AI Regulatory Capture Bet: Why OpenAI & Anthropic Stopped Competing on Tech

Summary

---

More or Less Podcast – “AI Regulatory Capture Bet: Why OpenAI & Anthropic Stopped Competing on Tech”

Hosts: Dave Morin, Jessica Lessin, Brit Morin, Sam Lessin
Date: July 17, 2026

Episode Overview

This episode dives deep into the current moment in AI: a “regulatory capture” arms race, the fading lines between innovation and protectionism, and why Silicon Valley’s top AI labs (OpenAI, Anthropic, etc.) have shifted their focus from outpacing each other technologically to lobbying for favorable regulations. The friendly, rapid-fire debate explores whether we’re truly in a competitive market, what “real” companies look like today, the edges of open-source AI, and the Hollywoodification of Silicon Valley. The hosts also touch on evolving business models for AI, hardware rumors, and even experiment with peptides and new dating app features.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Market Hype, Valuations & M&A

• The crew discusses whether the current AI moment is a bubble, interpreting “no news” as a sign things might be nearing a peak ([03:31]).
• There’s debate about whether OpenAI and Anthropic deserve their valuations, what makes a company “real,” and what justifies IPO momentum ([04:10], [03:04]):
  • Sam Lessin: “A real company is a company you can sue and you get paid if you win the lawsuit.” ([04:42])
• Brit flags that AI model costs are impacting consumer choices: “We’ve gone from token maxing to token budgeting in the Morin household.” ([06:35])
• Notably, Brit and Dave believe Anthropic and other providers are feeling margin pressure from open-source entrants like GLM 5.2 ([07:27]).

2. Open Source AI, Model Quality, and the Shift to Utility

• Major AI models are converging in performance, and open-source models are catching up rapidly, sometimes within “two months” of closed counterparts. Enterprises may still pay a premium for trust and slightly better performance ([08:06]).
• Sam Lessin: “We're just multiplying big numbers. ... These are utilities with none of the financial benefits of being utilities, which is why they’re all in Washington trying to, like, put up trade barriers.” ([09:19])
• Brit highlights how agencies/enterprises are starting to consolidate around the best-value models, squeezing weaker players ([07:27]).
• There’s consensus that as AI commoditizes, differentiation will come from reliability or “PhD student gets an A vs. B”, not step-function advances ([10:41]).

3. Regulatory Capture & Lobbying: The New Battlefield

• Central Question: Are we still playing capitalism, or is it all regulatory games now?
• Sam Lessin: “I don’t think we’re playing capitalism anymore. I think we’re playing … a political capture game that is way less interesting than capitalism.” ([13:27])
• The hosts map out the policy fight, likening it to the recording industry’s fight against Napster, with OpenAI/Anthropic looking to lock down open weights to retain profits ([17:08]).
• Regulatory arguments veer toward national security (Chinese models, distillation fears, etc.), but Sam and Dave agree that technical controls will always lag global software diffusion ([15:55], [17:08]):
  • Sam Lessin: “Stopping people from moving software around the world is the same thing as stopping them from moving books. … That’s really weird.” ([16:55])
• Jessica summarizes Google DeepMind’s Demis Hassabis’s proposal: a government body to vet frontier models pre-release—a symbolic move supported by AI CEOs, but unlikely to be effective or meaningful ([23:59], [24:18]).
• Sam Lessin: “If the plan was we, America, need to take our military and bomb every matrix multiplication facility globally ... that would at least be logical.” ([25:32] and in the cold open at [00:00])

4. Hardware, Product Bets, and Hollywoodification

• Rumors swirl over OpenAI’s upcoming “smart speaker”—is it just another Alexa or something radically new? The hosts are mostly skeptical ([29:41], [30:07]).
• Sam theorizes that much of the Johnny Ive “acquisition” was a narrative/brand value investment: “It was one step along that line of … making raising more capital cheaper, not more expensive.” ([31:03])
• They compare Valley dealmakers and researchers to Hollywood “stars” and “studios,” noting that “star power” now confers outsized business multiples ([32:39], [34:02]).
• Dave: “OpenAI is SNL … a comedy troupe that spun out several leading characters able to open movies.” ([33:16])

5. Current and Future UX: Voice & Real-Time Agents

• Dave predicts the next wave: real-time, always-on voice models like OpenAI’s “Live,” which can talk and listen simultaneously ([38:12]).
• The group is less sold on passive, always-on recording hardware—marginal improvements in context may not justify privacy/cost tradeoffs ([35:50]).

6. Side Topics & Fun Moments

• Health: Sam is experimenting with peptides and advocates tracking everything for self-optimization; Brit plans a future peptide episode with expert Matt Mazzio ([41:00]–[42:41]).
• Dating: Brit highlights Hinge’s new “Friends Take” feature, sparking nostalgia for older social matching services like Yenta—and musings on whether “references” could/should change recruiting paradigms ([43:33]–[45:39]).
• Music: The team closes with banter about seeing Jay Z, nostalgia, and how celebrities can leverage dynastic brand value ([46:09]–[47:31]).

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On “real” companies and AI valuation:
  • Sam Lessin: “A real company is a company you can sue and you get paid if you win the lawsuit. ... So I think they’re real companies.” ([04:42])
• On the maturing AI landscape:
  • Dave: “You’re just multiplying big numbers. Open source has caught up. It will be where the volume is. … These are utilities with none of the financial benefits of being utilities.” ([09:19])
  • Sam Lessin: “All of AI, these AI wars are like politics and not business or technology at this point. And, like, that’s a bummer.” ([19:22])
• On regulatory logic:
  • Sam Lessin: “If the plan was we, America, need to take our military and bomb every matrix multiplication facility globally … at least that is a plausible thing. … With the idea [of regulation], … enjoy being on a committee forever. … The only thing you accomplish is making those companies very valuable, right? You accomplish literally nothing except for that.” ([25:32])
• On hardware & “Hollywoodification” of tech:
  • Sam Lessin: “Johnny Ive acquisition … was one step along that line of … making raising more capital cheaper, not more expensive…just on the brand of Jony Ive.” ([31:03])
  • Sam Lessin: “Now everything is Hollywood. … There’s star power that really matters—people who can open movies, people who can open startups.” ([32:39])
• On always-on voice/AI agents:
  • Dave: “Streaming real time interaction with models is … one of the major things that OpenAI is researching. … Would you have a participant in your conversations every day that is a third party that's interacting with you in real time?” ([37:58])
• Light moments:
  • Jessica (about Benson Boone): “There is something about seeing him perform live … I need to hear him perform his new song.” ([27:17])
  • Brit (on health optimization): “I'm convinced women should be microdosing testosterone.” ([48:37])

---

Timestamps for Important Segments

• AI Market & M&A: [01:32]–[05:13]
• Anthropic, OpenAI True Value: [03:04]–[05:13]
• Token Budgeting, Model Cost Consolidation: [06:28]–[08:06]
• Open Source vs Closed Models: [08:06]–[10:41]
• Are We Playing Capitalism or Regulatory Games?: [13:27]–[14:12]
• Open Source, IP, & National Security: [15:55]–[19:40]
• Hollywoodification, “Stars,” and Multiples: [31:03]–[34:48]
• Hardware and OpenAI Device: [29:41]–[31:03]
• Voice/“Live” Model Discussion: [38:12]–[40:56]
• Peptides, Health, Dating Sidebars: [41:00]–[45:39]
• Jay Z/Beyoncé Closer: [46:09]–[47:40]

---

Tone & Style Recap

Conversational, irreverent, insight-packed, and given to playful analogies. The episode blends inside-baseball tech talk with candid, sometimes cynical asides about business models and the “games” of modern Silicon Valley. The core tension is between innovation and politics—epitomized by the shift from open competition to regulatory lobbying.

---

This summary captures all key insights, debates, and memorable lines, with guidance to specific timestamps for deeper listening.

Transcript

[A]

If the plan was we, America, need to take our military and bomb every matrix multiplication facility globally and we're gonna have all of them and then we're gonna control AI, that would at least be logical.

[B]

One thing that is different today, Wednesday, July 15, is that America now has at least one open weights model that just went out the door.

[C]

I'm convinced women should be microdosing testosterone

[D]

more or less easy.

[A]

No. Or is it?

[C]

Yes.

[D]

We'll debate the text.

[C]

That's best when we

[D]

more or less

[C]

Dave and grit plus salmon Jess put

[A]

it all right to the test.

[D]

More or less.

[C]

Why?

[D]

Hello, friends. Welcome to More or Less Deep Summer edition. Deep Summer.

[C]

Is this the deepest of summer or does that like late?

[D]

I don't know.

[B]

When is the deep summer?

[D]

It also, it depends where you are.

[C]

When do most people vacation?

[B]

It is kind of right around now. This is pretty much the middle, right?

[D]

Sure.

[C]

I don't know. Not if you're European. Yeah.

[D]

Not if you're East Coast.

[C]

Yeah. East coast is August.

[B]

I'm saying, like if you go back to school in the middle of August, then July 15 is pretty much the middle.

[C]

But East Coasters go back middle of September, so that's the difference.

[B]

Oh, they do.

[D]

But we're West Coasters, so happy Deep Summer.

[B]

What is wrong with West Coast?

[D]

Well, we get out earlier, we're here, there's news a little bit. Let's not pretend there's a lot of news, guys. There's not a lot of news. TITV turned one. That was big news this week.

[B]

Oh, congrats.

[C]

Congrats.

[B]

Woohoo.

[D]

Thank you. Thank you. We made it. Keep on going. We've got some AI headlines.

[C]

We should talk hardware, new models, potential acquisitions happening.

[D]

Potential acquisitions. I feel like the acquisition, it's always hard because the bankers just want you to think the acquisitions are already around the corner. But I think they're close. I think we're going to see a lot people are going to throw in the towel and take the valuation, but you guys are the actual investors. What do you, what do you have cooking? Tell us about all your deals.

[B]

Never happening.

[C]

I have a number of companies that are in M and A processes, so I do think there are real acquisitions that are going to happen.

[D]

There you go.

[C]

Finally. Remember, we've been doing this pod so long and the first like year or two is like so dry out there in the M and A world. And every year I kept predicting this is the year M and A is going to happen. But here we are, 2020.

[D]

Here we are so what's catalyzing it? Why now, without telling us which.

[C]

Well, I think, like, There are real IPOs happening. There is real liquidity happening. The AI races have never been hotter.

[B]

What real IPO are you talking about?

[C]

Okay, there are narrative IPOs happening, their AI races happening.

[D]

No, Anthropic is a real IPO, guys. Even OpenAI is a real ish. IPO. Really?

[B]

What? Really?

[C]

The valuations of these IP' videos are not real.

[B]

These companies are actually going to go public this year.

[D]

Jess, Anthropic will go public. I. I would be shocked if they're not public in September.

[C]

Yeah.

[B]

Really?

[C]

I'd be very surprised.

[D]

Yeah.

[C]

Agree. Yeah. And OpenAI is going to follow.

[D]

They might wait until next year.

[B]

Yeah. I don't know. I mean, the SpaceX IPO would pause on that for me if I was either of them.

[C]

Oh, no, it was fine.

[D]

But Anthropic is a real company.

[B]

Really?

[C]

None of them are real companies that warrant their valuations. They have what?

[D]

Guys, Anthropic, if you look at its revenue, profitability, growth rate, it's a real company.

[C]

Why?

[D]

Why do you say it isn't? Dave, I may disagree with some of the decisions they make, but why do you think it's not a real company?

[B]

Well, we've talked about it as nauseam. I mean, these companies are burning enormous amounts of capital. Like, they're.

[A]

They're not profitable, but Anthropic is profitable.

[B]

On which metrics?

[D]

I actually. On, like the good gap ones, I think. Not just the.

[C]

On the good metrics, not the bad metrics.

[D]

Yeah, no, I think they are. But to highlight your point, you think the numbers still don't add up ultimately, and maybe that they can't sustain this revenue growth, that kind of thing?

[B]

Yeah. Yeah, we'll see.

[D]

Sam, you're very quiet. What do you think?

[A]

I'm just looking at OpenAI's hardware. Oh, it's supply. What is supply cove with OpenAI? Is this their thing?

[B]

The Codex thing? It's just a. It's. It's. It's merch. It's not hardware.

[A]

Oh, this is. Is it? It's basically the easy button. Is this the easy button?

[B]

Yes.

[A]

For 2026.

[B]

Yes.

[A]

Got it. So it's like a Staples play.

[B]

Yeah, it's just merch.

[A]

I think everyone's out securing their bags before it all falls apart.

[B]

Yep, that's what's happening.

[D]

What signs are you seeing that it's all going to fall apart?

[A]

Well, there's no news, as they said. This is the same group and Saying forever. It's just everyone now is saying it in the open and out loud. Right. Which is none of this stuff makes sense. Which people are saying out loud. And everyone's going to race for the bag. You sell your company doesn't. Wherever you can get the cash. Yeah, I'm seeing people sell a bunch of companies, and I don't think it's wrong. I think they should. The isanthropic real company, you look, I give them credit. If you can actually do an EBITDA multiple on it, I give them credit for that, then, yes, they're a real company. But I'll go back to the Bob lesson. Definition of a real company is my dad, and a real company is very simple. A real company is a company you can sue and you get paid if you win the lawsuit. So I think they're real companies.

[D]

Okay, I like it. I like it. Okay, but everyone's getting super nervous for all the reasons we've been talking about every week.

[B]

Yeah, this isn't new. It's not like something changed week over week.

[D]

Well, Dave, we do do this podcast weekly, so dig deep and find something to say.

[C]

We have to keep plotting our chart, Dave, to make sure we're all moving the same direction week over week, towards the top of the bubble.

[D]

Here's something that's changed. Brit's tweets about AI have changed. I've noticed a change in the tenor of them.

[C]

Ooh, what does that mean?

[B]

Here's the other thing, which I'll just say this. The OpenAI's 5.6 soul is clearly superior to Fable. Like, there's nobody that nobody serious doesn't agree. And the open source models are less than two months behind. You know, I've switched out GLM 5.2 for almost every utilitarian use case that matters in any of my agents, because why would I pay for, you know, Frontier Intelligence to do all utility use cases? Like, it just doesn't make sense when GLM 5.2 is actually Frontier Intelligence and it's insanely cheap, so of course I'm going to use that. Why would I pay more?

[A]

Are you saying you're going with discount multiplying big numbers?

[B]

Yes, I am. I like discount multiplying big numbers.

[D]

Oh, this is what you tweeted, Brit. You tweeted that the Morin household is now gone from token maxing to token budgeting.

[C]

Yeah, it's not negative about AI.

[B]

No. It's such a sensational headline.

[C]

Not sensational.

[D]

That was her ex post. It wasn't headline Your own wife put that on the Internet?

[B]

No, I know.

[C]

I put it because I'm using all these models. It was a lot.

[A]

How much is your household spending on tokens?

[C]

I'm just going to say it was a lot. I don't. I mean, Dave keeps some secret credit cards from me, so I don't know. I mean, there's like, the real answer and then what I think is the answer. But I mean, even my own, I was like, oh, my gosh, how am I spending all this money? Because I have to. I'm testing all of them. I'm on, like, every, you know, playing with all this stuff all the time. And so I have done some consolidation and I'm really proud of my financial cleanup work.

[D]

So who are the losers in the consolidation?

[B]

Anthropic.

[C]

Yeah, probably anthropic.

[B]

No question. I mean, those turns, those agent turns were being done by, you know, Opus 4. 6 or Opus 4. 7 or Sonnet 4, Sonnet 5. And there's no point in paying for those turns anymore when you can get the same quality from GLM 5.2.

[A]

Well, okay, but just, just to play devil's advocate to that, like, I obviously, broadly agree with you. Right? Like, broadly. But I also just, like, don't care about any of this. Like, it doesn't matter. Like, it's not that expensive. And like, my view is like, I just use whatever and like, I'm not switching because I just don't care about the money. It's not enough to matter.

[B]

But, Sam, that might be your opinion, but, like, enterprises do care and we are speaking to a lot of people running enterprises.

[A]

Of course. I mean, that's fine and I'm happy for you to interrupt me anytime you want, but the you. The obviously enterprise is not going to operate that way. And as they go from experimental budgets to whatever, they'll be like, figuring this stuff out and optimizing it. Sure. I will say on a purely personal base, though, the reason, if there's a pro anthropic or model whatever argument, the argument is this, paying 10 bucks for something and let's pretend even 1% of the time it doesn't fuck it up or comes back and asks it doesn't ask me a stupid clarifying question, I'll pay for it. There is this veil of I don't care, it's not that expensive, whatever. And like, even if it's only want to save me one email once a month, whatever. You know what I mean? So I do think there's, like. And that's Going to be the interesting nexus here about, like, trust and accuracy around open sources. Anyone at scale, like, this whole story, like, obviously there's going to be massive pricing pressure on multiplying big numbers. And I totally root. Dave, we've been saying this I think as long as anyone. I think we all have, which is like, you're just multiplying big numbers. Open source has caught up. It will be where the volume is. It's a volume game. These are Monopoly. I'm sorry, These are utilities with none of the financial benefits of being utilities, which is why they're all in Washington trying to, like, put up trade barriers and like, get, you know, blah, blah, blah. We get that. But I will say the only counter argument to all that is in scenarios where, like, you're not 100% sure what the answer should look like, right? Or there's real return on it being slightly more accurate and you just don't care about the cost, you'd rather save another back and forth. To clarify something, and I will say, like, I moved my infrastructure up to Fable. I only did it just now. Like, I literally haven't upgraded because it hasn't been relevant. But I finally was like, I just told my bot over email. I was like, just start using Fable instead of Opus, whatever. And it did. I'm like, oh, this actually is a little better. That's cool. Like, it's not, like, going to change my life, but, like, it did one or two smart things. That's fine. You know what I mean? Like, that's kind of the vibe I'm at at this point, if that makes sense. Which is like, it's not exciting, it's not important, but it's fine.

[B]

Which I think that sentiment, Sam, kind of matters to.

[A]

No, I agree. I think that. But that's. That's the point of the curve we're at.

[B]

The business question we're asking is, does the revenue ramp continue to look like this over the next year? And I think that the sentiment that you're referring to actually matters, which is that it's kind of all just boring. Like, they don't move forward that much every time.

[A]

Well, I think it's kind of like imagine you have, like. It's just like, I go back to. You gotta use human analogies. It's like, look, we were all talking to high school students, and then we were talking to college students, and we're like, oh, these college students, I'd rather talk to them than the high school students. They seem better. And then we all started talking to PhD students. And we're like, oh, these PhD students, these grad students seem smarter than the college students. Good. And now we're at the point where, like, all right, well, maybe there's, like, a PhD student who's getting an A versus a B in some class. And, like, if I really care about specifically that one topic in that one scenario, God bless that they're now getting an A versus a B. But I'm actually asking it to fucking fold laundry. And the college kid can do it, right? And, like, that's kind of where we're at, you know? And, like, it's fine. Like, I'm glad. Like, people should keep making slightly smarter PhD students, but it's not gonna, like, change anyone's life.

[D]

Okay, Britt, what do you think this

[C]

is back to my evolution, not revolution that I brought up last week, which is. I agree. I'm like, it's fine. It's cool. I mean, I've been using Fable in the past week to do some interesting things. I think it's, like, failed less at getting things wrong. So that's good. But, like, I don't know. Demis was posting this whole thing today about AGI yet again and how we need a standards body to review all the models and all these different things. And then I was like, is AGI. Like, he's. Is AGI really years away? Is this really happening? And I know we debate this a

[A]

lot, but, well, just AGI is a meaningless term at this point. It doesn't mean anything. It's just like computers.

[D]

Well, let's. I want to pivot us a little bit to. Because we'll go nowhere on this topic, which is a good topic, but. Okay, I am hearing more buzz about real regulatory action around open source because of the issue.

[B]

Open source or open weights? Jess?

[D]

Open source. Right. So, like, folks inside the government saying, okay, we have a problem here. Anthropic and OpenAI are worried about the Chinese models undercutting them. At the same time, like, objectively, as a country, if you're worried about national security, you're not thrilled with everyone going to the Chinese models. At the same time, if the Chinese models are also advancing more rapidly because they're distilling the US Frontier models, that doesn't seem great for protecting intellectual property in the us so it. It seems to me like whether or not something happens is up to the Washington gods and goddesses. But, like, it. There's clearly. Dave, like you've now said for weeks, you've talked about GLM and all these things. Like I. Do you think the US will let this situation just continue to exist?

[A]

I mean it depends how good OpenAI and Anthropic are at lobbying to create margin for themselves. Yeah, that's what it comes down to. This is what I don't like about our moment in history is I don't think we're playing capitalism anymore. Like, I think we're playing some like, like political capture game that is way less interesting than capitalism, right? And so that sucks, right? And like we should compete in fair and open markets as much as possible and the best team should win and whatever. And like now we're just in this game of like people, which is again it's, it's, it's been stories for a while, AI is scary, blah, blah, like all these types of things. But now we've kind of moved to a new version of the game which feels much more desperate, right? Which is like, man, we better like get some regulatory capture going because otherwise we're in trouble.

[D]

Sam, what's your point of view on what the state of play with. And Dave, you finish your point and I want your point of view on this question too. But like what is in the US interest with regards to these open source Chinese models though? Like yes, it would be regulatory capture if.

[A]

I don't think it's Chinese. I think it's just, that's, that's like too specific, right? It's just open source, right? Like in broadly, like look, this goes back to like years ago I used to hate on GDPR constantly and specifically this thing called the right to be forgotten, which is one of the dumbest laws ever written because you're like, how the hell are you going to enforce that? Like you can't. It's like it makes no sense, right? Like, like from an intellectual. It's not how the Internet works. It's like, you know, people used to make T shirts with encryption algorithms. Encryption. We even go back further. In the early Internet there was this big argument about whether encryption technology was a weapon and whether it could be exported from the US legally or not. And then all these like hackers would like literally just put encryption algorithms on T shirts and walk around because they're so simple. It's like you can't stop this from moving cross border, right? And so the basic point with all this stuff again is like it's one thing if you're just like, okay, like the Chinese models are bad and like we're going to put up a trade embargo on like copying like Chinese using Chinese Models from China but we're going to do in the US like that none of that's how the Internet works. Like that's not how this shit works, right? And like so to me like, and weirdly enough, I mean there's even like a weird argument about oh would you stop American open source models because that's technically our domain for me to develop but not the Chinese one because that'll cause a trade war. Like that's insane, right? Like all this shit's just insane and doesn't map to how like capitalism or like the Internet works, right? And that's what I object to.

[D]

Is there a path back or what? I mean I agree with everything you're saying. What do you think solves it or ameliorates it or we just. Is it a one way door?

[B]

One thing that is different today, Wednesday, July 15th is that America now has at least one open weights model that just went out the door. So you know Miramorati's Thinking machines appears to be a really solid open weights model. You know It's a almost 975 billion parameter model, million token context window mixture of experts. It's really good. And this thing's open weights and I'm free. You can get it on hugging face today. So that's the first American really sort of heavy hitting open weights model, right.

[D]

There's like reflection and some other. But yes. Nemotron.

[C]

Yeah, Nvidia would be the biggest competitor

[B]

right in the U.S. nemotron's fine. This is substantially better. This one's competitive with the Chinese models.

[A]

I just think at the end of the day like stopping people from moving software around the world it's the same thing as stopping them remove books around the world. It's just, it's like really weird right As a concept to like push on

[B]

and like I'm just like so Sam, does this become. I mean I think if I'm putting myself into the then ideologies of the big labs. Is this more like the Napster fight than it was than it is anything where you know when Napster happened that was also moving effectively songs moving around were software moving around the Internet, right. And so what happened this like entire, what was it called? The DMCA kind of Metallica? It was Metallica, it was Jimmy Iovine. It was the, you know record labels like they were like we are powerful, we are going to get control over this. And today you know on modern computers like moving around digital music is still incredible, incredibly difficult and very hobbled like it's like It's a pretty gnarly system they built.

[A]

The problem is, like, there's some great irony to that example, although I think it's a good one to discuss, which is what do the models do immediately? Like, the, like, open AI, whatever. They went and ripped the entire Internet and broke all copyright and stole everything, right? It's like, in order to build, like, version one, and then they get all mad about people distilling them, and, like, that's literally just people doing to you what you did to everyone. So, like, I think, like, I get it, yes.

[B]

But I'm trying to get into, like, what's the policy fight here? Is the policy fight really similar? Like, are we trying to. You know, in Anthropic's case, they believe this is insanely unsafe. Only they should be able to decide what's safe and what isn't. And so let's lock it all down. Because biological weapons and weapons. And weapons, weapons, weapons, right?

[A]

I mean, look, it's a great. There are two things that end all arguments, right? Like national security and then child porn. Like, those are the things you use if you want to win an argument, because no one's going to argue against them. Like, this is like, the child porn was, like, the best example ever. Because, like, all you have to say is child porn and people lose their shit and, like, we'll, like, sacrifice anything to stop it. Maybe that's good, maybe that's bad, but it's like, it's a. It's a tough one, right? It'd be the analogy enough to be like, if listening to Metallica would explode your brain, right? Like, that would be the argument. We have to stop Metallica.

[B]

I mean, it might. Depends on how loud.

[A]

Yeah, yeah, exactly. So I don't know. I mean, like, I just. I don't know.

[D]

My.

[A]

My thing more is just, like, I'm just depressed about the entire thing. I have. I offer no advice. Like, I think. I think this has gone, like, all of AI. These AI wars are like, politics and not business or technology at this point. And, like, that's a bummer, but do

[C]

you see that changing?

[B]

But, Sam, between last week and this week's pod, you had Meta released musespark at a significantly lower cost, which was like, it was like a good business move. And I had access to it early and I was playing with it and I was like, wow, this is really fast and really cheap.

[A]

It is good. It's good.

[B]

I might actually use this instead of glm, but then I told my bot

[A]

to use it for some Things after

[B]

it released, it was just kind of like, eh. And so.

[D]

Well, it's also been six days.

[B]

I understand, but these were smart business moves. That's like a really smart business move. Use your money tree from the average. We've talked about Meta's advertising money tree for years now. Use that to subsidize the lower the cost, compete on cost. But it kind of was like, I guess we'll see. You're right, Jess, in like a month. Whether or not that mattered or not.

[A]

Well, look, we're back at a story where everyone's like, well, it's the application layer. I don't know. It's true. I think what it is, is like there are companies that can use this shit to be way more profitable. They will use that shit, right? Like, God bless and those companies will be better. And that's the story of this AI stuff. The actual one model to rule them all. We're clearly past that, right? The fact that who's in head keeps leapfrogging and open source is right there is like we're just multiplying big numbers and then there's going to be an attempt because the fundamental business structure is not playing out in a way where any of these trillion dollar companies really win, right? They're just in an expensive war, forever war. Right? There's going to be a take a shot at regulatory capture because that actually is the smart business move.

[B]

I guess what I was trying to get into, Sam, is what is making like, what has you depressed.

[A]

The fact that like the AI war thing will not be decided by like technology. It won't just happen naturally and occur naturally by the laws of economics which get you the best product at the cheapest price. People are making plays which are political, not business. Right, if that makes sense.

[B]

I see. So if it goes this way, right now it is actually playing out pretty purely capitalistic, right?

[A]

Like yeah, it plays out capitalist. But I think, I think it's very cynical for these companies to even try to switch the field of play from business to politics, right? Like, I think that's a very cynical anti American thing to do. To be like, okay, we're not going to play and compete in capitalism in a fair and open system. Instead we're going to like switch our venue to regulatory capture because it's the only play we have. And I get why they do it. And like to some degree as businesses, I don't grudge them the play they need to make. It's like the classic you can't win the game. So Change the game. But it's also just a bummer, right? Because you're just like, man, like, politics sucks and like, business and economics are awesome.

[B]

And like, we haven't talked about this much, Sam, but do you believe that there is real danger? Like, could there, could there actually be an argument for danger on the other side?

[A]

For sure, but I don't think anything you're going to do regulatorily is going to change that.

[B]

Right, but isn't that what Demis's post is about this week? Isn't that what mo. You know, what anthropic mostly says, like, that we want to. This stuff is dangerous. But.

[A]

But the problem is it's like kind of like being like you're talking about the stuff as though any one company can control it or any one country can control it. You can acknowledge the fact that giving technical. Enormous amounts of technical leverage on all sorts of things could be bad for biological weapons. Or this is like the. You can do all sorts of bad stuff with technology. You can do all sorts of good stuff with technology. Do all sorts of bad stuff with technology. That's what technology is. If we had a monopoly on technology in the US that would be different. We obviously don't. Right. And so in some ways, like, having a, like, it's like all this stuff about global warming and the environment where like, one country can take action, but it's completely irrelevant because we live in a connected globe. So it's a dumb thing to do. Right?

[C]

Like, I like that example.

[B]

That's a good example. I hadn't thought of that.

[A]

It's like one of those things where, like, it's kind of like you can go and be like, this is dangerous. Like, you're not wrong. Of course it is. Like, now we can have an army of drones do things. That sounds pretty wild, right? But like, you taking any action as a single country does nothing. Right? Like, and all it does is protect certain companies. Right. And their market caps.

[D]

So just to recap for people, what Demis, the AI leader Google Saabas proposed was like, it was this idea that there should be a separate government body that reviews frontier models basically for 30 days prior to their release.

[B]

Like, are we talking the FCC kind of a thing?

[D]

Kind of, yeah. I mean, it is so vague that any way I answered your question would be a guess. But his point was that it would be comprised of technical people and technologists and, you know, instantly got the thumbs up, like, from sort of everyone in AI. I mean, all the AI CEOs, in part because it, like, it wasn't really saying anything, in my opinion. And also, you know, everyone has their different style, but his style is like, you know, I worked my entire career on AGI and I. Because I believe it has the potential to do all of these things, but you know, who knows if it will, right? Like trying to pull back the Armageddon is nigh sort of version of the stuff from the top labs. But you know, I think the reality is, you know, there's these proposals are just all over the place. But to your point, Sam, that this is about sort of politicking, you put something out like that to show that you're a thoughtful, concerned participant in the ecosystem or something, right? Like you don't do it because it's an actual tangible roadmap, right?

[A]

No one has any roadmap that makes any sense that actually does anything, right? And so if the plan was we, America need to take our military and bomb every matrix multiplication facility globally, right? And we're going to have all of them and then we're going to control AI, that would at least be logical. I'm not saying you should do it, you obviously shouldn't. But I'm saying like, at least that is like a plausible thing. Like we're going to make it illegal to have a computer more than this powerful outside the U.S. right? Like it's insane. It's World War 3, but it's like logical, right? With the idea. It's other stuff, like people, these. We're going to do a committee on this. It's like, God bless, enjoy being on a committee forever. The only thing you could possibly do which you could do is somehow say like if you're an American taxpaying, law abiding company, which is a lot of companies, but certainly not everyone, you have to only use this and you cannot use that. And in theory, a bunch of people and lawyers would make that happen. And then you accomplish nothing except for making those companies very valuable, right? Like nothing. You accomplished literally nothing except for that.

[D]

Okay, I'm going to give you guys a topic and then I'm going to bounce because I'm going to another Fence and Boone concert tonight. And I'm super excited. And not missing that is more important.

[C]

It's like your fourth Benson Boon concert, guys.

[A]

Jessica is getting on an airplane to see Benson Boone. Like that's the point we've reached.

[C]

This is a big deal for like not the first time, like the eighth time or something.

[D]

I'm like crossing a mini ocean.

[C]

Are you actually in love with Benson Boone?

[A]

I Think she might be.

[B]

This is the the story of two music. Like, Brit and I are going to Chris Stapleton this weekend. You're going to Benson Boone.

[D]

I am not in love with Benson Boone, but there is something about seeing him perform live that find a lot.

[B]

He does seem good.

[C]

He moves his body well.

[D]

Guys, his voice is absurd and I need to hear him perform his new song. And it's not as far as it seems. Although I do have to take, like four modes of transportation to get there.

[B]

I'll go in the Bay Area with you sometime.

[A]

Jessica asked me if I wanted to come, and I was like, I'm never gonna. I'm not gonna get between you and Benson. Go enjoy your Benson evening.

[C]

I think that was a wise husband.

[D]

But I'm bringing another couple. I'm bringing two friends. Like, I've been more the merrier.

[A]

Are they both coming now in the last minute or.

[D]

They're both coming. This is like the bandwagon.

[A]

Well, now I'm glad you got two hotel rooms because that would be a little weird after the Benson.

[D]

It would have been a little weird when my girl trip was crashed by her boyfriend.

[A]

Let me know, you know, when you come back. You can give me your stories of your wild bender with Benson.

[D]

I mean, I'm sorry if you have not listened to his new song. Just listen to it.

[A]

It's fine.

[D]

Wanted Man Tour. You still have time to get tickets.

[A]

Wanted Mantor. Oh, I get it.

[C]

Oh, my God.

[D]

This is what it's called.

[C]

Story writes itself.

[A]

It just does, doesn't it?

[D]

And you know, as much as I could talk about AI with you guys, I'm not missing his first song. So with that, I suggest.

[A]

I'm really happy we have this all on a podcast because when I report back next week, like, there could be amazing. I mean, we could have amazing documentation of what happened.

[D]

I want you guys to talk about the report now that OpenAI's first consumer hardware device is basically Alexa. It's a script.

[C]

It's a developer tool, though. It's a developer tool.

[D]

No, you guys are conflating two things.

[C]

Oh, oh, oh.

[D]

There has now been more reports. The information Bloomberg, others. Bloomberg came out with.

[B]

So we're not talking about the merch we were talking about.

[D]

We're not talking about the merch. We're talking about the fact that sometime this year they are expected to unveil a smart speaker. I swear it's Alexa. What this means. Will anyone care?

[B]

No. It's a portable smart speaker, isn't it?

[D]

You guys can Discuss. Sorry, I'm here for someone else.

[C]

Bye. Oh, I got it. That's a Benson boon.

[B]

And now we don't have to discuss it. And we can keep discussing what we were already discussing.

[C]

No, I do think we should change topics.

[A]

Right? Which is if I'm going to be married in a week or if my wife is now going to hang out with Benson Boone.

[C]

I feel like Samson is like I don't give a fuck phase of his 40s. So it's totally fine 100% which is great. Does anyone care about the smart speaker that OpenAI?

[B]

I don't care.

[C]

Did you think they were going to launch this or something else? You didn't care either way? It sounds like you don't think any hardware OpenAI launches will be successful.

[B]

I did think it was going to be something you talk to. Like it just seems very clear that

[A]

that's of course you need something to

[B]

talk to like verbally though. Like I, I, that seemed clear to me.

[A]

Are we clear that Sam Altman paid Johnny I've like $8 billion to make

[C]

him an Alexa and to get sued by Apple? So he actually paid them more than 8 billion.

[B]

I had people complaining to us that we didn't talk about the Apple lawsuit last week and I was like look, it came out after we, after we recorded.

[A]

I do think it's fine. Like I actually think this whole thing is like pretty interesting because I do think like look, Sam Altman is an incredible storyteller and aspiring Elon level storyteller I would say in terms of you know, narrative capitalism and using that for cheap capital. The Johnny I've acquisition thing, especially if it just turns out to be an Alexa is like particularly interesting for this because it was one step along that line of like oh I'm buying, I'm going to pay a ton of money for Johnny I've because it will make raising more capital cheaper, not more expensive. So it actually even if it costs a billion dollars on paper is free to negative cost acquisition just on the brand of Jony I've which is an interesting thing.

[B]

Yeah, totally.

[C]

Who are other people who have five to $10 billion brands? Like are there like legacy people?

[B]

This kind of fits with the now that Twitter shows me my friends again, I actually saw your post about the Hollywoodification of Silicon Valley or I guess the world which I kind of like but that's kind of the same question right?

[C]

Like explain it. I didn't see the post. Can you explain Sam's post?

[B]

Who else are the Steven Spielberg's is The question.

[A]

Yeah, well, I was saying like, I was saying like, look, everyone's joking about how Hollywood's dead, which it obviously is, but I would actually argue in some ways it's like, it's kind of like an Obi Wan Kenobi situation, which is by striking me down, I'll become more powerful than you can possibly imagine. Because now everything is Hollywood, right? And like, what does that mean? I mean like one, like companies are valued on what they actually do, profit, revenue, whatever. And then a multiple on top of that. Right, but everything is multiple dominated. You can like make your revenue go up. It doesn't matter. What matters is like people's what multiple they're going to assign you and like how they think about you. You know, studios cabals rule everything. Just like in Hollywood, right. You need to be able to align with Club Elon or Club OpenAI or Club Meta or Club Google to be valuable. Like if Elon says Space Data center overnight, anything that has Space Data center in the title is worth a fortune. Even if the day earlier is worth nothing. Right? And so there's a whole cabal studio system developing and then there's star power that really matters. Right? Meaning, like there's people who can open movies. There are people who can open startups.

[C]

So who else are those people in Silicon Valley?

[A]

I mean, I think, I think AI researchers is the easy answer.

[C]

Like Alexander Wang, like these types of people.

[B]

No, no, no, researchers.

[C]

Oh, the researchers. Sorry, but Alexander Wang also got a billion dollar.

[A]

No, I think Alexander Wang was like, was a, was a character who could open, who can open movies for theory.

[C]

He wasn't a Steven Spielberg.

[A]

He's a leading man.

[C]

Okay, so the researchers are worth billions of dollars. Leading men or women?

[B]

Well, no, but Sam's not even talking about what they're worth. It's that can they lead? Can they open movies? Are they headliners? Right? Like, are they.

[A]

Or start. Like Mira Morati is like, obviously there was a whole. It was basically like a comedy troupe which was called OpenAI that spun out several leading characters that were able to open movies. Right. Like is what I would say.

[B]

I like this. OpenAI is SNL.

[A]

Yeah, yeah. Open a like or meta was SNL for a while. And like Google was clearly an SNL and PayPal was an SNL. Like there's just like these little things. Like, it's like there are these platforms where like people ping off each other, they get whatever. And then like some of them, you know, get to lead movies and some don't. Some become Tina Fey.

[C]

Okay, so Karpathi was another, right. That went to Anthropic. No, I'm just wondering who else there is. I don't know.

[A]

I think, you know, look, you know a star when you see them. Brit. I don't know. I think it's like a little hard to like a priority be like, well, this person's just.

[C]

It goes to a little to your creator thing. Sam, I wonder, like, can you get the upside of these people somehow?

[A]

No, for sure. I mean, I love that story, but like, look, in the end of the day I say, like, how do you know someone's a star? Well, there's one of two ways. Either they opened a movie or a few movies and they were super successful at those openings. Like, Jack Dorsey is like a leading man, isn't he? Elon's clearly like the. Elon is the. What's his name? He's like the Tom Cruise.

[B]

No, Elon's like Spielberg at this point.

[A]

It's like you can bring him to the. You can bank his movie from the day from before, you know, just because Elon's attached. Right. And so like, there's like characters like that. And then the only way you become a leading star is like, you. Someone makes a bet on you and you become a leading star. You know what I mean? There's like a. I don't know. It's not a perfect analogy, but there is something going on that I think is relevant here.

[C]

Yeah. Okay. Well, regardless, Johnny, I was theoretically worth. Was whatever, 6 to 8 billion.

[A]

Well, again, only because he actually. Because the market paid for him.

[C]

Right? Right.

[A]

Sam didn't pay for him. The market paid for him. Even if all he was making was a mini Alexa, there has to be

[C]

a suite of products that he's working on. I would imagine there's more than the Alexa coming. Isn't it funny how the Alexa has become a generic brand and a big

[A]

Alexa and a small Alexa.

[C]

You've got the Google home, you've got the home pod, you've got all the Alexas, car, Alexa. All of the above. Sam, what product would you most want to create if you had to create a hardware AI product?

[A]

Something that I could sell to someone before launch and take the cash.

[C]

Do you think there's any white space opportunities for that?

[A]

Right now I'm completely uninterested in hardware. I like my iPhone. I think it's fine. I like my Garmin watch. I could imagine putting a button on my Garmin watch with a microphone. That'd be kind of useful.

[C]

Would you ever wear something that's like turned on all day listening and tracking everything about you?

[A]

So I would be the poster child for this in theory, right? Because I like have built my own custom shit to upload every photo and I spend a huge amount. Like, I like, I track. I have millions and millions of data points consolidated on my health. Literally millions, like through apps I built. So like, I would be the poster boy for passive listening. I tried like the narrative clip back in the day. Like I played with every generation of this at fin. We built what's now in vogue, which was like screen recorders plus clickstream data and built huge data systems. So I love the theory of track everything in practice, like most of what people say isn't that valuable. So I don't know that like passive listening is actually all it's cracked up to be in the end of the day for usefulness. It's mostly a lot of ums. But look, marginally lowering the barrier to recording stuff is never going to be bad. I just don't know how valuable it is and how differentiated it'll ever be.

[C]

Dave, what's your take? I don't feel like you're a passive recorder type.

[B]

Is this because you're speculating that this is what it's going to be?

[C]

Yeah, I feel like the way we were seeing rings and necklaces and Alexas and spinoffs of Alexa. Like, is this where the future's headed?

[B]

If you just look at the release of. I don't remember what the API is called, but I think it's called Live. It's clear that streaming real time interaction with models is like one of the major things that OpenAI is researching. And so seems clear that your question is actually not the question. The question is, would you have a participant in your conversations every day that is a third party that's interacting with you in real time? Like, I think that's like the thing that people, Because a lot of like tech forward people have like spent their last year using granola and then using those transcripts to do things. That's how they think the future looks. I don't think that's actually how the future looks. I think the future looks much more real time and that you're just going to be like streaming, you know, in and out of these things in real time and they'll like tell you things and it's going to look much more like that. It's going to look like what this model was this week, meaning you won't

[C]

have to prompt something later. Like it's just going to be doing things for you.

[B]

No, like that's what this model this week is that everybody's so impressed with which model. It's called Live, I believe. I don't think you've played with it. It's a voice model.

[A]

This is the one where it can talk and listen at the same time.

[B]

Yeah. And so it's like a purely live, real time voice model. And it seems clear that that's where this stuff is going. And if I were to guess what this hardware stuff is, it's based on that. Because I think a lot of people

[C]

are looking at who released live OpenAI. Okay, just checking. Just I'm clarifying for the listeners. And so that's. That's part of the. Okay. Of the announcement is like it can talk, it can listen all at the same time. So it can be doing things proactively.

[B]

Everyone who's used the voice model knows that it's been this pretty janky experience where if you like say the wrong thing, it interrupts it, it restarts the inference, it gets confused. This is really good. It doesn't do that stuff anymore. You can just talk to it.

[C]

Have you played around with it?

[B]

Yeah.

[C]

What have you done with it?

[B]

You can just do it on ChatGPT and play with it.

[C]

All right, so it seems the consensus is, we believe voice models that can listen and talk all at once are going to be. They're part of the present, they're part of the future. You see, you both seem less bullish on recording every single thing every single day.

[A]

There are very funny, like Instagram memes about people talking to the voice mode being like. Or some guy's like, chatgpt, build me a billion dollar business. Make no mistakes. Be quiet, be quiet, be quiet. Do this, do this. Like SaaS app, you know, and like, so those will get better. I guess maybe that's an impact.

[B]

Look, I think there's a different question here, which is that agents in general have a long way to go in order to understand you in your daily context. And that's like the bigger, longer story here that I think maybe you're getting at, Brit, is that you just have to have a lot of context in order to make these things as smart as everybody wants them to be. And that's going to require totally different ways of thinking about memory, totally different ways of thinking about learning algorithms, totally different ways of capturing context. Like, that's what like the entire robotics industry is focused on is like, how do you understand the world? How do you understand physics? Around people. How do you understand people's internal state? Like, there's like so far to go in terms of getting machines to understand us, um, other than through the text we type into them or the text we speak into them. That to me is very interesting, but kind of a completely different set of questions.

[C]

What else is captivating you guys lately? Anything exciting on your plate?

[A]

Sam, I've started messing with peptides, which are quite interesting. We'll do another episode.

[C]

Oh, yeah, we were supposed to come back to this. Yes. I'm so glad you brought that up.

[B]

What does this mean?

[C]

Oh, did you talk to Mazzio? Is he going to come on the pod?

[A]

I'm sure he'd love to. I'll message him now. Yeah, I, I'm, I, I'm just taking some and then I'm running a lot. It seems good.

[C]

What are the before and after impacts on your health and body based on your peptide consumption?

[A]

I've only been doing it for like a week and a half and so, like, I don't think anyone thinks there's real impact yet, but I will just say, like, I've been upping my training volume a lot in terms of like the amount I'm running and working out and I feel much better than I would normally expect to. Like, way better. Mazio says he'd love to come up with odds. Maybe we can do that next week. He can explain peptides and show us his bicep because that man loves a bicep.

[C]

I mean, we've all known this guy Matt mazzio for like 20 years now. I can say the before and after.

[A]

He was my fraternity big brother when. I love that. Shockingly.

[C]

I love that.

[A]

Shockingly.

[B]

Sam, is this an investable category?

[A]

I don't, I mean, Matt will tell us. He certainly thinks so. I mean, I, I don't know.

[C]

He'll say yes. Invest in my company.

[A]

Yeah, I mean, I think his company's pretty good.

[B]

Well, we know he'll say that, but I want to, I want more sophisticated.

[A]

I don't know, I mean, I think the question is, like, what do we think of like him's and hers and Ro and things like that, right? All these generics and compounding pharmacies and the whole supply chain there, I mean, there is brand value, you know, if you can get lower cac, that there is a bunch of spend. I don't think this stuff is going to be fda. I mean, forget FDA covered. I don't think we covered by insurance anytime soon. So, like, that really cuts the Market way, way, way down. Like, if you don't have payers involved, like GLP1s, it's much harder to make huge businesses out of it. But I don't know, like, who knows? This is like, this is a good question.

[B]

I don't know, man. I've been hearing that the fda. I think the FDA is actually meeting next week to talk about.

[C]

The FDA has to figure out how they're going to get their shit together to approve so many new things. Like, there's so many new drug discovery funds and companies and like.

[B]

But not peptides.

[C]

I know, I'm not. I'm just talking more broadly. Like, I think what's coming at the FDA in the next 10 years is going to be insane. And it's like they're gonna have to figure out how to pace themselves more efficiently and, and get through all of these decisions. But yeah, I think peptides would be a really interesting topic. So I'm glad we're talking about it next week. Can I tell you that this is more of a feature launch? But I thought it was interesting in the realm of online dating. So Hinge now has a feature called Friends Take. So you enlist up to 10 of your close friends who then have to like, share written feedback, photos, or voice notes about you.

[B]

Finally.

[A]

I love it.

[B]

This has been so long coming. Oh, my God.

[A]

But Dave, you don't. I'll tell you. I'll tell you a story you don't know, which is. You know Mike Galpert, who you've been working with on openclaw?

[B]

Yeah, of course.

[A]

You know what? He and I started like 15 years ago in our Project in New York era.

[B]

No.

[C]

A dating app.

[A]

Oh, no, sorry. It wasn't. This is funny. Leave this in for the editing because it's funny. It wasn't him. It was Nate Westheimer. Or maybe it was. I can't remember who was Nate Westheimer or msg.

[B]

But we started.

[A]

We started a service with Chris Danzig, who you also know called Yenta.

[B]

Oh, I remember Yenta.

[A]

Remember Yenta?

[B]

Yeah.

[A]

And this was Yenta. We were like, you don't want to make your own dating selections like other people should make them for you. And people have tried this before. Right.

[C]

But this isn't your friends picking your dating selections. This is like your references. You know, it's like you have 10 references.

[B]

I was on the board.

[A]

Oh, I see. It's a references. Yeah.

[B]

Yeah. I was on the board of Hinge for like six years, and we talked about this idea ad nauseam and it's still shocking to me that it doesn't exist more broadly in the dating ecosystem.

[A]

Well, to be clear, what you're saying, Brit, is this is not actually the help ticking. This is like a references. This is like LinkedIn references for him, I would imagine.

[C]

Hopefully this can evolve to picking because if you have networks of your it's like your top five on MySpace like we all used to know and then those people know you so well, they provided references and then maybe there's like some social graph where they can like move people into your profile or something. I think that would be a cool next feature move. But I do think like, why don't we have this already for actual recruiting of talent? Like, shouldn't everyone have photo, video, voice note references from like lots of people? I don't know. It's just an. I think the way that we recruit is so outdated. Like, we're doing so much recruiting right now.

[A]

If you go use Vox Americanas, you will notice that the recommendations from other Americans is like a key feature. When you follow someone else, you first of recommend them or about them, et cetera. Endorsements. So I'm all for endorsement.

[C]

Great. Well, we should bring clout back while you do that so that it's like people of status have higher weight.

[A]

Clout was. No, but clout. Clout was so stupid. Like, clout always annoyed me. It was like such a like misunderstanding of how social capital works, like so fundamentally. But people liked it because people like scores.

[C]

Yeah, it was gamified. Dave, anything else catching your attention this week?

[B]

I just think it's awesome that Jay Z turned New York City into a music festival last weekend and is back on the stage.

[A]

Wasn't he like six hours late on stage?

[C]

That's how all the greatest musicians do it.

[B]

No, the demand for the show. They originally were only going to do two nights and they ended up doing a third because the demand was so insane. And then a bunch of people got into a pretty dangerous situation. It sounded like the only thing I

[A]

saw from this because I get all of my my information through Instagram was a video of a guy being like, the only thing that saved my night waiting six hours for Jay Z show up was this woman twerking. And it was this woman in front of him in the concert twerking for like hours. That's how I knew something happened.

[C]

Here is my takeaway. I feel like Jay Z and Beyonce actually do fairly little in the day to day of like keeping their music and marketing brands alive and then they can just like their Superpowers. They can come together, throw, like, the most insane event, still be relevant, and even include their family. Like, Blue Ivy was on stage. And so they're becoming this, like, dynastic music empire. Who doesn't have to work as hard as the other musicians.

[B]

It's also very weird to see Jay Z and Beyonce as, like, the golden oldies in New York.

[C]

Oh, you think they're, like, old now and outdated.

[B]

They are old. Jay Z's 56. He's been doing this for 30 years.

[C]

But, like, weren't young people there? Like, they're still relevant, right?

[B]

Yeah, but, like, this is a millennial oldies concert. Let's be real.

[C]

Oh, really? And Rihanna. Yeah.

[B]

Yeah.

[A]

All right.

[B]

This is like the millennials, you know, going to the Eagles.

[C]

Ew. I hate that we're that old.

[B]

Yeah.

[C]

All right.

[B]

Well, I mean, Jay Z's first album came out when I was in high school. Right. Like, a lot of these songs.

[C]

Yeah, you're really old.

[B]

I'm super old.

[A]

You really are old. Days.

[C]

We're all in our 40s. Let's just say that. But I'm the youngest. I just want to make sure everyone knows. I don't.

[A]

Yeah, but my. My heart rate might be the lowest.

[C]

Oh, I wouldn't do all of our biological ages on a future pod.

[A]

It's such.

[B]

It's such we can do heart rates.

[A]

Listen, I have done all of these because I'm closet kind of like Brit on some of this stuff. And, like. And my biological age is like a variance of 10 years based on whether you Dexa or Garmin or whatever the hell. They're all different. It's all bullshit.

[B]

It's true. It's total bullshit.

[C]

You do blood tests. You do blood.

[A]

I've done the blood test. I did the. I did.

[B]

The biological age is like the clout score of your body.

[C]

Just the clout score of your body.

[A]

I'm convinced cortisol is bad for you, by the way.

[B]

Yeah, it is.

[C]

I'm convinced women should be microdosing testosterone.

[A]

Interesting. We'll talk about that later.

[C]

We'll talk about that with Mazzia. All right, I have to go.

[A]

Bye, friends. Bye.

[C]

Thanks, everyone out there for listening, and if you liked this episode, please rate review, subscribe, and we will see you next week, hopefully with Matt Mazzia to talk about peptide or don't.

[B]

Or more tech stuff than AI models do.

[A]

What moves you. I don't think I've ever liked a video on YouTube. How can we ask people to do things we would never do?

[C]

Because you have to do that. That's modern marketing. Sam. Like review subscribe. I like just reminders for them to do it. I don't know, share it with a friend. Listen to the next one. Just do something to be engaged or don't if you're having a good summer, just come back whenever you feel like it.

[A]

Enjoy your run.

[C]

Let's do anti marketing.

[A]

Enjoy your drive.

[C]

Actually stop listening. Do whatever you want.

[B]

Yeah, only.

[A]

Only idiots listen to this stuff. All right, bye.

[C]

All right, thanks everyone. Bye bye.

[B]

See you guys later.

[C]

If you enjoyed this show, please leave us a virtual high five by rating it and reviewing it on Apple Podcast, Spotify, YouTube or wherever you get your podcast. Find more information about each episode in the show notes and follow us on social media by searching for more or less avemorin lesson. And as for me, I'm Brit. See you guys next time.