202) 695-1040.SponsorshipsAre you interested in sponsoring The Accounting Podcast? For details, read the prospectus.Need Accounting Conference Info? Check out our new website - accountingconferences.comLimited edition shirts, stickers, and other necessities

Story of the Week (DR):Cracker Barrel CEO is out after MAGA backlash to "Uncle Herschel" logo change MMBefore Julie Masino was brought in, Cracker Barrel was facing a slow-moving existential crisis:Their primary core customer base (older generations and rural highway travelers) was naturally shrinking, and younger diners were simply not replacing them.Kitchen tech, supply chains, and digital ordering lag behind competitors like Texas Roadhouse or Olive Garden.Some great fake populism from Fox: Cracker Barrel to pay for outgoing CEO's security, $4.6M severance after failed rebrandCracker Barrel names David Deno CEOBurger KingYum! Brands and Pizza Hut for 15 years, including serving as CFO and COO.Quiznos CEO.Best Buy: Served as President of Asia and CFO for Best Buy's International DivisionBloomin' Brands for 12 years: CEO, CFO and Chief Administrative OfficerOutback Steakhouse, Carrabba's Italian Grill, and Bonefish GrillBoard MembershipsCracker Barrel Old Country Store (2016-)Panera Brands (2024-): Audit Committee ChairKrispy Kreme (2016-)Bloomin' Brands (2019–2024)Peet's Coffee (2006-2012)Macalester College: Former Chair of the Board of Trustees (1998-2022).From Cracker Barrel to Boeing, Companies Are Turning to Retired CEOsThese retired CEOs are being hired to be "fixers." They are brought in to cut costs, repair supply chains, restore investor confidence, and act as a stabilizing force rather than reinventing the brand.Exxon and Chevron profits surge on rising oil prices due to Iran warChevron posted its highest profit in six years as the Iran war boosted oil pricesBig Oil Is Getting Sued for Heat Deaths. It's Fighting Back With an Army of Immunity LawsMore than a decade after investigations found that Exxon Mobil had known about the dangers of global warming since the 1970s but publicly downplayed the threat, lawsuits against oil companies have proliferated. There are nearly 40 of these cases pending across the countryIn the meantime, the industry has been mobilizing a counterattack against the lawsuits with the help of the Trump administration and Republican politicians.Republicans are trying to pass laws to grant oil majors immunity to these kinds of lawsuits, with success in several states so far.Utah, Iowa, Tennessee, Oklahoma, and Louisiana have recently signed laws shielding fossil fuel companies from lawsuits related to greenhouse gas emissionsOil executives have also gotten help from the federal government, following an executive order from President Donald Trump last year directing the attorney general to prioritize blocking climate lawsuits by states.This May, the Justice Department responded to Minnesota's climate lawsuit against Big Oil with a lawsuit of its own, just as the state's case was moving into the discovery phase. It said Minnesota was undermining “American energy dominance” and attempting to regulate greenhouse gases, which should fall under the purview of federal law—echoing the oil industry's well-known argument.Elon Musk Is Quietly Turning to This Fossil Fuel to Power His AI AmbitionsSam Altman Announces That the Singularity Has Arrived: a hypothetical future point in time when technological growth becomes autonomous, uncontrollable, and irreversible, fundamentally transforming human civilization“We are now, like, in the singularity ... Now we're actually in the moment that we used to talk about at the lunch table in a very not-serious way ...I've been waiting for this my whole life, and I think it's going to be incredible, hugely positive, awesome for the world.”Sam Altman says one of his biggest fears is that a small number of companies will control AI: 'That'd be very, very bad'Sam Altman says the Hugging Face hack is a reminder that an AI power monopoly could lead to 'long-term disaster'OpenAI says its rogue AI tried to hack other companiesMark Zuckerberg is urging the U.S. to accelerate AI development, not restrict it'No Way to Stop It': Elon Musk Warns Humans Will Lose Control of AI and Face Extinction by 2036Microsoft CEO Warns That Companies Embracing AI Could Drive Themselves Out of BusinessAI hackers are getting faster. The government may not be readyAnthropic says its Claude models 'gained unauthorized access' to other organizations' systemsAnthropic says its models went rogue and hacked 3 companies during testing'It Will Happen Frequently': Musk Warns of Rogue AI Threat After Anthropic Breached Three FirmsElon Musk Commits Up to $120M to Republican Midterms: Sets Feud With Trump Aside for Major Election PushGoodliest of the Week (MM/DR):DR: Gen Z women are having an entrepreneurship boomOf all women who started businesses in 2025, 47% of Gen Z women did so, compared with 38% the previous year. Gen Xers followed close behind at 46%. Then came millennials at 43% and baby boomers at just 23%.Overall, in 2025, 69% of new Black-owned businesses were started by women. The survey also found that women business owners are less likely than their male counterparts to depend on AIMM: Delaware judge rules public benefit corporations exempt from maximizing value in sale DRFiduciary duty is different - OpenAI, AnthropicAssholiest of the Week (MM):Fake man apologies MM‘I'm sorry ... but': Apologetic Alan Joyce tells his side of the Qantas storyJoyce has expressed some regret“So with the information we had at the time, I still don't think there was any other decision you could make,”“Hindsight is a great thing.”“I'm actually very, very proud of the fact that I'm not sitting here and apologising for Qantas going bankrupt, [something] that many airlines around the world did,”Australian Competition and Consumer Commission fined Qantas $120 million for selling tickets for 8000 already cancelled flights“I apologise for the angst that was generated [for] the customers on it, but the reality was we had 22 million bookings in the system [and] the system wasn't designed to do an automatic refund,”“Stop us!”More than 1,200 AI workers across Anthropic, DeepMind, OpenAI, and Meta are asking for Washington's help building an AI slowdown plan‘No Way to Stop It': Elon Musk Warns Humans Will Lose Control of AI and Face Extinction by 2036Elon Musk's new 5-year warning to Americans: AI will beat human brains by 2032 (then go wild). Get rich or get crushed?Sam Altman says the Hugging Face hack is a reminder that an AI power monopoly could lead to 'long-term disaster'It Will Happen Frequently': Musk Warns of Rogue AI Threat After Anthropic Breached Three FirmsBut also, DON'T stop us, obviously…Palantir CEO warns US against Europe's AI regulation path, urges Trump admin to not ban open modelsElon Musk's xAI sues Minnesota over law to ban 'nudify' appsMark Zuckerberg is urging the U.S. to accelerate AI development, not restrict itElon Musk Commits Up to $120M to Republican Midterms: Sets Feud With Trump Aside for Major Election PushIgnoring boardsHims & Hers mission:“Hims & Hers is the leading health and wellness platform on a mission to help the world feel great through the power of better health. We believe how you feel in your body and mind transforms how you show up in life. That's why we're building a future where nothing stands in the way of harnessing this power. Hims & Hers normalizes health & wellness challenges—and innovates on their solutions—to make feeling happy and healthy easy to achieve. No two people are the same, so the Company provides access to personalized care designed for results.”Hims & Hers board:CEO: Andrew Dudum, tech VC bro investor “serial entrepreneur” with deep health experience from Bungalow (airBnB knockoff in the UK), Homebound (a “homebuilding platform”), TalkIQ (an AI startup, duh), and Terminal (something about scaling engineering?)TWO directors from DoorDash (Kofi Amoo-Gottfried from Marketing, previously of Facebook, and Christopher Payne the COO, previously of eBay, MSFT, and Amazon)TWO pharma execs (one lawyer, Deb Autor, one with an econ degree, Kare Schultz)One guy from Netflix (David Wells) and one lady from Urban Outfitters (marketing/brand, Andrea Perez) and one pure law firm lawyer (Anja Manuel)ONE DOCTOR EXCLUSIVE: US FTC sues Hims & Hers for sending user health info to Meta, SnapUsers' sensitive health information was shared with online advertising companies including Meta ​Platforms and Snap despite the company leading customers to believe their ​data was private, the FTC alleged in the lawsuit filed along with Los ⁠Angeles County and Utah.Hims & Hers also started charging users for prescriptions before ​they have ⁠had a chance to meet with healthcare providers, the FTC alleged. Most customers do not receive a consultation with a provider, and instead are charged for ⁠prescriptions ​soon after filling out an intake form, ​according to the agency.Headliniest of the WeekDR: CEO apologizes for offering interviews to people who got tattoos of his AI company logoSan Francisco tech CEO Jordan Zietz, co-founder of an early stage AI startup called LemonLime. Stanford grad.“LemonLime learns your business and then automates your team's busywork in a single click, no coding or manual setup required.”Former Qantas CEO reflects on tenure, issues apology to passengers over post COVID chaos AND ‘I'm sorry ... but': Apologetic Alan Joyce tells his side of the Qantas storyMM: Amazon received $600 million in tariff refunds and will pass some back to customersMM: Trump Staff Cuts Blamed After Watermarked OpenAI Map Mislabels Africa at AIDS ConferenceIt's the fact that we have less staff that meant we couldn't bother to figure out which country was whichWho Won the Week?DR: Kohls: For getting some much-needed female influence on board: Kohl's Appoints Wendy Arlin as Chair of the BoardCurrently only 2: Robbin Mitchell (7%) and Wendy Arlin (1%)John Schlifske (27%) stepping downMM: The phrase “not due to any disagreement with the Company”Anne Sweeney Resigns From Netflix BoardOn July 26, 2026, Anne Sweeney notified Netflix, Inc. (the “Company”) that she was resigning from the Board of Directors of the Company effective as of that date. Ms. Sweeney's resignation is not due to any disagreement with the Company1,660 8-Ks in the last 5 years have the exact phrase “not due to any disagreement with the Company”So we're saying that 1,660 c-suite and board members resigned in 5 years - more than 300 per year - and NONE were due to a disagreement with the companies? That's only THAT phrase - no other details are given for most of them except occasionally:To pursue another jobPersonal reasonsFor scale, in the last 5 years, the term “was due to a disagreement with the Company” appears… 5 timesPredictionsDR: Qantas CEO Vanessa Hudson apologizes that it took former CEO Alan Joyce to apologize for something she already apologized for despite not being CEO when any of it happenedMM: Damion resigns from Free Float due to a disagreement with the zero dollars he gets paid, but Free Float puts out a statement saying it's “not due to any salary reason related to the company”

La propia industria de las inteligencias artificiales enciende las alarmasEn este contexto de vaciamiento que el humano promedio detecta rápidamente con una sensación de angustia y desinterés, esta semana ese apocalipsis de scroll infinito, de cursos de desintoxicación de redes, de ya no importa que es falso y que verdadero: un grupo de empleados de empresas tecnológicas encendió las alarmas sobre las alarmas. Empleados de Open AI, de Google, de Antrophic y algunas más, firmaron la solicitud Stop the A.I. RaceECDQEMSD noticias, humor e historias verdaderasEpisodio 6360 I.A. Inminente Apocalipsis - los peligros del progreso a cualquier precioConducen: El Pirata y El Sr. Lagartija https://canaltrans.comNoticias del Mundo: Inteligencia Artificial y las alarmas - Escándalo en la FIFA - UEFA parte con Infantino - Concacaf se suma - La frontera desbordada - Ceuta y los marroquíes - Tercer Verano Jarocho y La Soberana - Pronóstico del TiempoHistorias Desintegradas: Los vecinos de siempre - Los muchachos de la esquina - Las calles de mi barrio - Cocinarle al animal - Croquetas vs comida natural - Enviado por los perros - La banda del buffet - Lugar de encuentro - Pizza libre - Licor de hormigas - Aguacate, palta, avocado - Guardias forestalesEn Caso De Que El Mundo Se Desintegre - Podcast no tiene publicidad, sponsors ni organizaciones que aporten para mantenerlo al aire. Solo el sistema cooperativo de los que aportan a través de las suscripciones hacen posible que todo esto siga siendo una realidad. Gracias Dragones Dorados!!NO AI: ECDQEMSD Podcast no utiliza ninguna inteligencia artificial de manera directa para su realización. Diseño, guionado, música, edición y voces son de  nuestra completa intervención humana.

AI GOES ROGUE: BREAKOUTS & KILL SWITCHESOpenAI says Hugging Face breach caused by its models'Unprecedented': OpenAI says AI models autonomously hacked another companyAnthropic says three Claude models reached real-world systems during testingHouse AI 'kill switch' bill unveiled as OpenAI hack raises alarmsAI MEETS REAL LIFEAI advice made people three times less accurate but twice as confidentChatGPT's medical advice nearly killed a Florida man, lawsuit claimsLinkedIn introduces a 'Seems Like AI Slop' buttonOpenAI Ads: Advertise in ChatGPTPRIVACY & SECURITY WATCHPrivate Claude chats exposed in Google and Bing search resultsA whole bunch of people's Claude chats are publicly accessible onlineLG to ban residential proxies from smart TV appsGrapheneOS duress PIN could land a man in prisonA missing underscore sent an innocent man to prison for 18 monthsBIG TECH SHAKE-UPS & POLICYFirefox 153 brings native Containers to the browserJack Dorsey made an open-source Slack for humans and agentsFramework's premium laptop is shipping with less RAMStripe in talks to buy AI-model marketplace OpenRouterThe secret Trump administration battle to fight Chinese AIFrance joins a global move toward restricting social media for childrenROBOTS, DRONES & RECORD FLIGHTSThe US government just banned RoombasUnited Airlines bans humanoid and animal-like robots from all flightsLondon Gatwick introduces robotic parking serviceResearchers build a low-visibility drone that uses motion blurAirbus A350 flies 24 hours nonstop from Australia to FranceWEIRD AND WACKYWhite House teleprompter operator investigated over alleged Kalshi trades"Drawing" the Mona Lisa with GPT-5.6, Claude, Gemini, and GrokPolitician reads AI prompt during assemblyTech Rec:Sanjay - Decoy Font: A TTF font that hides what you type Adam - SupabaseFind us here:sanjayparekh.com & adamjwalker.comTech Talk Y'all is a proud production of Edgewise.Media.

(Presented by Thinkst Canary: Most Companies find out way too late that they've been breached. Thinkst Canary changes this. Deploy Canaries and Canarytokens in minutes and then forget about them. Attackers tip their hand by touching 'em giving you the one alert, when it matters. With zero admin overhead and almost no false-positives, Canaries are deployed (and loved) on all 7 continents.) Three Buddy Problem - Episode 107: Proofpoint's Greg Lesnewich joins the show to break down Laundry Bear, the "half-click" webmail exploits that let a Russian GRU cluster hack inboxes the moment an email was opened, and what it took to publish alongside the NSA, FBI and sixteen allied agencies. Plus, Anthropic and OpenAI both admit their models escaped test sandboxes and popped real companies, why JAGS wants the CFAA burned down and vulnerable devices bricked, and a heartfelt detour into how threat hunters actually build intuition and skills. Cast: Greg Lesnewich, Juan Andres Guerrero-Saade, Ryan Naraine and Costin Raiu. Timestamps: 0:00 Sponsor - Thinkst Canary 1:34 Greg Lesnewich introduces the Proofpoint threat-hunting team 5:23 Inside the NSA ‘Laundry Bear' advisory 7:15 What does "half-click" mean? 9:58 Laundry Bear's Zimbra exploit: DNS exfil and app-specific password persistence 12:59 Ferrari model numbers, F1 UNC names, and ESET's Operation RoundPress 17:05 Targeting Ukraine, US universities, and magnetic fusion research 19:34 How threat hunters actually build intuition 32:35 Systems thinking, Donella Meadows, and Costin's laptop under the dinner table 54:48 The dopamine hit of a real find and the deleted "never mind" messages 1:00:42 Magnets of threats: under 1% of customers ever see an APT 1:25:21 Getting detections into the product, and coordinating a release with NSA 1:53:22 Anthropic and OpenAI models breaking out of the eval sandbox 2:17:45 The case for killing the CFAA and bricking vulnerable devices 2:43:44 AI in the lab, malware paleontology, Google's new names, and AngrySpark

I am Rolf Claessen and my co-host Ken Suzan and I are welcoming you to episode 177 of our podcast IP Fridays! Today's interview guest is Dr. Ernst-Peter Heilein, who is a German and European patent attorney, the founder of HEILEIN IP LAW, and a long-time IP leader at BSH Home Appliances. He is the mastermind behind the BSH v. Electrolux decision of the European Court of Justice about long-arm jurisdiction in Europe that has the whole patent world stirring in Europe at the moment! But before we jump into this fascinating interview, I have news for you! Emboline v. AorticLab (UPC Court of Appeal) The UPC Court of Appeal has clarified for the first time how a conditional revocation counterclaim should be handled, in a dispute over Emboline’s embolic protection patent EP 2 129 425 against AorticLab. A defendant can validly make its revocation counterclaim conditional on infringement being found first, meaning no ruling on the counterclaim is needed if the infringement claim fails, as the Munich Local Division had held. The Court of Appeal also closed a related gap: if the claimant appeals a non-infringement finding, the counterclaimant may conditionally appeal the unresolved counterclaim too. AorticLab missed its own appeal deadline and can now at best seek re-establishment of rights, while Emboline has already appealed the non-infringement finding. FujiFilm v. Kodak (UPC Court of Appeal) Following the closely watched long-arm jurisdiction ruling of June 2, the UPC Court of Appeal, chaired by Rian Kalden, has now granted FujiFilm an injunction against Kodak in a second proceeding. The Court upheld the limited printing plate patent and found that Kodak’s Sonora XTRA 3 plate infringes it. Kodak can no longer sell or use that plate in Germany. OpenAI v. EUIPO (General Court of the EU, T-555/25) The General Court’s Eighth Chamber dismissed OpenAI’s action against the EUIPO decision to partially cancel the OPENAI trademark. The partial refusal for classes 9, 42, and 45 rests decisively on Article 7(1)(c) EUTMR, the descriptiveness ground. For a significant part of the English-speaking public, “OPENAI” directly conveys that the goods or services are provided using freely accessible artificial intelligence. Dental Monitoring v. Align Technology (CAFC) On July 7, 2026, the Federal Circuit confirmed that AI and deep-learning patent claims covering dental image analysis are not patent-eligible under Section 101. Simply training a “deep learning device” on a specific dataset does not amount to a patent-eligible technical solution. Publisher v. Google (Munich I Regional Court) The Munich I Regional Court issued a preliminary injunction barring Google from spreading false factual claims about a publishing company in its AI Overviews. A search query combining the company’s name with the German term for “fraud scheme” had triggered an AI-generated summary containing entirely fabricated accusations of subscription traps. KPN v. Oppo (Federal Court of Justice, X ZR 103/24) On July 1, the Federal Court of Justice dismissed KPN’s appeal against the revocation of a central claim of its LTE patent EP 2 291 033. Oppo had successfully challenged the claim, leaving KPN’s infringement action against Oppo’s German distribution entity without a legal basis for now. BSH v. Electrolux: What the ECJ Ruling Means for Your Company’s Patent Enforcement Strategy A vacuum cleaner from 2001 has reshaped the European patent landscape. That sounds like an overstatement. It isn’t. For IP Fridays, I spoke with Dr. Ernst-Peter Heilein, founder of HEILEIN IP LAW and long-time Senior IP Leader at BSH Home Appliances. He guided the case BSH v. Electrolux from its first strategic idea all the way to the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Justice, a case that earned the 2025 Managing IP Award as “Europe Impact Case of the Year.” For managing directors, IP heads, and R&D leaders at German Mittelstand companies, this case is not a legal footnote. It changes where you can enforce your patents, and it changes where you yourself can be sued if your company operates across several European markets. That is what this article is about. Background: How a Patent Dispute Became an ECJ Case The invention dates back to 2001 and concerns a new vacuum cleaner technology. In 2006, BSH identified what it believed was an unauthorized use of that invention and contacted Electrolux to clarify the situation. The European patent was granted in 2009 and validated in a number of European countries. Nobody, Heilein says, could have imagined at the time that this matter would eventually reach the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Justice almost twenty years later. In late 2018, BSH successfully defended the patent through opposition and appeal proceedings before the European Patent Office. In 2019, the Higher Regional Court of Düsseldorf found that certain Electrolux vacuum cleaner models infringed the patent. A classic milestone win, the kind that occurs regularly in patent practice. Except the patent had been validated in many countries. Winning in Germany did not solve the enforcement problem everywhere else. Heilein describes the starting point in very concrete terms: how do you enforce a patent that exists in many countries without filing a separate lawsuit in every single one? And how do you prevent claims from becoming time-barred while you work that out? Running parallel proceedings in multiple countries is not just legally complex. It consumes time, personnel, and money that a mid-sized company rarely has in that quantity to spare. This is exactly where the real value of this case for you begins. From the outset, this was never an academic debate about jurisdiction. It was a question that every company holding rights in more than one country eventually faces: how do you enforce your rights efficiently without burning your budget on ten parallel proceedings? Brussels Ia Regulation: The Underrated Article 4 While searching for a solution, the BSH team came across Article 4 of the Brussels Ia Regulation. The underlying idea is simple: a person can generally be sued in the country where that person is based. In the BSH case, that pointed toward the Swedish home court, because Electrolux is headquartered in Stockholm. For a long time, this rule played no real role in patent practice. The widely held view was that cross-border patent litigation in Europe was effectively dead the moment a defendant challenged the validity of the patent. Anyone wanting to enforce a patent across several countries appeared to have no choice but to litigate country by country. Heilein and his team questioned that assumption instead of simply accepting it. This is the point I find most instructive: challenging accepted assumptions in your own field is often the difference between a standard solution and a strategic one. In 2020, the team decided to file the action in Sweden, aware that they were looking at a possibility, not a guarantee. Cross-Border Enforcement: The Three Questions Referred to Luxembourg After Electrolux challenged the validity of the patents, the Swedish home court declared itself not competent to hear the case. BSH appealed, and the Swedish Court of Appeal agreed to refer three questions to the European Court of Justice. The first question addressed the core problem: does a home court that would otherwise have jurisdiction over an infringement claim lose that jurisdiction simply because the defendant argues the patent is invalid? The second question concerned a feature common to many legal systems, including Germany’s, where infringement and validity are decided in separate proceedings. The third question originally concerned Turkey. Today, most people immediately think of the United Kingdom, and some even think of US patents. Originally, the question was simpler: do the same jurisdiction rules apply to patents from countries outside the European Union? The fact that the ECJ first assigned the case to a Chamber of seven judges and later referred it to the Grand Chamber of 15 judges already signaled how much weight the Court placed on these questions. The Judgment: What the ECJ Actually Decided A home court does not automatically lose jurisdiction simply because the defendant argues the patent is invalid. For many years, the opposite was widely assumed to be settled law. The ECJ made clear that this reading was too narrow. The court where the defendant is based can generally continue to hear the infringement case. One point matters for how you read this ruling: questions concerning the validity of a European patent still fall to the national courts of the country for which the patent was granted, as provided in Article 24(4) of the Brussels Ia Regulation. What is new is that the infringement case does not automatically collapse the moment validity is challenged. The home court keeps control of the overall proceeding. For patents from EU Member States, the home court does not automatically lose jurisdiction. It assesses the validity challenge. If it looks strong, the home court may stay the infringement case. If it looks weak, the home court may proceed. For patents from non-EU countries, the home court may stay the case if a validity proceeding is already pending there, drawing on Articles 33 and 34 of the Brussels Ia Regulation. The result is a considerably more flexible system than most observers expected . Patents from Outside the EU: Long-Arm Jurisdiction The part of the judgment with the greatest international reach concerns patents from countries outside the EU. The ECJ ruled that the special jurisdiction rule for patent validity generally does not apply to non-European patents. That means the general rule can apply instead, opening the door for infringement claims based on non-European patents to be brought before a home court where the defendant is based in the EU. Commentators quickly started calling this “long-arm jurisdiction.” One clarification matters here, because it tends to get lost in the public discussion: the ECJ did not say that a European home court can revoke or invalidate a foreign patent. That remains a matter for the authorities and courts of the country that granted it. What the ECJ said is that a European home court may assess the claims between the parties. That distinction is essential to how you should read this ruling. Consequences in Practice: Fujifilm, Regeneron, and Onesta Three recent cases show how quickly practice is already adapting to the new possibilities. Fujifilm v. Kodak: the Düsseldorf Local Division of the Unified Patent Court accepted jurisdiction over the UK part of a European patent even before the ECJ delivered its judgment, building on reasoning the Advocate General had already signaled in the BSH case. In June 2026, the UPC Court of Appeal further developed that approach based on the principles confirmed in BSH. Regeneron v. Formycon: the Munich home court applied the BSH framework and granted a Europe-wide injunction based on a European patent, one of the first examples of a national home court putting the BSH logic into practice. Onesta v. BMW: this case shows the debate has moved well beyond Europe. After Onesta attempted to assert two US patents before the Munich home court, BMW obtained an anti-suit injunction from a Texas federal court. Judge Albright took the view that US patents should generally be decided by US courts. The injunction was directed against Onesta, not against the Munich court, and Onesta has appealed the Texas decision. The Munich home court stayed the proceeding but did not reject its own jurisdiction. Whether a European home court can ultimately decide infringement claims based on US patents remains an open question, one that has turned from a European jurisdiction issue into an international jurisdiction conflict. What This Means for Your Company Heilein sums up twenty years of litigation in three lessons, and I share this assessment without reservation when advising my Mittelstand clients. First: patent enforcement has become more international. National litigation still matters, but companies should think across borders from the very beginning, not only once the first cease-and-desist letter has been sent. Second: choice of forum now carries real strategic weight. Where you bring a case can matter just as much as the legal arguments themselves. Third: long-term commitment pays off. Major developments rarely result from a single filing or a single hearing. They come from pursuing a clear strategy consistently over many years. For you as a managing director, R&D lead, or Head of IP at an innovative Mittelstand company, this translates into two concrete points. First, if you hold rights in several European countries and a competitor infringes them, you no longer necessarily have to fund five or six parallel national proceedings. A single action at the infringer’s home base can be the economically smarter option. Second, and this side of the ruling gets less attention in public discussion, if your company is based in Germany and operates across several countries, you can now be sued at your own home base over patent infringement claims tied to activities in other countries. That risk belongs in every freedom-to-operate analysis and in every assessment tied to acquisitions or market entry. Here is the full transcript of the interview: Host Today's interview guest is Dr. Ernst-Peter Heilein. If you don't know Ernst-Peter, he is a German and European patent attorney, the founder of HEILEIN IP LAW, and a long-time IP leader at BSH Home Appliances. Thank you for being on IP Fridays. Answer Yeah, great to be here! BLOCK 1 – THE PERSON BEHIND THE CASE Host When looking at your career, one thing stands out: you never really followed the traditional path of either private practice or industry. Er, how did your professional journey begin, actually? Answer My professional roots are actually in private practice. After qualifying as a Patent Attorney, I worked in private practice and fairly early founded my own law firm, which later became HEILEIN IP LAW. Host So you never completely left private practice behind? Answer Exactly. In 2005, I had the opportunity to take on additional responsibilities on the BSH side. There, I was able to build and lead a new unit within the IP organization. The team was responsible for patents in the small appliances business, as well as global design and trademark protection. At the same time, I helped build an international network of internal and external IP counsel and coordinated their work. Host That still sounds fairly like traditional IP work. When did international disputes become part of your career? Answer Over time, my focus gradually shifted from traditional IP protection to strategic enforcement. That included anti-counterfeiting activities, global trademark and design matters, and cross-border patent disputes. Host So your work became more about enforcing rights rather than simply obtaining and managing them, right? Answer Exactly. And that development eventually led me to play a strategic role in the case BSH Home Appliances versus Electrolux, a case that still accompanies me today. Host Looking back now — from private practice, to building an international IP organization, and eventually becoming involved in a case before the European Court of Justice — did you ever imagine that path? Answer No, not at all. Looking back, this combination of private practice, responsibilities on the business side, and international enforcement experience turned out to be very useful when our case eventually reached the European Court of Justice. BLOCK 2 – HOW IT ALL STARTED Host Yeah, talking about this case. The case BSH versus Electrolux started long before it reached the European Court of Justice. When did the story actually begin? Answer The story actually begins much earlier than most people would expect. The invention itself dates back to 2001 and concerns a new vacuum cleaner technology. In 2006, we identified what we believed to be an unauthorized use of the invention and contacted Electrolux to clarify the situation. The European patent in suit was granted in 2009 and validated in a number of European countries. At the time, nobody could have imagined that this would eventually lead to a decision of the European Court of Justice almost twenty years later. Host Wow, 20 years! That's a long time. So, at first this was simply a normal patent dispute? Answer Yes, absolutely! After many years of opposition and appeal proceedings before the European Patent Office, we were finally able to defend the patent successfully in late 2018. Less than one year later, in the summer of 2019, the Higher Regional Court of Düsseldorf found that certain Electrolux vacuum cleaner models infringed the patent. Host Er, at that point, one might think, that the patent owner had achieved its goal, right? Answer That is what many people would think. But that judgment did not bring the dispute to an end. A new challenge emerged. The patent had been validated in many European countries. Winning in one country, like Germany, did not automatically solve the enforcement issue in all the other countries. Host What was the practical problem then? Answer We were facing a very simple question: How do we enforce a patent that exists in many countries? And how do we prevent claims from becoming time-barred without filing separate infringement actions in every single country? Doing that would not only be legally complex. It would also require a huge amount of time, effort, and money. Host That sounds less like a major legal question and more like a business problem. Answer Exactly. At the beginning, this was not an academic discussion about jurisdiction. It was a very practical business question. How can we enforce our rights efficiently without running parallel lawsuits all over Europe? That was the real challenge we were trying to solve. BLOCK 3 – THE IDEA OF A CENTRAL ACTION Host So, how did the idea of one central action emerge? Answer While looking for possible solutions, we came across Article 4 of the Brussels Ia Regulation. The idea behind that rule is very simple. In general, a person can be sued in the country where that person is based. In our case, that pointed us toward the Swedish home court because Electrolux is based in Stockholm. Host That sounds like a fairly ordinary jurisdiction rule. Answer Yes. And that was exactly what made it interesting. Article 4 is the general rule. The question was whether that rule could also be used for patent infringement claims covering several countries. Host Was that a common approach at the time? Answer No. Quite the opposite. Many people believed that cross-border patent litigation in Europe was effectively dead. Host That sounds rather dramatic. Why did people think that? Answer Because there was a widely held view that a central patent case could be stopped as soon as the defendant challenged the validity of the patent. As a result, many companies assumed they had no real choice but to litigate country by country. Host Yet you decided to look at the issue differently. Answer Yes. Sometimes it is worth taking a fresh look at accepted assumptions. We felt that Article 4 might play a much more important role than many people believed. Host So at that point, you already saw an opportunity, right? Answer Yes, we saw a possibility! Not a guarantee. But we believed there was a strong legal basis for bringing all claims before the Swedish home court. Host And that eventually led to the lawsuit being filed in Sweden, right? Answer Exactly. In 2020, we decided to file the action in Sweden. That followed our success before the European Patent Office in late 2018 and in the Düsseldorf infringement proceedings in 2019. At that stage, our objective was very practical. We were simply trying to find an efficient way to enforce rights that exist in many countries. Host At that point, you already think the case might end up before the European Court of Justice? Answer No. Not at all. We were focused on solving a business problem. The idea that the case would eventually reach the European Court of Justice came much later. BLOCK 4 – THE OBSTACLE: GAT v. LuK Host You mentioned that, er, many people believed cross-border patent litigation in Europe was no longer a realistic option. Why was that? Answer The main reason was an earlier decision of the European Court of Justice known as GAT versus LuK, decided in 2006. For many years, that decision was understood to mean that a home court could lose its ability to hear a patent infringement case as soon as the defendant challenged the validity of the patent. In practice, that understanding made many cross-border patent cases extremely difficult. As a result, many people believed that cross-border patent litigation was not effective. Host And yet you decided to follow exactly that path, right? Answer Yes. Sometimes it is worth questioning assumptions that have been accepted for many years. We believed that Article 4 of the Brussels Ia Regulation played a more important role than many people thought. That is why, in 2020, we decided to file the case in Sweden. Host And at that point, did you already realize that the case might eventually reach the European Court of Justice? Answer No. Not at all. Our goal was simply to find a practical solution to a real enforcement problem. The idea that this would eventually become a case before the European Court of Justice was far from our minds. BLOCK 5 – THE QUESTIONS REFERRED TO THE EUROPEAN COURT OF JUSTICE Host So, how did the case eventually reach the European Court of Justice then? Answer After we filed the lawsuit in Sweden in 2020, Electrolux challenged the validity of the patents. The Swedish home court then concluded that it could not hear the case and declared itself not competent to proceed. We appealed that decision, because the issues were important and affected far more than just our case. We suggested that several questions should be referred to the European Court of Justice. The Swedish Court of Appeal agreed and sent those questions to Luxembourg. Host So, what were these main questions? Answer At the heart of the case, there were three questions: First: if a home court has jurisdiction over a patent infringement case, does it lose that jurisdiction simply because the defendant argues that the patent is invalid? Second: Does it make a difference if the national legal system requires validity issues to be decided in a separate proceeding? And third: Do this jurisdiction rules also apply to patents from countries outside the European Union? Host The third question sounds particularly interesting. Answer Yes, at the time, the discussion in our case focused on Turkey. Today, many people immediately think about the United Kingdom, and some even think about US patents. But originally, the question was much simpler. We wanted to know, whether the same jurisdiction rules also apply when patents from non-European countries are involved. Host And, did you realize how important that third question might become? Answer No, certainly not to that extent. At the beginning, most of the discussion focused on the relationship between the different jurisdiction rules within Europe. Only later did it become clear that the European Court of Justice’s answers might have consequences far beyond the European Union. Host So, how did the European Court of Justice react then? Answer That was actually quite interesting. The European Court of Justice first heard the case before a Chamber of seven judges. Later, it referred the case to the Grand Chamber of 15 judges. That already showed that the European Court of Justice considered the issues to be important. And when the judgment finally came out, some of the answers were very different from what many observers had expected. BLOCK 6 – THE DECISION OF THE EUROPEAN COURT OF JUSTICE Host Let’s talk about the European Court of Justice’s answers. What was, in your view, the most important part of the decision? Answer The most important point was this: A home court does not automatically lose jurisdiction just because the defendant argues that the patent is invalid. For many years, many people believed exactly the opposite. The European Court of Justice made it clear that this understanding was too narrow. The home court where the defendant is based can generally continue to hear the infringement case. That is really the key message of the decision. Host Why is that so important? Answer Because it gives new momentum to cross-border patent enforcement in Europe. Before this decision, many people assumed that a defendant could effectively stop a central infringement case simply by challenging the validity of the patent. The European Court of Justice made clear that this is not automatically the case. Host Does that mean the home court hearing the infringement case will now also decide whether the patent is valid? Answer No, and that is a very important point. The European Court of Justice confirmed that questions about the validity of a European patent should still be decided by the national courts of the country for which the patent was granted, as provided for in Article 24(4) of the Brussels Ia Regulation. What is new, is that the infringement case does not automatically fall apart because of a validity challenge. The home court can keep control of the overall case. Host So, how does that work in practice? Answer The European Court of Justice gives the home court some flexibility. For patents from Member States of the European Union, the home court does not automatically lose its power if the defendant says the patent is invalid. The home court can look at the validity challenge. If it seems strong, the home court may stay the infringement case. If it seems weak, the home court may continue the infringement case. For patents from countries outside the European Union, the home court may also stay the case if there is already a validity case pending in that country. In such situations, Articles 33 and 34 of the Brussels Ia Regulation may apply. That creates a much more flexible system than many people expected. Host Er, we have discussed the implications for patents from Member States of the European Union, but a lot of attention has been given to another part of the decision, that we already talked about briefly, namely patents from countries outside the European Union. Answer Absolutely, and that may be the part of the judgment with the biggest international impact. Host Why? Answer Because the European Court of Justice decided that the special jurisdiction rule for patent validity does not generally apply to patents from non-European countries. In simple terms, that means the general rule can still apply. And that opens the possibility of bringing infringement cases based on non-European patents before the home court where the defendant is based in the European Union. Host That sounds like a very far-reaching statement. Answer It is. That is why many commentators started talking about what is often called “long-arm jurisdiction.” In other words, a European home court may, under certain circumstances, deal with infringement claims relating to patents from countries outside the European Union. Host So, many listeners may now wonder: Can a Swedish or a German home court really decide a dispute involving a British or Turkish patent? Answer Ah, we need to be careful here. The European Court of Justice did not say that a European home court can cancel or revoke a foreign patent. That remains a matter for the authorities and national courts of the country that granted the patent. What the European Court of Justice said is that a European home court may assess the claims between the parties in a dispute. That is an important distinction. Host Did you realize during the proceedings how important this part of the decision might become? Answer Not to this extent. We started with a very practical enforcement problem. Only later did it become clear that the European Court of Justice’s answers might have consequences far beyond the original case. Today, the decision is discussed not only in connection with Turkish patents, but also British patents and even possible claims involving US patents. Host If you had to summarize the decision in one sentence, and I know, this is a very difficult task, what would that sentence be? Answer The European Court of Justice did not re-invent cross-border patent enforcement in Europe. But after many years, it clearly gave it much more room to develop. BLOCK 7 – THE REACTION OF THE IP COMMUNITY Host So, how was the decision received after it was published? Answer Ah, the reaction was very strong. It quickly became clear that many people saw the decision as much more than just another patent case. Many articles and commentaries described it as an important development in European patent litigation. Host Did that surprise you? Answer To some extent, yes. Of course, we knew that the questions referred to the European Court of Justice were important. But I was surprised by how quickly the decision became a major topic of discussion across the European patent community. Host Er, you later presented the decision at several conferences yourself, right? Answer Yes. The discussion started right away. I had the opportunity to discuss and present the case at several conferences and events, including the annual VPP conference in Germany and the Ingolstadt Patent Symposium. I recently received an invitation to serve as a panel speaker on cross-border litigation at the AIPPI World Congress 2026 in Hamburg. What struck me most was that both internal and external IP counsel were trying to understand the practice consequences of the decision. Host So, what was the question you were asked most often? Answer Almost always the same one: How far does this decision really go? People wanted to know whether this was simply a correction of earlier case law or whether it marked the beginning of a new phase in cross-border patent enforcement. Host And what did you say? Answer I would describe it as: neither a revolution nor a minor adjustment. The European Court of Justice did not rewrite the system. But it clearly changed the balance between the different jurisdiction rules. That is why I believe the decision will continue to be discussed for many years, both in practice and in academia. Host Er, one year later, the case received the Managing IP Award as the “Europe Impact Case of the Year.” What did that recognition mean to you? Answer First of all, it was a great honor for everyone involved. But for me, the most important thing was the message behind the award. The award showed that the decision affects much more than the parties involved in the case. It has an impact on European patent practice as a whole. And it also shows that the underlying jurisdiction questions reach far beyond patent law. They are relevant whenever companies have to enforce rights across borders in an increasing international world. That is what makes this case special. Host You often describe this case as a team effort. Answer Absolutely. A case of this size is never the work of one person. Many people contributed over many years. On the BSH side, team members from different functions played an important role throughout the proceedings. And we worked closely with external advisors in several countries. So I see the award as recognition of a shared achievement rather than an individual success. Host Looking at the discussions today, would you say the debate is over? Answer Not at all. I actually think we are only at the beginning. There are still many practical questions that home courts will have to answer in the coming years. That is exactly why the decision remains so interesting. BLOCK 8 – WHAT DOES THE DECISION MEAN IN PRACTICE? Host Let’s move from legal theory to practical business implications. What does this decision mean for patent owners and companies? Answer In my view, the biggest change is strategic. Patent owners now have better opportunities to bring cross-border disputes together in one central proceeding. At the same time, companies need to be aware that they may face claims at their European headquarters covering activities in several countries. So the decision creates opportunities, but it also creates new risks. Host That sounds really like a significant shift; right? Answer I would call it a rebalancing rather than a revolution. The European Court of Justice did not create a completely new system. But it made clear that the general rule — suing a defendant where it is based — plays a much bigger role than many people had assumed. As a result, the court at the defendant’s home base becomes much more important strategically. Host In the patent community, people often talk about cases such as Fujifilm v. Kodak, or Regeneron v. Formycon or Onesta v. BMW. Why are those cases attracting so much attention now? Answer Because they show how quickly practice is already adapting to the new possibilities. Fujifilm was important because it was one of the first UPC cases to test the logic that was later confirmed in BSH. At that time, the BSH case was already pending before the European Court of Justice, and the Advocate General had expressed a view that pointed in that direction. Against that background, the Düsseldorf Local Division accepted jurisdiction over the UK part of a European patent even before the European Court of Justice delivered its judgment. In June 2026, based on the principles confirmed in BSH, the UPC Court of Appeal further developed that approach. Host And what happened in Regeneron v. Formycon ? Answer In the Regeneron case, the Munich home court applied the approach confirmed in BSH and granted a Europe-wide injunction based on a European patent. That was one of the first examples of a national home court using the BSH framework in practice. That demonstrates that the decision is not just an academic discussion. It already has practical consequences. Host And what about the Onesta case? Answer The Onesta case shows that the debate has moved beyond Europe. After Onesta attempted to assert two U.S. patents before the Munich home court, BMW obtained an anti-suit injunction from a Texas federal court. Judge Albright took the view that U.S. patents should generally be decided by U.S. courts. The Onesta case therefore illustrates that the limits of the BSH logic are now being tested internationally. Host Did that end the proceedings in Munich? Answer Not necessarily. What makes the case interesting is that the Texas injunction was directed against Onesta, not against the Munich home court. At the same time, Onesta appealed Judge Albright’s decision in the United States. The Munich home court therefore decided to stay the case for the time being. Importantly, however, the Munich home court did not reject its own jurisdiction. So, at least for the moment, the underlying question remains open. Host Can a European home court ultimately decide infringement claims based on U.S. patents? Answer That question has not yet been answered. But the case has already shown that such an attempt can trigger strong reactions outside Europe. In that sense, the debate has moved from a European jurisdiction question to an international jurisdiction conflict. Host For our audience of internal and external IP counsel, what are the main lessons from this decision? Answer For me, there are three key takeaways. First: Patent enforcement has become more international. National litigation remains important, but companies should think across borders from the very beginning. Second: The choice of forum is becoming more important. Where you bring a case may be just as important as the legal arguments themselves. And third: Long-term commitment matters. This case shows that major developments rarely happen because of a single filing or a single hearing. They usually result from pursuing a clear strategy consistently over many years. Host Do you think this decision will also influence the Unified Patent Court, the UPC? Answer Yes, I believe so. The decision fits into a broader trend toward more centralized patent litigation. Both, the UPC and the BSH decision are driven by the same idea: Handling cross-border disputes more efficiently and more consistently. What is interesting is that many of the questions were faced in BSH versus Electrolux are now reappearing in a new form before the UPC. Cases like Fujifilm versus Kodak show that the discussion about jurisdiction, scope, and cross-border effects is far from over. Institutions may be new. But the underlying challenge remains the same: How do we enforce patents effectively across borders? Host Some commentators even see this as a step toward a more independent European patent judiciary. Do you agree? Answer To some extent, yes. Professor Hanns Ullrich, who supervised my doctoral studies on the legal protection of a then new semiconductor technology many years ago, recently observed that the UPC is gradually developing its own European case law.[DH1] I think that is — again — a very accurate observation. If you look at the developments since BSH and the first UPC decisions, you can see that European patent litigation is becoming more connected. National courts will remain important. But at the same time, we are seeing a more integrated European patent system taking shape. How far that development will go remains to be seen. Host Looking back on the entire journey — from a vacuum cleaner patent, through litigation in several countries, all the way to the European Court of Justice and an award-winning decision — what is your personal conclusion? Answer My main conclusion is that innovation needs effective legal protection. But it also requires the willingness to challenge established assumptions and explore new approaches. For me, the BSH versus Electrolux case shows that persistence, teamwork, a willingness to challenge accepted assumptions, and a long-term strategic view can sometimes lead to developments that go far beyond the original dispute. BLOCK 9 – THE PERSON BEHIND THE DECISION Host Ernst-Peter, today we have talked a lot about jurisdiction, patent enforcement, and European case law. When you look back at this journey, which has lasted almost twenty years, what impressed you most? Answer Probably the realization that major developments rarely follow a straight line. When we started thinking about the case, we were dealing with a very practical problem. Nobody said: Let’s create a landmark decision of the European Court of Justice. We were simply looking for a reasonable and practical solution for a company. The fact that this would eventually lead to a decision with Europe-wide impact was something nobody could foresee at the time. Host Were there moments when you thought the case might fail? Answer Of course. Whenever a case lasts many years, there will be setbacks, new questions, and unexpected developments. That is exactly why persistence is so important. In the end, success is often not about one filing or one hearing. It is about staying focused on a clear objective over a long period of time. Host You often talk about teamwork. Is that one of the main lessons from this case? Answer Absolutely. A case of this size requires commitment from many people and institutes over many years. On the BSH side, my role was to help maintain the strategic direction and long-term commitment that such a case requires. At the same time, experts from different functions within BSH contributed technical expertise, testing, documentation, and practical support throughout the proceedings. On the legal side, Roman Sedlmaier and his team at IP-Counsels Gigerich & Sedlmaier (IPCGS) helped develop the cross-border litigation strategy and the overall case architecture. Our Swedish litigation team then carried the arguments through all stages of the proceedings. Looking back, it was the combination of institutional commitment, technical expertise, strategic leadership, well-designed case architecture, and consistent execution that made the difference. Host One final question. What advice would you give to young internal or external IP counsel? Answer Stay curious: Don’t be afraid to question accepted assumptions. Be patient: Intellectual property is usually a marathon, not a sprint. And never forget that every patent dispute involves an invention, a business, and many people who have worked hard to bring that innovation to market. For me, that connection between technology, law, and strategy is what still makes this profession so fascinating today. Host Ernst-Peter, thank you very much for joining us today on IP Fridays. Answer Thank you. It was a pleasure to be here.

Competing in a Future World of Infinite Intelligence Navigation: Intro From Knowledge Workers to Judgment Workers The AI-Native Company: Org, Hiring, Culture The Human Element: Are We Underestimating It? Scenarios Our Take Conclusion Our co-hosts: Bertrand Schmitt, Entrepreneur in Residence at Red River West, co-founder of App Annie / Data.ai, business angel, advisor to startups and VC funds, @bschmitt Nuno Goncalves Pedro, Investor, Managing Partner, Founder at Chamaeleon, @ngpedro Our show:   Tech DECIPHERED brings you the Entrepreneur and Investor views on Big Tech, VC and Start-up news, opinion pieces and research. We decipher their meaning, and add inside knowledge and context. Being nerds, we also discuss the latest gadgets and pop culture news Subscribe To Our Podcast Nuno Gonçalves Pedro Introduction Welcome to episode 79 of Tech DECIPHERED. Today, we take a leap into the big unknown. This is a thesis episode, not your classic analysis, in-depth sharing episode. The big idea for this episode is that we may be approaching the cognitive age, and how would one, or how would a company compete in a world of infinite intelligence? The big idea, again, is that intelligence, which has been mostly scarce and expensive for all of human history, might become abundant and cheap. If that happens, what happens to work, what happens to companies, what happens to society? This episode will be really framing a lot of these discussions. From knowledge workers to judgment workers, addressing the AI native company and how does that change, going into the human element and whether or not we’re underestimating it, and finally, ending up going into scenarios, feasible scenarios of a future where, well, intelligence is abundant. Intelligence is quasi-infinite or infinite itself.Bertrand Schmitt Yes. Big questions for this episode 79. From Knowledge Workers to Judgment Workers We can start with from knowledge workers to judgment workers. Let’s go back first to how came the knowledge worker. It’s a 20th-century invention from Peter Drucker in 1959. The idea here is that that category might be splitting. The production of knowledge itself is on its way to being commoditized by AI. However, our perspective is that judgment around production of knowledge is not disappearing and is staying for a bit control managed by humans. What’s your take on this, Nuno? Do you agree with this split?Nuno Gonçalves Pedro I think it’s a little bit more profound than that. It’s not just judgment. Definitely, human judgment will be needed. We’ve seen agents perform all sorts of funny things in the wrong way when left alone to their own devices. Even some very well-known AI researchers coming forward and saying, “Hey, I tried to use this myself, and actually I messed up some of my systems,” or “I messed some of my code. I messed up some of my flows for a period of time.” I think just having human-in-the-loop from a judgment standpoint will be needed for a significant amount of time. That is something you can’t just delegate into machines, into algorithms, et cetera. The second part is, ultimately, there needs to be contextualization, and that contextualization, I think, comes from two forms. One from actual data, where the machine, I think, at some point will catch up, or the machines will catch up. The algorithms, at some point, on the data analysis will get better and better and have probably the closest to the truth that you can get, minus all the biases that are in the data, just to be clear, because data has a ton of biases. We’ve looked at this in the past and discussed it at prior episodes. But maybe on that, I think the machine has a chance to catch up, or the machines have a chance to catch up, so there’s less of distinctiveness from the human standpoint. But then, on just the attributes, the ability when you’re judging some situation, you’re in the middle of the situation. You’re judging the person and how it’s acting, in some ways, a lot of the things that end up happening, end up happening because there’s human interaction. There’s someone on the other side. I see how they’re delivering the message, how they’re implicating. We’ll talk about it later in the context of the organization and what changes in companies. I don’t think it’s just judgment. I think there’s a little bit more than that. One of the reasons I went to the dark side of management early on in my career from being an engineer was Peter Drucker and this notion of the knowledge worker, which he later on reemphasized with the publishing of his book, which for me was seminal and defined a lot of my career in life, the post-capitalist society, which is this notion that information rich and information poor is going to be the key distinctiveness that will happen in the world. The two big camps, information rich, information poor, which links back to this invention of the term knowledge worker, that knowledge is going to be key in some ways. I think that’s what we’ve seen for the last decades. Again, I think judgment is not going anywhere, but I think it’s beyond judgment. There’s elements of humanity and involvement that won’t go away anytime soon, where human-in-the-loop are particularly critical. We’ll discuss later some scenarios, but for me, that’s my stick in the ground. I think human-in-the-loop is going to be critical for many decades to come.Bertrand Schmitt While we are talking about all of this, and we share some possible scenarios, there is always that question. This is moving so fast right now. If you think about AI 10 years ago, AI 5 years ago, AI with the launch of ChatGPT 3, and then AI the past 2 years, now we have agents that are running at scale. Things are moving very fast. I can tell you, me in 6 months, the change has been pretty dramatic in terms of what I can use AI for. There is always that question that whatever we are thinking about cannot just be connected to what we were able to do 6 months ago or even today, we have to think and project ourselves at least in the next 6–12 months. Of course, we can go beyond that, and we will do that with some future scenarios, but it’s a very fast-moving, and it’s not clear yet where are the limits.Nuno Gonçalves Pedro I think that’s a very fair point. Let me try to analyze things that I don’t think will change anytime soon for the next few years. Agreed with you that many things will change, and we’ll have a lot better tools, platforms out there. That will be difficult to predict what exactly won’t change. I think there’s elements of humanity, and some of them do relate to judgment, like having good or bad taste, having a view on it, on whether something looks good or bad. Obviously, all of this sometimes is subjective, but some of it may not be as subjective as people think it is. The elements of contextualization. I think a little bit going back to what we did at Chamaeleon ourselves, where we built this platform, Mantis, and the objective of building Mantis was not really to replace us, was that it was a core augmentation layer in some ways that we would use investment or investor judgment as humans in the loop to systematize pattern recognition and a variety of other things, but that Mantis would really elevate all that judgment, not just in terms of timing, us being more productive, but also in terms of the quality of the decisions we’re making. Think of it as a little bit like having our human judgment in the context of operating Chamaeleon at a higher altitude, where we are more aware of the things that are happening and how they actually happen. The ability to really get to the data pieces and then make decisions on top of that that generate the needed alpha in our case for investors. What I mean by this is I think there’s always going to be core elements of humanity that I do think are going to be difficult for the machines to replace. For example, the taste piece people are like, “I can figure out what’s the taste in the market.” Yeah, but that’s mainstream. That doesn’t identify what’s the next big thing, which normally doesn’t start from mainstream. It starts from something else. It could start from opinion leaders and influencers. It could start by someone having a different way of addressing a problem and having a solution that hasn’t been thought through. For example, elements of creativity, I think, in human judgment and in human operations is something that I feel the machine will still have difficulty to replace.Bertrand Schmitt Let’s not forget how today current algorithms are working by feeding them enormous quantity of data, actually as much data as we can find. Finding more data is becoming a limitation these days. What it means is that it’s very hard for AI to think beyond its training data. There is some level of logic that’s being added, but at the same time, take the launch of the iPhone. What was the opinion before launch? Is that no, it doesn’t make sense. Not enough battery life, no keyboard, no this, no that. If you just base your analysis on what’s written out there, what’s being sold out there, you would just say, “It’s going to fail.” AI might really follow that more generic advice and perspective because that’s what in the training data and that’s what they’re in volume. It’s, of course, raising a lot of questions of, how do you improve the quality of the training data? How do you separate the weed from the chaff? There are a lot of questions there, and obviously, it will get better over time. But it’s still a critical part of how it’s working today. It won’t be that easy to change. I really like your point regarding Mantis, and I will say in general, platforms that you build with AI or leveraging AI capacity. Because when we say knowledge production is going to disappear, but we’ll keep judgment, it will be a different type of judgment because the quantity and quality of knowledge we will have in front of us to build our judgment will be very different. If suddenly we have for free the work of 10 interns or 5 junior analysts or whatever, and you can run that on nearly anything you do in life or at work, it’s completely dramatic. Your judgment was not used to be exercised so often because often you were missing quality data to have a judgment. Before it was a lot of finger in the wind and trying to smell something, but you didn’t have enough to make a serious analysis. Except if you are working as a strategy consultant, as you used to do, Nuno. That part is actually quite interesting. That the judgment itself will be exercised much more often and hopefully on the base of much more in-depth analysis for a lot of things. We will work very differently.Nuno Gonçalves Pedro We will go in-depth, faster and more fact-based, more data-based along the way. The question some of you might have right now is, is there some judgment that’s going to go away? Is there some judgment? We seem to be defining that there’s this organization, we’ll talk about it later, that goes from doers more into deciders. I think there’s some nuances to that, so I’ll just hit pause on that. In terms of judgment, obviously, there’s judgment that has been hidden over the years under the pretense of being wisdom, but it’s actually not wisdom. It’s just repetitive tasking, and it’s rules-based for the most. There’s a lot of judgment done, in particular in the white-collar space, that you could say it’s just reps. People have been doing it all along like that, and so therefore to say, “I’ve done it before like this, so I’ll do it the same way.” There’s actually no best in class, no analysis, no nothing. It’s just, “I’ve done it like that before.” I think that type of judgment will disappear because, again, algorithms will be as good, if not much better at that. They’ll be better at figuring out, actually, this would be the better way to do this. That’s how you play it forward. Then the question is, if there are fundamental, wise people in the organization, people that can really take that more complex elements of judgment, how do you go from the world we have today, which is a world of apprenticeship, where people come out of college, they go and work, and they learn their way, and therefore, hopefully over time, some of them, not all of them, we know that, but some of them will develop that wisdom to be great decision makers 15, 20 years down the road? How do we do that in a world that now is saying, “I don’t need people out of college because I can do it myself, and I can do individual contributor, and I can have agents doing the work that would require some manifestation of management in the middle.” Basically, “I don’t need this stuff. I don’t need you.” It’s a little bit the story we’re in. How do you create then this apprenticeship? How do we create then wisdom? My two cents on that is that wisdom, because of what we were just discussing and what, for example, myself and Bertrand was just saying, because of more often interactions with more data-stressed information and insights, what will happen is people will get better through their own reps in whatever form they’re doing, in day-to-day life, in internships, et cetera. In some ways, that will create the accelerated growth. It’s a little bit the interactions with agents and the interactions with our beloved AI algorithms that will create that growth over time and maybe not as much with other people. That still leaves the question around social interactions, but that’s probably the way this gets sorted. Apprenticeship gets sorted through the machine and the human having more interactions in effect.Bertrand Schmitt I agree with you because when we talk about apprenticeship, in some ways a lot of time was wasted on stuff that were not that important. But in a way, that was the price you had to pay in order to be there when people make the big decision to try to get some wisdom from that one hour of interactions that’s really useful and make a difference out of your full week. But the rest of your full week was just basic stuff that you had to do like a machine in a way. Why not let a machine do that? That, for me, is a big question. You could argue there is a transition period where it could be hard. For instance, if you can work hand in hand with AI smartly while you are doing your 4, 5 years of universities, you could graduate with a very different knowledge, perspective, judgment, skill set than anyone who graduated 5 years ago. I think that part will require a question around, “How do you change education?” You see what I mean? If you keep education the same way, expecting that the output is someone that should go now into 5 years of apprenticeship, that’s not going to work because companies will be, “No apprenticeship anymore.” On the contrary, you have to come much more knowledgeable and ready to use the tools. The tools are so efficient that the bar pretty high. You need to come already very well-grounded. If the education is not doing their job, that will be trouble. That part for me, I think is often forgotten. In some ways, the new-found importance of universities as a place to, and not just universities, the trade to really deliver people who are ready for the workforce. If on the business side, the expectation can change, of course, you have to change the education on the other side. My worry probably right now is that it doesn’t look like universities are in touch with what businesses are looking for, businesses are working on. Of course, that’s very worrisome because the cost of university has increased very significantly. It’s not clear quality of education has improved at all. If anything, it could be the opposite. It’s pretty scary. Of course, it’s going to raise a lot of questions. How much is education worth in that type of situation? Maybe another point because we talk a lot about apprenticeship, how this stuff was useful, but at the same time, if we go back in time, not long ago in the ’50s, if you wanted to be a developer, for instance, ’50s, ’60s, the job was very different. There was barely any programmation language out there. You had to use punch cards. Your time truly spent doing the coding was very limited. Once you had your stuff working, then, the debugging was a total nightmare. My point is that no one is looking back to that time saying, “You know what? It was great. It was a great way to learn and to do an apprenticeship for 5 years. To do that crappy job of punching cards for the boss.” There was little value in this. Guess what? Everyone is happy it’s not being done anymore by anyone. I think we also have to see what AI is bringing in a similar way is that everyone’s job is going to become quite different. There are a lot of big parts of the job who are not going to look back with fondness. Just looking back as, “Wow, that was very machine-like type of job. I’m glad I’m done with it.” People will want to jump directly to the next step. You don’t need to go to the punch card phase to be able to be a good developer for the past 40 years. I guess it will be the same with AI.Nuno Gonçalves Pedro I think so. The difficulty we have as humans is to also visualize dramatically different scenarios and landscapes, professionally. It’s difficult for us to anticipate what are the jobs of the future. Jobs have changed a lot in the last few decades, not even the last century. What people do, the migration initially from the agricultural society to then the industrial society to then the services society, and in some ways, the shift within the services industry, and now we’re seeing another shift, so we can’t really anticipate what those jobs look like. Back to your point on education, because I think that’s a very important point. If you’re right now an undergraduate student or a postgraduate student, for that matter, and you’re not figuring out your own mechanisms of learning outside of your syllabus, outside of what your professors are telling you, et cetera, you’re going to face very difficult times. If you’re not right now using all these AI tools proficiently, all these cycles of vibe coding, co-working, et cetera, with agents in the mix, you’re going to have a really tough time. If you’re not at this point in time as proficient as someone like myself or Bertrand, and given that we’re nerds, we’re relatively proficient with a lot of these tools that are out there. On top of it, some of us have our own platforms in-house. If you’re not as proficient as we are with those tools, you’re going to have a very difficult time because then people like us won’t need you. I think that’s the sad truth. It’s like at some point, if you’re not needed, you’re not needed. Then again, you may find something else that’s more interesting for you to do. Start your own company, go join a new exciting job doing whatever it is that you need to do next, et cetera. But again, I think the bar is very high. If you’re in college right now, again, undergrad, postgraduate, this is the time of transition. This is the worst time. It’s not the best time, it’s the worst time. Because education and all these institutions haven’t adapted to it yet. You need to adapt. You need to adapt. You need to adapt. If you don’t, you’re going to pay for it, not just in the loans you need to repay, but also in terms of actually having difficulty finding your career path in those first few critical years.Bertrand Schmitt You need to be especially proactive when you’re facing this type of period where businesses are adapting as fast as they can because they all know it’s going to be survival of the fittest very quickly. Universities typically are working on a very different pace, and it’s pretty guaranteed they are not going to have adapted as fast as businesses. In time of big dramatic change, it will be trouble. It will be trouble. Yes, you will have not fun. Not saying it was part of the deal when you sign up for that loan and decided to go for university. But that’s life. There has been issues before. It’s not the first time. You have to do something about it. You talk about your perspective about, “Hey, why do we need you if you are not already fluent and very efficient with these tools and stuff?” The truth, in some ways, it’s even worse than that. Each time we spend with someone who is not efficient with all of this is less time we spend with the tools that are already providing magic for us.Nuno Gonçalves Pedro Exactly.Bertrand Schmitt It’s a very big choice of, “Hey, do I spend more time training this person?” Do I just… there is an opportunity cost. Or, do I spend more time staying at light speed? Why do I slow down to do something else in the hope that maybe I will get to return versus the light speed I’m already on? It’s a lot of tension. Again, it’s certainly new. But if we want to look back, I think you talk about the switch from agriculture and society, industrial society, and now the service industry. The reality is that, yes, we have made dramatic changes in the past before. 140 years ago, we were 90% agricultural society in Europe, in the US, 90% of us. Today, it’s what? 2%. So my point is that that’s a normal evolution. There is no progress without change. Sometimes the rate of change is soft, and sometimes you have a step function. Now it’s a step function, and it’s also a pretty fast step function. Before, it could take decades to get new stuff being put in place, to have electricity come up, this or that. Now we see that the rate of investment in AI is insane, way beyond anything we have seen before. Two, in a way, a lot of the architecture behind the scene was already there to support an even faster transition. What’s new might be the pace of the transition, how unnatural it might look. But at the same time, if you put yourself in the shoes of someone who lived 150 years ago, I mean, this was also a dramatic change for them. From horses to cars to planes to rockets, pretty big change, maybe even bigger change.Nuno Gonçalves Pedro Maybe the silver lining, just to bookend this section, is one, there will be new roles. There are a lot of things we can’t anticipate. There will be new roles, there will be new jobs being created, and new things that we can’t really quite grasp yet. The second part is that the rules are changing, and they’re changing, I would say, in general, for the better. If you are a decision-maker or an organization, and you still have your job, you’re probably making more important decisions with more data, with more tooling around you, with less red tape, hopefully over time. I know that will not hold true for all the big corporations out there that are listening to us, but it is starting to happen. Things are making an impact on how decision-making is made. There’s less and less red tape along the way in certain organizations. There are more and more fact-based discussions happening as we move along. The silver lining is better jobs, more jobs, different jobs in the future, hopefully as well. Secondly, the second part of the silver line is that the jobs that exist today, hopefully, will be more interesting, certainly on the knowledge space and on this judgment space that we’re now introducing as part of this episode. The AI-Native Company: Org, Hiring, Culture Switching gears, maybe to how does that shift? How does the company of the future look like? How does an AI native company look like? I feel there are a lot of discussions on, “Oh, you only need one person to run everything.” Let’s not go to that level. We’ve had a couple of episodes where we focused on AI as your co-founder and a couple of other elements that you guys can go back to. Let’s focus on a more evolutionary view of what’s happening to organizations, and maybe start with the org structure. In general, we should see more flat organizations where mid-level managers have to justify their pay in some ways because middle management are routers. They are normally routing tasks. It’s sometimes aggregating it, synthesizing it, and pulling it back up. Guess what? AI and agents in general are very good at that. The synthesis piece, et cetera, is not as well needed. One could say there are several elements of middle management that are valuable, like the coaching of people, the creation of apprentices, and the accountability that comes with some of middle management. But lo and behold, most of middle management is seen as a little bit of a thin line that doesn’t need to necessarily exist. I feel we’re moving into a world of smaller teams, more senior teams, where there’s more judgment at the top, where you’ll have people that both do a mix of what we used to call management in its new form, but also a lot of individual contribution. If you’re not used to that, if you’re not used anymore to be an individual in the future, again, and if you’re a very senior in an organization, maybe this is the right time to either reinvent yourself, find some other job that doesn’t require as much of that, which we’ll have plenty of those jobs for the next few decades, or maybe retire. I’ve actually, shockingly enough, seen people who have said, “You know what? This thing is changing too fast, too dramatically. My industry is changing quite aggressively right now. I’m about to retire in a couple of years. I’m just going to retire now.” I’ve literally met two people who have done that. Again, there’s nothing wrong about it. I think we’re, again, going through a step function and a huge shift, but figuring out where you fit in this new model of organizations, more senior at the top, smaller teams, more of a mix of individual contribution with management than ever was done before.Bertrand Schmitt I agree with you. In some ways, I’m not surprised that some people might say, “You know what? It’s now time to retire.” I feel a bit sad, maybe because it means you don’t like to keep reinventing yourself and changing your habits and thinking about new stuff. You were a creature of habits, I would say, if that’s your conclusion. But everyone is entitled to their own opinion, obviously, and a way of life. I guess that’s what happened, again, at regular times in the past in terms of big change. What I can see is that the rise of, you can call it the full-stack individual, someone who will have multiple roles inside the team. Before, you had to really separate the role. Especially in the US, there is such a clear separation between every role you can have in a company. Let’s take a tech company. You will have people doing design, people doing different types of designs, people doing front-end development, back-end development, and operations. You see step-by-step hyper-specialization. I have seen that, and it’s true that the level of complexity you had to deal with at some point requires some level of hyper-specialization because it will take you 6, 12 months in order to be really, really strong on a specific topic, a specific language. God forbid, trying to go deep into something that you had no real experience into. But I feel with AI, it’s a big change, actually. It’s the opportunity to go beyond that. It’s the opportunity to do more, to touch more. You can combine designing and shipping code, product managing and shipping code, being an analyst and deploying. Of course, we have to think how it works because putting a marketer shipping code to production, maybe that will get you into trouble. But I think that there must be some change. We see it changing dramatically, how fast we can get into something, something different from what we are used to. I think it would be crazy not to take that opportunity to dramatically change the scope of many positions and put an end to that hyper-specialization. I think for me, in some ways, hyper-specialization was bad. There is only so much you want to be a specialist in because a lot of things, a lot of opportunities are actually coming from the mixing of many different ideas, many different perspectives, and you lose if you go to hyper-specialization.Nuno Gonçalves Pedro I don’t think the age that is coming is the age of the generalist. I think it’s going to be the age of the multispecialist. We’re going to go into an age of multispecialization, which is a little bit, we’ve mentioned it as well in the past, what Amazon defines as an athlete or T-shaped or pie-shaped people, people that have on top an amazing ability to do general management, strategy, managing teams, et cetera, then have spikes. Spikes into business development, corporate development, product management, whatever it is. With AI and with agents, the development of those spikes, as we’ve been discussing in this episode, will actually be easier. It’s almost like a given. If you want to go deeper and deeper into a certain area, you can go much faster. I think that level of multispecialization is going to be really cool to observe. I’m not sure we’ve had an age of multispecialization over the years. Maybe people would point out, well, the Da Vinci example, people that are great across very different areas. Maybe that’s an example of multispecialization. But honestly, from my perspective, this is going to be an exciting time because of that, because you’ll have people who, instead of being just focused on this area of sales, and I only do that, they can actually and should actually do a lot of other things. So the work, as we were talking before, can be more interesting. More demanding as well, because the judgments you need to make are more complex. The context you need to actually gain needs to be gained much faster. At a level of magnitude, you haven’t been able to do it before. Talk about information overload. But actually, ultimately, the roles can be a lot more interesting, a lot more exciting, because I can jump around. If I’m an investor, in this case, we have two investors on this conversation. But if I’m an investor, one of the things that we start looking at is actually not just looking at a startup as, is this startup doing something in AI or not? Is it AI-enabled or not? Is it an AI platform or not? But actually, more fundamentally, is this an AI native startup? Meaning, organizationally, culturally, is this the company that’s already in the AI age? How is the team working? How are they defining things? It’s not just that they only have two or three people. It’s like, what are those two or three people doing? How are they doing it? What cadence are they doing it on? What tools are they using? How are they making decisions? I feel we’re still actually relatively early on that track. It’s very interesting because we’ve had all these companies raising mega rounds. First round out, we invested in one of them, but there have been many frontier labs out there raising a ton of money. But a lot of them don’t have a fundamentally different way of doing business. Of organizing themselves, of how they do the day-to-day. Although they’re working on cutting-edge stuff, with very notable exceptions, they’re actually not using it themselves. They’re not actually shifting how they do stuff themselves.Bertrand Schmitt For me, that’s very interesting because in the past, I used to be quite conservative on how you manage and run a company in the sense that if you’re already in tech, if you are already on the cutting edge of what technology can deliver, and this and that, don’t waste time trying to invent a new org structure. Just focus on delivering something great, amazing, and be great at technologies. That’s already your huge differentiator. At the time, there was no real reason to innovate on the team organization. I have seen so many teams that tried to innovate, and it was just catastrophic because there was not much to innovate on, because we had decades of optimization that we could leverage. There was no reason to invent. But here it’s very different. There is a dramatic shift in how you can organize differently a company. I don’t think there are any blueprints yet on what’s the best way to do it because it’s too new. But at the same time, I would feel very bad to invest or support a company that first is not focused on AI or AI-enabled, but at the same time is not trying to innovate on the team itself. Because if you don’t do that, you’re going to get killed by someone who is going to innovate better than you on not just the product, but on the org as well.Nuno Gonçalves Pedro Indeed. The shifts are pretty substantial. If you look, for example, just at hiring, what do you hire for? Certainly, there’s this element of the multispecialized orchestrator, which normally will be someone with quite a lot of wisdom and expertise. It doesn’t necessarily mean someone who’s old, but someone who has the ability to work with all the AI tooling and platforms out there and be an orchestrator of agents. Why do they make judgments, make decisions, move stuff forward really, really, really quickly? Again, those jobs are going to be the best jobs. The second part, I think that is very interesting, around hiring, is you’re going to skew towards the elements that are potentially either very aligned with the use of AI tooling and platform, AI expertise, or being AI native, or someone who’s used to using AI. That’s one side of the fence. On the other side, you’re going to actually be optimizing to hire people that have the characteristics that will be difficult for AI to replace immediately, like taste and the notion of fundamental accountability and notion of implications, the notion of how you affect change in organizations, how you affect change in individuals, the elements of coaching, and beyond coaching. You’ll be optimizing for those kinds of hires as well. Then, last but not least, for me, I feel that there is a momentum already happening. I think it will happen even more, which is the tendency to under-hire rather than over-hire. The moment of the good old days of blitz scaling, “Oh, let me go and hire 300 people to scale my go-to-market and just land grab market.” Now, that’s not how it’s going to work. People are going to try and first get the efficiencies in-house with top talent and see if there’s, at the end, the need to hire more people or not, rather than the other way around. I think the issue here is a little bit of what we alluded to before in this episode. There is a tax on individuals. If you hire more people, you’ll have to manage people, you’ll have to work with them, et cetera. If I don’t need to, I might as well work with the agents that the tools and platforms that I use give me access to. Because that’s a world that’s much more efficient, right?Bertrand Schmitt I’m in total agreement with you on this. It’s definitely raising way more questions than before because, again, on one side, you have the product, the technology used to build products that are completely different. At the same time, all of this is also enabling new ways to design organizations and to scale differently, especially in a world where, as we have seen in 3, 6, and 12 months, stuff that you thought were impossible are suddenly becoming possible. So you’re, “Hey, I’m going to scale and burn a shitload of money for 6 months before I know if there is any return.” Versus, “You know what? Maybe I just wait 6 months. The AI has improved enough so that we don’t need this new team. We don’t need these people to do stuff.” Because actually, if you just wait 6 months, we will have stuff coming for free from either new AI models or new AI tools or this or that. If you remember, we used to say that in mobile, things were going three times as fast as on the web in terms of pace of innovation and speed of development and stuff. I mean, with AI, it’s 5X mobile.Nuno Gonçalves Pedro Maybe even more. Yes, well.Bertrand Schmitt Maybe even more, maybe 10X. Every assumption around blitz scaling or scaling in general was based on past assumptions. It’s not based on how is the industry evolving today. Might make more sense for you to really grow your agents and spend more money on more tokens. I remember, of course, Jensen is selling his business interest, but he was saying, “Hey, for each one of my 450K engineers, he better spend 250K in tokens a year.” I’m not saying it’s the right way to say it, but I think there is some truth in it, and that would be something to think about. Have we maxed out the token usage per employee? I’m not talking in a stupid way because token maxing and wasting money has no value and is as stupid as it gets. But if you are truly getting a return on these tokens, can you use more? Can you generate more? Can you create more loops so that one engineer manages not just 10 agents, but 50 agents, but 200 agents? I think that’s the big question. We’re trying to add more people. More people means more management, more issues, more this, more that. That would be a fair question. Another piece of the puzzle is how do you build in a way your… I don’t know if it’s a digital twin, but more like the digital version of your companies represented by agents. How do you make sure that everything you do as a business is truly captured, is truly leveraged so that your agents are getting better and better? Not just because the model gets better, but because you are putting more data into it, because it has more opportunity to learn, and as a result, gets better at your specific business.Nuno Gonçalves Pedro The next big thing is culture. How does culture change? I think the biggest shift that I see is, why would you do meetings all the time?Bertrand Schmitt Yes.Nuno Gonçalves Pedro At least at Chamaeleon, we have a very small team, just by the way. We have a very small team at Chamaeleon. We’ve reduced by way more than 50% the time we spend on meetings between each other across the board, one-on-ones, partner meetings, et cetera. I think we’re really pushing to be more and more asynchronous. There’s stuff you can process via message. I was just asking one of my colleagues, “Can you just send me that prompt for that so I can just do that on CoWork?” Or “Can I just go on Mantis and do this? Can you tell me the cycle?” Or vice versa. Basically, it’s a little bit like you’re just going to do it. I don’t need to meet. I don’t need to meet all the time. There are some things where we still need to meet and interact, and we need to brainstorm at times, and we need to go to a different level of abstraction on the top end. Then on the lower end, there might be things that are a little bit more specific and governance-related and operational-related that we need to agree on that are more sticky. But otherwise, the culture is going to be biased towards build. “Go and do it,” rather than, “Let’s do a meeting.”Bertrand Schmitt Yes.Nuno Gonçalves Pedro Async is the thing. I’m more and more like we have a couple of interns this summer. “Can we async this?” They’re like, “What does that mean?” “Can we make this interaction asynchronous?” Because synchronous interactions for me are very expensive. Can you send me something that I can process, and then I can send it back to you? We don’t waste time on you giving me context and whatever. Then I’m not ready quite yet because I need to process it. Maybe I’m in between two meetings that I’m actually thinking about other things in my mind.” Again, I feel that shifts how stuff is done. One, build rather than meeting. Two, asynchronous versus synchronous. In some way, millennials had it right when they shifted a lot to messaging and stuff like that. Let’s do more asynchronous rather than synchronous, those two elements from just an operating model of the company are significant. Maybe this is a good time for me just to put one parenthesis because there’s this thing that’s bugging me as we’re talking here. Everyone who is listening to us at this point in time might be saying, “Cool, but I work for this large organization. We’re just now…” Everything we’re saying here is contextualized by time. We’re giving you extreme situations. We’re looking into the future. Some companies that we’re talking about might be doing this already as we speak. Some of them might be in the process of doing this and might in the next couple of months be doing it like we are describing it here. Some of them might take years to get there. Then again, some of the companies that might take years might actually be destroyed in between or meanwhile, and be disrupted. Some of them might not because they’re in very legacy businesses, and it’s fine, and it’s okay. Again, don’t take everything that Bertrand and I are saying today as this is gospel, and it’s going to happen tomorrow, and why the hell are we not doing it? We think that aspirationally, this is where you should be moving to as an organization, whatever size you’re at. Speed will matter, as we discussed before, but not everyone, obviously, is going to move as fast as we’re describing it here.Bertrand Schmitt Yes. Me, for instance, take inspiration often with what some of the AI labs, frontier AI labs, are doing, the way they are working, especially in OpenAI and Anthropic. They are clearly at the top of the spear in terms of what is it that you can do because they have access to models we don’t have access to, because they have unlimited tokens they can use for tasks. They hire people who are, of course, 100% on AI. They are the best example of what is achievable if you have the top minds, if you have the latest models, if you have unlimited tokens. From there, you can take that for our needs and for our situation, and others in industries that are not as advanced. Definitely, you have some time. But as you say, things are moving fast, things are changing. Wall Street is going to expect better returns because when we discuss all of this, the conclusion is that you should be able to do more with less. That’s as real as it gets at some point. By the way, that’s what you see. You see better performance, a better business performance right now. So even if you might not get disrupted, you’d better start there. For some, it might take more time, and they might still be fine.Nuno Gonçalves Pedro Maybe to bookend this section, clearly what we’re saying is organizations are going to change. Their MOs are going to change, the structures are going to change. There are elements of what we discussed before in terms of judgment that are fundamental to this. The ability that in some ways, one would say a lot of the technique of getting solutions out there, even in brainstorming or problem-solving, is going to get democratized. The algorithms are able to do that. On the other hand, having points of view and having wisdom is not necessarily democratized, necessarily by the machines. It can be facilitated, it can be more productive in achieving that level of wisdom, but wisdom still will matter at the end of the day. We’re not saying that’s out of the question. Actually, that’s going to be the asset. People who have fundamental wisdom that can come to the table and frame things. We see this even today in prompt engineering, on just creating prompts. The better your prompt is, the better the outcome is going to be, the result that you get from the algorithms. That’s not going to change, in my opinion, anytime soon. That UI interaction piece is not going to change anytime soon. Again, if you’re an organization thinking through organizational structure, culture, if you’re thinking through hiring, these are some of the elements that we think will give you an opportunity, but I would actually go one step further. On the positive side, I would say, they give you arbitrage. If you’re able to move faster than your competitors and really adapt your org faster, you’ll reap the benefits faster as well. That’s what many still say and relate to as the word innovation. That’s how innovation gets accelerated. I think there’s a huge opportunity right now for arbitrage. If you move fast, experiment, experiment on new org structures, experiment with talent, you’ll know that some of them will work well, some of them will fail miserably, so you can’t experiment on literally everything. On the other side, I think the doomsday scenario is if you don’t, if you’re on the other side and your competitor is outpacing you on trying these different organizational models, structure, hiring models, and operating models, they’ll potentially just disrupt you. They’ll do stuff that you thought you had the moat on, and lo and behold, you don’t anymore. Sometimes it comes just from org, just from injection of people with a different MRO, different operating model.Bertrand Schmitt The Human Element: Are We Underestimating It? Maybe we can move to our next section about the human elements. Are we underestimating it or are we overestimating it? The three things that are a big part of the human elements, emotion, creativity, and synthesis. Is it just soft skills, replaceable part? On the contrary, is it the durable part now that we have automated intelligence?Nuno Gonçalves Pedro I’ll start with emotion first because I think it’s probably the easiest of all the ones you’ve mentioned. Emotion is key. Many of you listening to us will know this. The way you deliver a certain message, the emotion that you have when you deliver it, just in and of itself, this could be a sentence, it’s something verbal, et cetera. Makes a difference between the person or the people on the other side actually adopting it or actually just resisting it. Emotion is critical. It’s what runs the world. Everyone talks about a bunch of things, but emotion is a currency that is still naturally human. It will be, I feel, difficult for these AI tools and platforms to recreate it fully until there’s some literally very high-definition manifestation of them as avatars or some physical manifestation of them as robots and all that stuff. It will take a while for that emotion to be manifested. Emotion, I think, is still something that we as humans have as a moat, and it’s critical. As you mentioned before, I was a strategy management consultant at McKinsey, and getting people to action is actually 80% about the delivery, communication, the emotion that you surround the project itself, more than sometimes the truth. It’s great to have the truth and to have something that is similar to the truth in terms of analysis, but in some ways, that’s not what really moves change. Change is moved by, I would argue, a significant amount of emotion and alignment on emotions.Bertrand Schmitt You could argue that’s something that most politicians have perfectly understood. If you look at most campaigns these days, everything on emotions, maybe the tagline might be one word. It’s interesting when you see from that perspective that actually it’s very little on facts, very little on all of this, but more about emotion. You could argue it’s the same for businesses in the future? That’s a fair question. I think creativity is another one that’s quite important. At the same time, it’s not so easy because I must say I’m quite amazed when I’m looking for creativity from AI, either to generate the image, to generate video, to generate audio, or to generate text. AI can be pretty creative. I still think you need to control its creativity; you need to understand what’s good, what’s bad, what’s quality, but at the same time, I can see even in creative tasks, AI can be a very strong partner. I’m talking about any creative task, like invent a name for a product, let’s brainstorm the mission for the company. AI can actually be doing a pretty impressive job. That’s the type of job where you will hire experts, where you will use some of the best people in your team to help you for days. We say, “You can do quite a lot.” It’s an interesting one because I think there is some unique human creativity, and at the same time, AI can be pretty strong at creative task as well.Nuno Gonçalves Pedro I agree. In particular, if it represents benchmarking, if it represents repetition, if it represents seeing the world and then coming up with something that presents itself as creative, to be honest, it can actually outpace humans. If it’s like genuine light bulb moments of creativity, angles that haven’t been tried before, certainly not in the same way, I think humans still have the advantage. To your point, I agree. This is not a humans-win situation. On the previous one, on emotion, still, part of it is because, also on emotion, there are exchanges. You and I might be looking at each other, and from the facial expressions and the reactions, where you judge that for AI to get there, it’s going to take a long time. There’s going to be a lot of very complex algorithmic stuff put into that for AI to be able to create synthetic emotional behaviors, but creativity, I agree with you. There are a lot more nuances to it today, where AI does have significant advantages at the end of the day. Synthesis depends. Synthesis, I feel, if we’re talking about holding a bunch of messy assumptions, contextualized inputs with different layers of data adjacent to them and then trying to create and form one coherent, fully accountable point of view that you stake something on, like a decision, a company, a business unit, whatever, I think humans have the advantage. Part of it is the complexity of what we have today with generative, pre-trained transformers, today with GPTs, where the hallucination comes through, where it’s really more statistical analysis. Over time, maybe synthesis will be a forte for AI. Right now, I think we still have that ability to really be the ultimate decision-makers and judge-makers and have that wisdom put at the table to make those decisions. Honestly, models are very good on balancing both sides, so ended up, as we say in Portuguese, neither fish nor meat. It’s to balance both sides’ answers. That’s not helpful in most cases. When you’re in a difficult position where, for example, the future of a company, company is almost dying, what do you do? I’m not sure your AI algorithms that are going to give you a great solution. Because it will give you a median or average solution, which likely will lead you to a median or average outcome, which in this case would be failure. Again, on synthesis, there are some areas of advantage for human beings. If you are looking for clearly synthesized perspectives on certain elements that are maybe less edge-focused, they’re more than the normal part of the normal distribution, then probably AI agents are brilliant at that. All the tools we have today are pretty good at that, and I think they’ll just get better over time. That’s how I see synthesis.Bertrand Schmitt I think a lot of improvements will come with a better fine-tuning of agents to what’s special about your company. Because if you just take a general agent, there is only so much. It can understand your industry, your company, and your way of working. I think that part of making sure your agents are finely trained, finely tuned on your own business, so that they can give you a really well-calibrated feedback, will have a lot of importance.Nuno Gonçalves Pedro I think that’s absolutely spot on. Maybe to end it, what is definitely different about humanity? Definitely, emotion, as we discussed, some pieces of synthesis. Creativity, maybe the light bulb creativity, not the more repeatable creativity, the one that you can put and encapsulate into processes in some ways. There are elements of us being physical, which robots can’t still recreate. That’s definitely an advantage. The embodied, we’re embodied. That’s obviously a huge advantage. With that also comes advantages because we have to interpret each other, and we have to see the complexities in physicality that land to it. Is human and the human element categorical difference? If we’re having a more philosophical discussion around this, I think it is. I think it will be for at least the foreseeable future and maybe decades to come, even in whatever scenarios we’ll discuss, which is our next section, scenarios.Bertrand Schmitt I would say projecting beyond 10 years is always pretty hard on this because, again, some of the improvements we are talking about we can imagine based on how it has evolved, but at the same time, there will be disruptions in AI. Stuff that we take for granted in terms of weakness, especially, might not be there in a few years from now. Either because it has been solved through brute force or because the field will have made significant change and improvements and discoveries, making some of our points moot. If we talk about embodiment, obviously, robots are coming. How fast, how cheap? That will be a big question. Right now, they’re not very smart. They’re usually very specialized. The more we move to a more general form factor, humanoid form factor, the more I think it will change. Also, another piece of the puzzle is that we have the assumption of agents having trouble to convince humans and stuff. At some point, we keep assuming that humans in the loop. If we’re talking about agents convincing another agent, not having embodiment might be even more efficient. That will be another perspective. Going forward, we will have not just agents we control who are doing a job and scanning the job, but agents truly interacting with other agents. You have agents controlled by one person, one team in your company, working either together or maybe not confrontationally, but trying to think and having different perspectives with another agent, controlled by other teams. I don’t think we have seen much of that now. We have seen mostly agents that are controlled by one team doing one job in one direction. Not multiple teams agents working together, or against or in parallel with another team agent. I think we will see some interesting things coming out of that.Nuno Gonçalves Pedro Scenarios Switching to scenarios, we love our two-by-twos. We haven’t done one in a while. This time it’s a two by two. We have four scenarios. I think on one axis, we would have potentially the capabilities of AI. One side would be more incremental. The other side would be the extreme full AGI. I’ll define it in a bit so that we can at least have a little bit of a definitional view on what the AGI is. Then the other axis would be how gains are distributed, concentrated versus broad. Obviously, if they’re very concentrated, it’s more unequal. It only goes to a few companies, a few people, a few individuals. If it’s broad, it’s much more dispersed through society, et cetera. AGI, just to try to define it, the formal definition of it is that it’s a hypothetical AI that matches or exceeds human capabilities across virtually all cognitive and practical tasks. In some ways, AGI can learn, reason, and adapt to novel situations across any domain. Then there are several mutations on this, but there’s one notion, or rather, there are three notions that normally are across a lot of these definitions. One is generalization, ability to seamlessly transfer knowledge from one domain to another without needing retraining, which is a very impressive skill that we humans still seemingly have. Autonomy in agency, the capacity to operate independently, set goals, plan and execute complex tasks. I think AI is their issue with agents to a lot of that extent. Then, last but not least, human parity, performing economically valuable work at or above the level of a typical human knowledge worker. If you listen to one of our last episodes, you’ll realize that Bertrand and I have slightly different views on AGI, and if it’s already here or not. I think, definitionally, maybe we have slightly different views on what the definition actually is. For me, maybe AGI is a little bit more what some would call superintelligence and generalized superintelligence. Strict to census, Bertrand is more connecting to AGI as in its prime definition. It behaves as well or better than a human thing. Maybe that’s what’s leading us to differences on whether AGI has arrived or not.Bertrand Schmitt Personally, I will have a different scale where I will put AGI, as you just said, in some ways, relatively similar in performance to your average human being. On top of it, it’s able to touch different domains that most humans are not able to do. Usually, there is some level of specializations where in AI, it can be more generic. I will put ASI, Artificial Superintelligence, as clearly the step beyond. Something that, on any dimension you pick, it’s able to beat a human expert. From my perspective, I think we already discussed that, but we are at AGI already. We have AI that can do way better, not just way better, but at least as well as humans on many topics, sometimes better. Yes, there are some topics that are not for AI yet. Embodiment, for instance, to flock with your humanoid robot in 2026. For me, we are partially there or fully there in AGI. If we take the stricter definition, ASI, we are definitely not there, but my guess is that it’s moving quite fast. We might be there in a few years from now. I don’t think we are talking about multi-decades. It’s 5 years, maybe 10. Of course, there are questions because people will say, for instance, “Hey, how do you become truly super-intelligent when all your training is based on human data?” That’s not an easy one because how do you train on that? To be way better, not just a bit better, but way better. Maybe I’m going on a tangent, but some are looking at AI learning from AI, AI being taught from AI, AI fighting with AI, AI challenging AI. The same way we saw this AlphaGo moment where AI was not trained anymore, like in chess with human moves, but has been trained to play against itself. That’s when it reached superintelligence in Go. It reached superintelligence by playing against itself and basically letting go of that human baggage, if you want, and going to the next level. What I found interesting in that, actually, first, that’s what happened, but two, there was some analysis that the average level of Go players and the top players went up after AlphaGo because AlphaGo, in a way, opened doors that humans didn’t believe were open in front of them, or they didn’t see them. They didn’t see these doors, so they didn’t bother to open them. AI opened new doors, but interestingly enough, humans improved after that, thanks to AI. You see what I mean? It was an interesting, okay, that self-learning from AI was the way to go beyond the current level of human knowledge and human expertise, but at the same time, humans were able to follow up. It was not like suddenly humans are totally useless crap. They improved. Did they still beat AI? Maybe not, but it was definitely also helpful.Nuno Gonçalves Pedro Back to our scenarios. We’re going to take the definitional extreme just for argument’s sake for scenarios. We’re going to talk about maybe what you were saying, ASI rather than full AGI, but like ASI. Again, artificial superintelligence as the extreme on the one hand. Let me talk about maybe the first scenario that would come to mind. Maybe we can call it the plateau scenario. All of this was great, but it was all smoke and mirrors. They were great at some cognition stuff. They’re a great tool. At some point, they’re going to hit a wall. Hallucinations are never going to be a thing of the past. We can’t fully trust them on really hardcore stuff. We’ll gain productivity enhancements. We’ll keep gaining those productivity enhancements, but at some point in time, we really won’t reach ASI. We really will be stuck with what we have. It’s a little bit like we get the next big thing, the next big spreadsheet, the next big internet, but it’s not going to change the whole world beyond just productivity, enhancements, and amazing tools that we have available to us that makes us much better. In that scenario, the winners will continue being fast adopters, probably small and medium businesses, because there won’t be a push for maximum speed either, so they’ll catch up at some point. Then AI native companies will be better companies than other companies, but not necessarily overall disruptors across the board. It’s not necessarily a new species of companies. It’s just companies that are a little bit better at doing stuff, which we also saw during the internet phenomenon and that first big push forward and then bubble, where we had some companies that were fundamentally different on how they operated. It took us another couple of decades for companies to be more and more digitally native along the way. Basically interesting, but it’s boring. It’s like, cool, we got tools, we got promised the world. What are the implications? All these companies that are worth trillions and trillions of dollars are not worth trillions and trillions of dollars. Because at some point we’ll face competition, commoditization. It will just be tools and platforms. They will not unlock that next stage. Therefore, this will have been a bubble, and likely it would be a hard landing to that bubble. That’s the implication.Bertrand Schmitt I would just say that, yes, I agree with you, but I would just say overall, even if it stopped today in terms of quality improvement, speed or stuff, or it barely improves, I still think we will have 10 years of madness just to leverage everything that we have today.Nuno Gonçalves Pedro Understood, Bertrand. This is a scenario. I understand, but maybe we’re going to hit a wall, and we’re going to hit that wall next year, or we’re going to hit that wall in 2 years or whatever.Bertrand Schmitt Possibly. I’m just saying we still have 10 years of goodness from that big push in AI we experienced the past few years.Nuno Gonçalves Pedro Absolutely. Agreed, but it’s boring.Bertrand Schmitt It’s boring. It’s a plateau.Nuno Gonçalves Pedro It’s a plateau. The second one is more of something that we have AI, but humans in the loop are going to be critical along the way. The judgment work that we described earlier in the episode is going to be critical to everything that happens. It’s, I would call it the augmentation scenario. The AI will be a great augmentation tool for humans, but humans will never really quite stop being in the loop. Some of the gains that AI has are broadly distributed in society and in the startup, big corporation and small medium business world. Everyone will have access to them. We humans, are still very important. We have all these augmentation things, and AI is mostly benign. There will be a couple of issues, but honestly, at the end of the day, we’re just better. We’re better, faster, more data-driven, more factually current. We’re doing stuff faster, but humans

Gus Carter is joined by Geoffrey Cain to speak about the ongoing developments in Chinese AI, and how it stacks up to its American rivals. Gus and Geoffrey talk about the emergence of Kimi K3, and how Chinese models will become inherently more competitive to global audiences, not just those the United States. They also discuss the OpenAI model that went rogue, and how other US models refused to undertake research to prevent the same from happening again.Learn how to earn yield on gold, paid in gold, at Monetary-Metals.com/AmericanoProduced by Henry LloydBecome a Spectator subscriber today to access this podcast without adverts. Go to spectator.co.uk/adfree to find out more.For more Spectator podcasts, go to spectator.co.uk/podcasts.Contact us: podcast@spectator.co.uk Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

OpenAI 'Rogue Agent' Fallout, Minnesota Water Systems Hit, Exchange OWA Zero-Click Mailbox Takeover   David Shipley covers multiple security stories: the OpenAI "rogue agent" incident expands as Modal Labs says a customer's exposed endpoint was used as a launchpad in attacks on Hugging Face, while critics cite missing zero trust/defense-in-depth and disabled safeguards; Bruce Schneier and Bargath Raghaven label this the "genie effect" and propose a "genie coefficient" to measure instruction-to-outcome gaps.   Minnesota IT Services reports more than 30 community water systems hit in a coordinated OT attack July 26–27, with some running manually, as agencies assist and warnings persist about Iranian-linked PLC targeting; Canada also reports a NoName intrusion claim.   Proofpoint details Laundry Bear exploiting an Exchange OWA XSS (CVE-2026-42897) to maintain mailbox access even after password resets. MCBS reports a 2025 breach affecting 1.261M people. Lava finds ~25,000 internet-exposed IPMI/BMCs leaking crackable hashes.   00:00 Headlines and intro 00:29 OpenAI rogue agent fallout 02:18 Genie effect and benchmarks 03:29 Minnesota water systems hit 05:02 Iran-linked PLC warnings 06:23 Exchange OWA mailbox backdoor 08:24 Medical billing breach tally 09:43 IPMI BMCs exposed online 11:00 Wrap-up and next episodes

So-called “frontier” artificial intelligence is going rogue. Think of it as FrankenAI.  Anthropic and OpenAI have both reported in recent days that their AI agents have autonomously attacked other organizations, apparently without authorization from humans or prior notice.  The trouble is this is assuredly but a small foretaste of what is being unleashed.  Leaders in the industry like Elon Musk have been warning for some time that the pell-mell pursuit of ever more powerful AI technology risks creating instruments for the destruction of civilization.  The notion that we must do so lest we “lose the race” with Communist China, sets up a no-win nightmare: Either we create doomsday AI or they do, with the help of American big tech.  We better hit “pause” on both our own headlong rush to create FrankenAI and stop enabling the CCP's.   This is Frank Gaffney.

In today's Cloud Wars Minute, I explore OpenAI's bold move into AI-powered consumer hardware and what it reveals about the future of trust in artificial intelligence.   Highlights 00:03 — OpenAI is adding yet another string to its bow as it becomes increasingly recognized as more than just its flagship ChatGPT product. Now, the company is reportedly developing its first consumer hardware device: a human-like AI companion that lives in the home. 00:21 — The report suggests that OpenAI is creating a portable, screenless AI smart speaker, not the AI phone that many people are expecting. As you might expect, the device will integrate with ChatGPT and handle questions, send messages, play media, and enable smart home controls. 00:38 — All pretty comparable to the existing smart speakers on the market, like Amazon's Echo. However, OpenAI's device is also expected to include cameras and sensors to get a better understanding of where it is and the context. While mechanical moving elements will give it more presence. Over time, the AI will learn about its owner and become increasingly personalized. 01:01 — Now, beyond the obvious—and by that I mean OpenAI's potential foray into consumer electronics and all the potential battles that might start between the leaders in that space—there's something really interesting about the ambition here and what it says about where we are today. Not long ago, the discussion was all about trust. 01:21 — Could we get consumers to trust AI enough to get the most from it? Looking at this investment, I think the answer is yes. This is an AI that not only observes and listens to its owner, but actively changes to adapt to their likes, dislikes, and personalities, passively and without waiting for requests. This is a big jump. Visit Cloud Wars for more.

The Investing Power Hour is live-streamed every Thursday on the Chit Chat Stocks Podcast YouTube channel at 5:00 PM EST. This week we discussed: (00:00) Introduction (02:31) AI Hedge Fund 'Situational Awareness' Sells Major Holdings (14:44) Amazon's Impressive Quarterly Results and Growth Drivers (17:10) Google Cloud and Cloud Revenue Growth Insights (21:52) Microsoft Earnings: Cloud, Office, and Gaming Performance (26:36) Korean Market Volatility and Degenerate Trading Culture (35:01) Robinhood's Prediction Markets and Trading Incentives (40:21) Meta's Earnings: Spending, AI, and Metaverse Investments (50:23) Luxury Goods Earnings: Hermes, Ferrari, and LVMH (59:25) Insider Trading and Political Connections in Stocks (01:01:21) NVIDIA's Support for OpenAI and Data Center Projects (01:02:06) Market Bubble Indicators and Blow-Off Tops ***************************************************** Subscribe to Emerging Moats Research: emergingmoats.com  ********************************************************************* Chit Chat Stocks is presented by Interactive Brokers. Get professional pricing, global access, and premier technology with the best brokerage for investors today:  https://www.interactivebrokers.com/  Interactive Brokers is a member of SIPC.  ********************************************************************* Fiscal.ai is building the future of financial data. With custom charts, AI-generated research reports, and endless analytical tools, you can get up to speed on any stock around the globe. All for a reasonable price.  Use our LINK and get 15% off any premium plan: ⁠https://fiscal.ai/chitchat  ********************************************************************* Disclosure: Chit Chat Stocks hosts and guests are not financial advisors, and nothing they say on this show is formal advice or a recommendation. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

What if the company quietly making OpenAI, Google, Anthropic, and Meta's models smarter was founded in India?Turing is one of the companies shaping how AI is advancing. It started in 2018 as a talent platform that found the top 1% of the world's engineers, became a unicorn in 2021, and then made a bet almost nobody understood at the time. In early 2022, long before ChatGPT existed, Turing began helping OpenAI improve its models by feeding human expertise directly into training. Today its network of more than four million vetted engineers and domain experts powers the post-training and evaluation work behind the frontier labs, and the company crossed roughly 300 million dollars in revenue while staying profitable, at a 2.2 billion dollar valuation.Vijay Krishnan is the co-founder and CTO. He was an NLP researcher at Stanford back when almost no one believed that predicting the next word could ever turn into reasoning, and he explains why running a modern model company without human-in-the-loop data is like entering a race with three tyres instead of four. He walks through how a model is actually taught to use software like Salesforce, why coding became the beachhead for every lab, and what changed for Turing the moment Scale AI was absorbed into Meta.The conversation then turns to the question every founder is now asked in the room. What is your moat against Claude? Vijay's answer is to go deeper than the frontier labs can reach, into the outcome you own and the context that lives inside an enterprise.If you are excited about how AI actually gets built, who really trains the models, and how to build a company that survives the labs, this episode is for you.00:00 - Trailer02:20 - The Indian company quietly behind OpenAI, Google, and Anthropic04:50 - How Turing went from a talent platform to a unicorn to an AI research partner08:20 - The bet nobody understood11:50 - Why a model company without human data is "racing on three tyres"15:50 - Why coding became the beachhead for every frontier lab19:50 - What changed for Turing the day Meta bought Scale AI23:50 - "What is your moat against Claude?"29:50 - Will AI create more lawyers, not fewer?34:50 - The teams where engineers haven't written code in six months39:50 - 16% of the Philippines' GDP is under threat from AI?43:50 - How you actually teach a model to use Salesforce49:50 - How robots are taught real-world work54:50 - Why million-dollar researcher packages are breaking startup hiring59:50 - The one kind of AI company that gets stronger as the models improve1:04:50 - Product vs. services, and the trap that quietly kills AI startups-------------India's talent has built the world's tech—now it's time to lead it.This mission goes beyond startups. It's about shifting the centre of gravity in global tech to include the brilliance rising from India.What is Neon Fund?We invest in seed and early-stage founders from India and the diaspora building world-class enterprise AI companies. We bring capital, conviction, and a community that's done it before.Subscribe for real founder stories, investor perspectives, economist breakdowns, and a behind-the-scenes look at how we're doing it all at Neon.-------------Check us out on:Website: https://neon.fund/Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/theneonshoww/LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/beneon/Twitter: https://x.com/TheNeonShowwConnect with Siddhartha on:LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/siddharthaahluwalia/Twitter: https://x.com/siddharthaa7-------------This video is for informational purposes only. The views expressed are those of the individuals quoted and do not constitute professional advice.Send us Fan Mail

The AI industry spent the week arguing with itself, which is honestly the healthiest thing it's done in years. One coalition led by Nvidia begged regulators not to slow down open AI models, while more than 1,100 AI workers signed another letter asking regulators to do exactly that. Anthropic warned about bioweapons, OpenAI admitted the four-hour workweek isn't happening after all, and Microsoft's Satya Nadella reminded everyone that building your entire business on someone else's AI is a fantastic way to outsource your own brain. In other words, the people selling the future still can't agree on what they're selling, except that you'd better buy it fast.Meanwhile, the AI bubble keeps demanding sacrifices. Patreon, BuzzFeed, and Uber all swung the layoff axe while insisting AI isn't replacing humans... it's just reorganizing them out of a paycheck. Nvidia is floating another three-quarters of a trillion dollars in infrastructure deals that have people muttering "AI subprime mortgage crisis," China has discovered there's money in renting your face to AI companies, and the U.S. is carving data centers out of pollution rules because apparently acid rain is a small price to pay for chatbot dominance. Add in ChatGPT suddenly refusing to imitate famous authors, researchers discovering AI coding assistants are happily installing malware if you ask nicely, and Meta launching an ad campaign about the wonders of AI that somehow forgets to mention what any of those wonders actually are.Elsewhere in Tech Hell™, eBay finally paid the price for its executives' unhinged harassment campaign involving pig masks and live insects, Elon is shopping The Boring Company while promising money won't matter in the AI utopia of 2036, and a traveler is headed to court after allegedly triggering GrapheneOS's "duress PIN" during a border search. We also hit Media Candy with Star Trek: Strange New Worlds, Silo, Blade Runner 2099 and Neuromancer, celebrate Dave Bittner's birthday, marvel at Jason's ever-growing Boneyard of dead websites, and somehow end up discussing thermal cameras, piano repair, and old-man bladder supplements. Because that's what happens when Gen X gets older - we just add more tabs instead of closing the old ones.Sponsors:DeleteMe - Get 20% off your DeleteMe plan when you go to JoinDeleteMe.com/GOG and use promo code GOG at checkout.StoryBlocks - For a limited time, they're offering 15% off any annual plan at storyblocks.com/gogPrivate 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/757Watch on YouTube at https://youtu.be/Sii_nodESkcSHOW NOTESEBay and Former Execs Will Pay $56 Million to Couple They Tormented With Bloody Pig MasksAs US weighs response to Chinese AI, industry urges against broad open-weight restrictionsAI researchers call for new tools that can slow automated model developmentOver 1,100 AI workers sign letter asking US to support tools that 'pace the frontier of automated AI development'Anthropic's Dario Amodei responds: doesn't oppose open-weight models, but fears Chinese AIAmodei Denies Anthropic Supports Open-Weight AI Ban, Warns of China RisksSam Altman said AI hasn't led to 4-hour workweeks because people are competitiveSam Altman Shuts Down Hopes of an AI-Led 4-Day Workweek Anytime SoonOpenAI Proposes 32-Hour Pilot Incentives for EmployersSatya Nadella says companies that trust one AI for everything may not survive Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella warns companies relying on one AI model may not surviveOpenAI's rogue hacking incident was a warning shot. Will it be a wake-up call to finally create AI safety regulation?Behind the Curtain: AI godfathers converge on regulationsPatreon is laying off 20 percent of its staffAI Mania Is Eviscerating Global Decision-MakingBuzzFeed Lays Off 33 Percent of Remaining Staff After Bizarre Pivot to AIUber lays off 10 percent of its customer service team in favor of using AIIn China, people are renting out their faces to AIAs SpaceX Sheds a Tesla's Worth of Value, Elon Musk Is Trying to Sell Investors on Another CompanyHow Much Charity Would It Take for People to Like Elon Musk?ChatGPT is now refusing requests to write in famous authors' stylesNvidia's $750 Billion Deals Revive Fear of AI Circular FinancingThe Trump administration is exempting data centers from pollution laws intended to prevent acid rainUS accuses American of allegedly wiping his phone using a 'duress' password during border searchMeta launches new Facebook Verified badge for actual, real humansMeta launches a storefront platform through Facebook MarketplaceMeta's pro-AI ad campaign is conspicuously light on AIIf You AI-Generate Code, Hackers Just Found a Devious Method to Install Malware Directly on Your ComputerMinions & MonstersStar Trek: Strange New WorldsBroadchurch S2SiloTed Lasso Season 4 TrailerNeuromancer — Official Teaser | Apple TVPrime Video Finally Lifts the Lid on ‘Blade Runner 2099'Star Trek: Section 31Bad Deeds by Andrew Hunter MurrayDave BittnerThe CyberWireHacking HumansCaveatControl LoopOnly Malware in the BuildingJason DeFillippoJurassic Park computers in excruciating detailWho are the Mandalorians? | Star Wars: Galaxy GuideHF96V Thermal Camera with Visual Camera & Laser Pointer, Intelligent Scene Detection, 240 * 240 Super Resolution Thermal Imaging Camera,25 Hz, 50° FOV, -4°F to 1022°F, IP54 Infrared CameraProject FarmSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Chris Ryan returns to help Jason and Tyler give the people what they want: cryptids! Inspired by Christopher Nolan's ‘The Odyssey,' they take a look at some of folklore's most fantastical creatures. In this episode: (00:00) Intro (3:31) Cryptids in ‘The Odyssey' (16:26) The goblin shark (19:55) The unidentified organism (22:38) The barreleye fish (23:20) New Loch Ness Monster sighting (25:25) Cryptids that'd be the best hang (40:19) Giant great white shark (42:02) Stories we're keeping tabs on Hosts: Jason Concepcion and Tyler Parker Guest: Chris Ryan Producers: Donnie Beacham and Justin Sayles Art direction: David Shoemaker Motion graphics and animations: Chris Calleton Engineering: Sarah Reddy Set design: Hannah Leiken and Jonathan Ratliff Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Donald Trump suggests introducing controls on artificial intelligence following OpenAI's admission that it lost control of systems under test. But the US president said any restrictions should not allow China to win the AI race. Also: Germany says deportations to Afghanistan are no longer limited to criminals. A special report from a train journey across Iran. A mystery illness kills elephants in Kenya. BTS decides not to compete in the Grammys - we find out why. And fancy a private tour of Stonehenge? It could be yours.The Global News Podcast brings you the breaking news you need to hear, as it happens. Listen for the latest headlines and current affairs from around the world. Politics, economics, climate, business, technology, health – we cover it all with expert analysis and insight. Get the news that matters, delivered twice a day on weekdays and daily at weekends, plus special bonus episodes reacting to urgent breaking stories. Follow or subscribe now and never miss a moment. Get in touch: globalpodcast@bbc.co.uk Photo: A mobile phone display showing the icons of artificial intelligence (AI) apps Deepseek, Chatgpt and Gemini. Credit: Hannibal Hanschke/EPA/Shutterstock

A new study from the Oversight Board found that leading AI systems are less likely to criticize authoritarian governments than democratic ones. It's a wild finding — but wait? Why is the Oversight Board studying systems from OpenAI and Anthropic in the first place? Suzanne Nossel, who sits on the board, joined us to discuss the findings and why the Oversight Board's future might involve looking at more than just Meta. Further reading: Zoox can now charge for rides in its steering-wheel-free robotaxis Spotify Running Mode helps match tunes to tempo Friend re-launches its AI pendant with a speaker that talks to you, for twice the price ⁠How Facebook undercut the Oversight Board⁠ Subscribe to The Verge for unlimited access to theverge.com, subscriber-exclusive newsletters, and our ad-free podcast feed.We love hearing from you! Email your questions and thoughts to vergecast@theverge.com or call us at 866-VERGE11. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

A.M. Edition for July 30. Meta shares fall and Microsoft rallies after the hyperscalers sent very different signals on how they're monetizing their massive AI outlays. Plus, as some people are allowed to return to their homes in southwestern France, WSJ's Ed Ballard says a debate over aging water bombers and the country's readiness ahead of a summer of wildfires is picking up. And DoorDash secures a key certification from the FAA to use drones for deliveries. Luke Vargas hosts. Sign up for the WSJ's free What's News newsletter. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

P.M. Edition for July 30. The U.S. economy grew just 1.5% last quarter, lower than the previous quarter and falling short of economists' expectations. WSJ economics reporter Harriet Torry explains why the details in the report, particularly around consumer spending, suggest things aren't as bad as the headline number makes it seem. Plus, the buzzy AI-focused hedge fund Situational Awareness, founded by AI whiz kid Leopold Aschenbrenner, sold most of its stock portfolio to investment firm Citadel. We hear from WSJ special writer Greg Zuckerman about why this happened and where the company goes from here. And a big rally in tech companies sent U.S. stocks soaring today. Alex Ossola hosts. See the new fronts in the Iran war.  Sign up for the WSJ's free What's News newsletter. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Following a recent cybersecurity breech by OpenAI, in which two of their in-progress models autonomously hacked into the AI company Hugging Face, lawmakers from both sides of the aisle are pushing for an "AI Kill Switch" bill in Congress. Brendan Bordelon, AI and tech influence reporter at Politico, discusses Washington's changing approach to AI regulation amid growing concerns over cybersecurity in every sector, and unpacks how tech giants are hoping to guide the shift.  Photo: WASHINGTON, DC - JULY 29: Sam Altman, CEO of OpenAI, leaves a meeting at the U.S. Capitol on July 29, 2026 in Washington, DC. Altman is meeting with lawmakers to discuss artificial intelligence policy ahead of the August 1 deadline for AI leaders to develop a framework to limit AI security threats. (Photo by Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images)   Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Cal Newport takes a critical look at recent AI News. Video from today's episode: youtube.com/calnewportmedia (0:00) Did OpenAI's model “go rogue” (11:29) The implications (11:42) Did this attack reveal surprising new capabilities we didn't know AI systems possessed? (12:48) Did the system's decision to escape the test environment and autonomously attack another company indicate an emerging malicious intent in AI? (16:28) What changed led to this attack occurring? (27:32) Who should care about this story? Links: Buy Cal's latest book, “Slow Productivity” at www.calnewport.com/slow  https://huggingface.co/blog/security-incident-july-2026 https://openai.com/index/hugging-face-model-evaluation-security-incident/ https://www.wsj.com/tech/ai/openai-models-escaped-and-hacked-a-company-in-cybersecurity-test-gone-wrong-ee388506 https://thehill.com/policy/technology/5987397-openai-hugging-face-hack/ https://apnews.com/article/skynet-ai-terminator-artificial-intelligence-eb85da03a0161beaa5f3babc4331e93b https://www.ft.com/content/7e558951-0c69-459b-8bc8-2c6021d4402d?syn-25a6b1a6=1 https://federalnewsnetwork.com/all-news/2011/08/dhs-anonymous-used-rudimentary-tools-to-hack-contractor/ Thanks to Jesse Miller for production and mastering and Nate Mechler for research and newsletter. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices