2508 - The Dystopian Future Being Pushed by Right-Wing Tech Oligarchs w/ Adam Becker

Summary

Podcast Summary: The Majority Report with Sam Seder
Episode 2508 - "The Dystopian Future Being Pushed by Right-Wing Tech Oligarchs" featuring Adam Becker
Release Date: June 2, 2025

---

Introduction and Overview

In this episode of The Majority Report, host Sam Seder welcomes science journalist and astrophysicist Adam Becker to discuss his latest work, More Everything Forever: AI Overlords, Space Empires, and Silicon Valley's Crusade to Control the Fate of Humanity. The conversation delves into the alarming influence of right-wing tech oligarchs and their vision for the future shaped by artificial intelligence (AI) and space colonization.

---

Key Topics Discussed

1. Legislative Maneuvering in the Senate

• Senate’s Baseline Rewriting: Sam Seder highlights the Senate's limited timeframe—with only 13 legislative days remaining—to amend the House's reconciliation bill, which includes provisions that could significantly impact AI regulation. He notes, "The real big story about what we're going to see with this Senate bill" revolves around the majority of Senate members advocating for deeper cuts without substantial review (04:50).

• Parliamentarian’s Role: The discussion emphasizes the potential confrontation with the parliamentarian, who is expected to challenge Republican attempts to use existing tax cuts as a baseline for negotiations. This could lead to a $3 trillion deficit if the Senate proceeds without proper markup (06:24).

2. Joni Ernst's Controversial Statements

• Ethical Implications: The episode critiques Senator Joni Ernst’s remarks during a town hall where she minimized the consequences of Medicaid cuts by stating, “we all die” (09:20). This statement was met with backlash and prompted Ernst to issue an apology, though Sam Seder and Emma Vigland remain skeptical about the sincerity and implications of her apology (10:04).

• Impact on Public Perception: The conversation underscores how such statements reflect a broader disregard for essential public services and the human impact of policy decisions, highlighting the ethical void in prioritizing ideological agendas over constituent well-being (13:03).

3. Silicon Valley's Ideological Influence

• Singularity and Technological Utopianism: Adam Becker explains the concept of the Singularity, primarily advocated by figures like Ray Kurzweil, who foresee a future dominated by superintelligent AI that will either create a techno-utopia or pose existential threats (25:08). Becker draws parallels between this technological determinism and religious millenarianism, suggesting that these tech leaders embed quasi-religious beliefs into their visions for the future.

• Effective Altruism and Long Termism: The discussion touches on Oxford philosophy professor Will MacAskill's ideas on effective altruism and long termism, critiquing their emphasis on maximizing future positive outcomes often at the expense of addressing immediate societal issues (28:22).

• Sam Altman and AI Optimism: Sam Altman's stance on AI as a panacea for global problems—such as addressing climate change by delegating solutions to AI—was scrutinized. Becker points out the flawed assumption that technological advancements alone can resolve inherently political and societal challenges (30:53).

4. AI Regulation and Reconciliation Bill

• Ban on State Regulation of AI: A significant portion of the episode examines a provision in the Senate's reconciliation bill that prohibits states from regulating AI. Janine Jackson explains that this move could effectively stifle any efforts to control or oversee AI deployment at the state level, leading to unchecked growth and potential abuses (56:51).

• Implications for Privacy and Security: The ban raises concerns about the inability to curb harmful applications of AI, such as creating deepfakes or deploying autonomous vehicles without sufficient oversight. This lack of regulation could exacerbate privacy violations and undermine public trust in technological advancements (58:37).

5. Palantir’s Expansion and Surveillance Concerns

• Palantir's Role: The conversation delves into Palantir's acquisition of vast governmental data, raising alarms about surveillance and the concentration of power in private tech companies. Sam Seder and Janine Jackson discuss the dangers of allowing companies like Palantir to wield government-level surveillance capabilities without democratic accountability (59:59).

• Potential for Abuse: The episode highlights fears that individuals with significant resources could exploit Palantir's data for personal vendettas or suppress dissent, further eroding civil liberties and privacy protections (63:19).

---

Notable Quotes with Timestamps

• Sam Seder:

  • "The real big story about what we're going to see with this Senate bill" (04:50).
  • "Why do we need a military? Why do we need cops?" (10:04).

• Adam Becker:

  • "If we did somehow build such a machine and turn it on and asked it, hey, how do you solve global warming? It would say, well, you shouldn't have built me." (33:35).
  • "These are people with enormous resources, the resources of a small nation. And now they've got the surveillance resources of a large nation without democratic accountability." (63:19).

• Joni Ernst:

  • "We are all going to perish from this earth." (11:29).

---

Conclusion and Insights

The episode of The Majority Report provides a critical examination of how right-wing tech oligarchs are shaping the future through their unbridled pursuit of AI and space colonization. By intertwining technological determinism with ideological agendas, these leaders are steering societal norms and policies in ways that may undermine democratic institutions and civil liberties. Adam Becker's insights shed light on the urgent need for robust regulation and conscious political decision-making to counterbalance the unchecked power of tech giants.

The discussion also underscores the perilous intersection of technology and politics, where the allure of a futuristic utopia blinds policymakers and the public to the immediate ethical and societal implications of technological advancements. As Senate proceedings loom, the potential passage of restrictive bills on AI regulation without adequate oversight could cement a dystopian trajectory for society.

---

Final Thoughts

The Majority Report episode 2508 serves as a wake-up call to the pervasive influence of technology-driven ideologies in shaping our collective future. By highlighting the motives and actions of tech oligarchs, Sam Seder and his guests emphasize the critical need for informed and democratic stewardship of technological progress to ensure it serves humanity's best interests.

---

For more information on this episode and to support the show, visit Majority.FM.

Transcript

[Sam Cedar]

You are listening to a free version of the Majority Report. Support this [e-mail] and get an extra hour of content daily. It is Monday, June 2, 2025. My name is Sam Cedar. This is the five time award winning Majority Report. We are broadcasting live steps from the industrially ravaged Gowanus Canal in the heartland of America, downtown Brooklyn, usa. On the program today, Adam Becker, science journalist, astrophysicist and author. His latest book, More Everything Forever. Also on the program today, eight injured in an attack in Colorado on a march to remember. Hostages held in Gaza. Meanwhile, Ukraine launches a mass massive drone attack inside Russia, the verge of peace talks. Ceasefire attacks Israel kills more than 30 Palestinians by gunfire trying to reach a food distribution site set up by the Americans and the Israelis. Democrats to press the parliamentarian on the Senate Republican attempt to rewrite the baseline for the big billionaire giveaway bill. Feds arrest an aide to Jerry Nadler in his office for attending an immigration protest in. In the building, Cash Patel continues a purge at FBI. Trump administration shuts down more than 100 climate studies because.

[Emma Vigland]

We'Re all going to Mars anyway. Our next guest will tell us exactly.

[Sam Cedar]

Iran nuke talks appear to stall and those law firms that cave to Trump, well, now they're losing clients because why would you want guys who so easily caved to an obvious illegal thing to represent you in court? The Trump administration announces an end for a program for HIV vaccine. All this and more on today's Majority Report. Welcome, ladies and gentlemen. It is. Oh, look at this.

[Emma Vigland]

Fun day Monday. We're matching.

[Sam Cedar]

We're. We're wearing the same color shirt.

[Emma Vigland]

We are. This is an oxford, like you.

[Sam Cedar]

Yep.

[Emma Vigland]

Yeah, it's weird. Yeah.

[Sam Cedar]

That is strange. The amazing thing is is that we've been in here for three hours. Hadn't noticed it at all.

[Emma Vigland]

It's unfortunate.

[Sam Cedar]

Satin girl says, I'm really disappointed in you, Sam. How are you going to claim to be an ally? You're not even wearing a leather harness during pr.

[Emma Vigland]

Oh, yes. Happy pride, everybody.

[Sam Cedar]

Yep.

[Adam Becker]

It's been a while since we did the Virgona stuff.

[Sam Cedar]

I know it. We got to bring that back. Maybe. Couple of. I want to read a couple emails before we start. First off, dear Majority Report, I called in a few months ago from Italy. I mentioned I had brought my infant son to a live Majority Report event with in New York City with Sam and Janine way back in the day.

[Emma Vigland]

Wow.

[Sam Cedar]

That would have been probably at the tank, maybe. Or maybe Ars Nova. Just want to let you know, that said Baby. My son Logan just graduated with a degree in international relations from the American University of Rome. Thought you might enjoy a senior thesis which hits on many themes dear to the hearts of majority reporters, including gender, right wing populism, Francis Fukuyama and yes, Sam. Zero sum game.

[Emma Vigland]

Wow.

[Sam Cedar]

Yeah. You weren't here for the big zero.

[Emma Vigland]

I was not here but I.

[Sam Cedar]

Zero sum wars of 2017, 2018 I think. Yeah. I would like to think his mom having a majority report playing in the house while he was growing up made some impression on him. Although he laughed me years ago. Let's hear it for the next generation. And here is a shofar congratulations to Logan. I'm gonna read that thesis. It's probably gonna take me a little while. Another email. Oh shoot. I cut off their name but challenge accepted. I ordered four pizzas for the UMass workers today. Here are screenshots as well as pics they took once the pizzas arrived. Are you guys open to negotiations? Would it possible to get a six month membership and a T shirt? If not, I understand. I can't remember what we offered.

[Janine Jackson]

Ask the moms.

[Sam Cedar]

But we'll, we'll work on that. And I'm sorry I did your name got cut off in my, my email. But thank you for supporting those workers. Much appreciated. We've got a lot to get to. The big story is there are, I think it's 14, I want to say 14 legislative days left in the Senate. Sorry, 13 legislative days left in the Senate to work on their so called big beautiful bill. Now you're saying to yourself, wait a second, don't they need to do markups on the, on the House bill that came? Like, don't they need to go back over the numbers? Don't they need to do all this to pass their own version? Normally, yes, but they obviously don't have the time to do it. So who knows? So much of this is going to be just posturing. The real big story about what we're going to see with this Senate bill and you've got mostly in the Senate hawks who are saying we need more cuts.

[Janine Jackson]

Right.

[Sam Cedar]

There's a couple of people and I'm talking on the Republican side, Josh Hawley supposedly concerned about the Medicaid cuts. Sarah, you know, Collins and maybe Murkowski, maybe, maybe Thom Tillis are concerns concerned about these cuts. I mean most.

[Emma Vigland]

They're always so concerned.

[Sam Cedar]

They're very concerned. Always concerned because they're running for reelection in 2026. The big questions are going to be about the part are going to be Basically facing the parliamentarian. One is whether the Republicans will be able to use as a baseline the tax cuts that exist or which is properly done. The tax cuts, if they get repealed or, I mean, I'm sorry, automatically sunset, which they're going to at the end of this year. That's going to mean that if the parliamentarian rules against that, says this is not valid for the sake of reconciliation, it's going to create a 3, something like a $3 trillion hole in their bill. So my guess is they're just going to end up ignoring the parliamentarian if the parliamentary, if the parliamentarian rules against them.

[Emma Vigland]

Just something to note for Democrats if they ever get back into power and choose to legislate.

[Sam Cedar]

There are also some smaller things that have nothing to do with the budget that the parliamentarian will probably strip out in that bill. But we'll talk about that as that happens. But the big thing is, is will people like Thom Tillis and others who are running for reelection in 2026, will they be able to slow this bill and soften some of the cuts to things like Medicaid? The answer is probably no. And the reason for that is they are more afraid of their, their base than they are even the general public in their states. I bring you Joni Ernst. Now, you may have seen Lindsey Graham tweeting out that essentially that he hopes Israel attacks the aid flotilla, the aid flotilla to Gaza, and that Greta Thunberg drowns. Yes. And why is he doing that? Because he's got a primary challenge and he's very nervous in South Carolina about it. And why does Joni Ertz do this? Well, you recall the other day that she was at a town hall in Iowa and somebody said, you know, if you have these cuts to Medicaid and snap, people are going to die. And she said, well, we all die. Which, you know, if you have that attitude, you would think opens up the door to a lot of savings for government.

[Emma Vigland]

Usually you hear that within the context of, like, someone saying, I'm going skydiving, not a legislator that's supposed to be in office trying to provide for their constituents and create the best life for them. That's kind of why they're elected. But, hey, everyone's gonna die. God, why do rich people die?

[Sam Cedar]

Why do we need a military?

[Emma Vigland]

We all, yeah, we're all gonna die. That's the point.

[Adam Becker]

Well, I mean, statistically, rich, rich people are dying, lasting longer before they die, and poor people are expiring sooner. So I just, in terms of the we all die thing, well, no, differentially. Not really.

[Emma Vigland]

Right. There's a point that, like, there's a difference between dying with dignity and dying in your bed or dying because you have, like, can't get your cancer treatment or the medication that you need. That's the difference. Joni Ernst.

[Sam Cedar]

I think it's pretty obvious to every person that there is a difference there. I mean, because her prescription. Why do we even need a military? Why do we need cops?

[Emma Vigland]

Sure.

[Sam Cedar]

What do we need any of it for?

[Adam Becker]

Why check both ways when you cross the street?

[Sam Cedar]

Exactly.

[Emma Vigland]

Let go and let God into that intersection.

[Sam Cedar]

Let's stop this type of gun control and give everybody some RPGs.

[Adam Becker]

Jesus will call me home when it's time. I don't need to care about that crosswalk.

[Sam Cedar]

What do you do if you're Joni Ernst and you're worried about a primary? Well, you vote to confirm Pete Hegseth, even though he represented, you know, six weeks earlier. Everything that your career has been about against that. And you go on to show that you can be just a total a hole. Because, understand, at the very least, within the Republican primaries, there is one overriding factor as to who they're going to vote for. It has nothing to do, in my opinion, with is this person going to bring me material benefits or whatnot. It is aggrievement. And if this person is going to be the one getting out there and taking it to the libs, well, then they're going to get my vote.

[Joni Ernst]

Hello, everyone. I would like to take this opportunity to sincerely apologize for a statement that I made yesterday at my town hall. See, I was in the process of answering a question that had been asked by an audience member when a woman who was extremely distraught screamed out from the back corner of the auditorium, people are going to die. And I made an incorrect assumption that everyone in the auditorium understood that, yes, we are all going to perish from this earth. So I apologize. And I'm really, really glad that I did not have to bring up the subject of the Tooth Fairy as well. But for those that would like to see eternal and everlasting life, I encourage you to embrace my Lord and savior, Jesus Christ.

[Sam Cedar]

Before we get to the heart of it, can we just. Can we just talk about the juxtaposition between this hilarious mythical creature, the Easter Bunny, and the transmission of, like, eternal life will come through another.

[Adam Becker]

You believe in the Tooth Fairy also, by the way, Jesus is watching your thoughts right now.

[Sam Cedar]

Exactly.

[Emma Vigland]

And is so in favor of me voting to cut health care for over 10 million people and SNAP benefits to feed the hungry. That's what Jesus would have wanted to.

[Sam Cedar]

But putting that aside, you know, folks want to believe in their religion as opposed to the Easter Bunny or some other thing. That's. That's their business. I believe that, too. But aside from her lying about the premise, like, as if someone just yelled out, people are going to die, as opposed to, like, you're cutting SNAP and Medicaid and health insurance. People are going to die.

[Emma Vigland]

Right.

[Sam Cedar]

The entire attitude, the doubling down, this is, this is exactly like. This is her people that she's talking to. And the irony is, like, what percentage of people in Iowa are on Medicaid? What percentage of children in Iowa are on Medicaid? And she's not addressing the Medicaid issue. She's addressing the idea that, like, some people are hysterical.

[Emma Vigland]

She seemed to get in her. I thought she was on the golf course. Turns out she was in the cemetery. So she got in her car to do this little jaunt over to.

[Sam Cedar]

Why is she wearing a fluorescent green shirt, though, during this. Anybody know that?

[Emma Vigland]

I'm. It's unclear.

[Sam Cedar]

Came from like a walkathon or something, perhaps.

[Emma Vigland]

I mean, I thought she was golfing. That's why I thought. Because usually those pastels indicate that. But no, she went to a cemetery to make this troll video and she's not very good at it.

[Adam Becker]

Not too busy then.

[Emma Vigland]

Guess what?

[Sam Cedar]

They really not have, like, somebody like, in the Republican Senate, like, on staff to, like, do punch up.

[Janine Jackson]

Yeah.

[Emma Vigland]

I don't know.

[Sam Cedar]

It's amazing, but there it is. I hope there's some talented politician in Iowa who can use that to run against her. But we'll see.

[Adam Becker]

This is what, you know, right wing Christians are, though. They're nasty. They're basically. I saw Lindsey Graham basically cheer on the idea that. Greta Thunberg.

[Sam Cedar]

Yeah. So we just said it, right?

[Adam Becker]

That's Christianity for you in America right now. And we should.

[Sam Cedar]

Well, that's the argument that, you know, to get through their primary. It is all just satisfying some measure of agreement.

[Adam Becker]

But that they can call it, like, Christianity or religion. No, you're fascist.

[Emma Vigland]

No, it's Christian Zionism. It's also like, it's, it's. I mean, it's unrelated sort of to the issue of Israel, but that's like the end times fascism thing that Naomi Klein wrote about, which is like, we're giving up on this world, essentially. We're all going to die. Salvation's on the other side. Heaven's on the other side, and who cares? Like, it's about getting mine and that's how the tech right and the and.

[Sam Cedar]

Well I think yes is is going to speak to that. Adam Becker, science journalist, astrophysicist, author of More Everything Forever. AI Overlords, Space Empires and Silicon Valley's Crusade to Control the Fate of humanity will be with us in just a moment. Couple words from our sponsors. Oh, I just got some new clothes from there but I don't think the sad is about that. Oh you know what is coming up actually it's the same weekend as your wedding.

[Emma Vigland]

Yes.

[Sam Cedar]

Do you know that?

[Emma Vigland]

Yep.

[Sam Cedar]

Made aware of is God did that. It is Father's Day. Your dad, if he's anything like me, does everything for their kids.

[Emma Vigland]

Oh wow.

[Sam Cedar]

Yes.

[Emma Vigland]

Talk about aggrievement.

[Sam Cedar]

It's unbelievable. They build beds for them. Yeah, Ikea beds.

[Emma Vigland]

But still, still that can be frustrating.

[Sam Cedar]

Sometimes they take them to school in the morning, even when they got to go to work.

[Emma Vigland]

That's tough.

[Sam Cedar]

Dads are notoriously tough to shop for. But if you're struggling to come up with a great Father's Day gift, you are not alone. Cozy Earth has you covered. The all day tea is an everyday essential. This is with naturally breathable fabric keeping you cool and comfortable all day. Yes, I can attest. In fact on the weekends, sometimes I take a T shirt off on a Saturday after I've been hanging out and I put it on my bed and when I wake up on Sunday morning I'm like do I really want to get another shirt dirty? And I wore it two days this weekend.

[Emma Vigland]

Whoa.

[Sam Cedar]

That exact T shirt. It's a great T shirt. Looks good, has breathable fabric, keeps you cool. They have a new line of pants called studio pants. They're incredibly soft, comfortable and breathable. They sort of wear like, well, they wear like nice looking pants but they feel like almost like, like almost like joggers. Which Cozy Earth apparel item would you buy for your dad? Thanks to Cozy Earth for sponsoring this episode. All Cozy Earth apparel items have a lifetime warranty. So you're making a risk free purchase. That's how much Cozy Earth believes in them. Cozy Earth makes a comfort that lasts and this Father's Day, your dad deserves it. Go to cozyearth.com use the code majority report for up to 40% off all men's apparel. That's cozyearth.com code majority report for the dads who work hard during their 9 to 5 and deserve the best during their 5 to 9. Also I will say if your dad's in the in the market for a new hoodie that. The cozy earth hoodie is my favorite piece of, I think, clothing that I own at this point. I wear it constantly.

[Emma Vigland]

You were always talking about it because.

[Sam Cedar]

It keeps me cool. It's both light and heavy. It keeps you cool and warm. I like it versatile. Thank you. I was looking for that word. Also sponsoring the program today, Shopify. When we started this podcast, it was. We had a lot of work to do just to get the show out every single day. And the idea of doing a merch store was completely daunting. And people kept asking, I'm talking for years. And I'm like, I really, I can't. I just can't even imagine, like having to keep this stuff organized or build it or, or what it, what's involved in the back end, etc. Etc. However, at one point, you find the right tool that not only helps you out, but simplifies everything and it's a game changer. And for millions and businesses, including ours, that tool is Shopify. Hello.

[Emma Vigland]

Whoa.

[Sam Cedar]

Yes. Shopify is the commerce platform behind millions of businesses around the world. From household names like Magic Spoon to brands just getting started, Shopify has hundreds of ready to use templates that help you build an online store to match your brand, whether that's beautiful, edgy or minimalist or ours, which is a little bit garageband. Of course, I'm talking about our. Our merch store. Shopify is packed with AI tools to help you put together product descriptions, page headlines, even enhance your product photography. And best of all, Shopify helps you with managing your inventory, international shipping, processing, returns beyond. If you do a live show like we do, it integrates with in. In your. Your sales there can integrate with your online stuff. You can put it all over social media. If you're ready to sell, you're ready for Shopify. Turn your big business idea into a cha ching. With Shopify on your side, sign up for your $1 per month trial and start selling shopify.com start selling today at shopify.com majority. Go to shopify.com majority shopify.com/mainior. Did that myself. Well done, folks. The we'll put the description and the code in the YouTube and podcast descriptions and at Majority FM. All right, quick break. We come back. We'll be talking to Adam Becker, science journalist, astrophysicist, author. His latest book is More Everything Forever.

[Adam Becker]

Sam.

[Sam Cedar]

We are back. Sam Cedar. Emma Vigland on the majority port.

[Emma Vigland]

Sam can't look at the screen.

[Sam Cedar]

Our outfits match and it's really distracting. Want to welcome to the Program. Adam Becker, science journalist, astrophysicist, author. His latest book, More Everything Forever. AI overlords, space empires in Silicon Valley's crusade to control the fate of humanity. Adam, welcome to the program.

[Janine Jackson]

Thanks for having me.

[Sam Cedar]

So my understanding is you obviously wrote this book before the election and because there we could see what was going on in the ether, but I don't, I can't imagine you would have anticipated the, the level of relevance of this crew and sort of like ideology in terms of like just how much power they would have over our, our body politic, in our society. I mean, this is coming just in the heels. And we'll get to the Palantir stuff too, on some level I want to talk to you about, but I mean, it's, it's crazy.

[Janine Jackson]

Yeah, yeah. I mean, the, the word that everyone's been using for my book when they talk with me about it is timely. And I never wanted it to be this timely. I was really hoping that it wouldn't be, but here we are.

[Sam Cedar]

Yeah, here we are. All right, let's start with, I mean, I want to just get some of the, the, the names out there so that, you know, many of whom our audience would be familiar with, some of whom not, and then we'll talk about the sort of, the ideology that they have that is sort of, I guess, obscured or hidden by supposedly just being science and some type of vision for the future. But tell us about, like, I mean, I think people obviously know Peter Thiel, the. Hopefully our audience knows Curtis Yarvin by now, but we'll get back to him. But Ray Kurzweil, tell us about him.

[Janine Jackson]

Sure, yeah. So Ray Kurzweil is, is like this, this popularizer, an advocate for this idea called the Singularity. And the Singularity is this idea that machines and technology will get better and better and we'll use them to improve them and it'll go faster and faster. Technological progress will just get faster and faster until we get a human level AI and then that AI will improve itself more and more until we have a super intelligent, godlike AI running society and making the world a kind of techno utopia for us. And, you know, it's an idea that, that originated in science fiction, except Kurzweil thinks it's fact and has been predicting for years that the Singularity is coming. He had a book in 2005 called the Singularity is Near, and then he published an update last year, and I swear to God, this is the title. It's actually called the Singularity is Nearer.

[Sam Cedar]

That's fantastic. I think one of the things, there's some themes here as we talk about this that are going to come out that I think are sort of like sound. There is a parallel to religious thought in many respects.

[Janine Jackson]

Oh yeah.

[Sam Cedar]

Having studied like a millenistic cult back in my college days, that notion of like we're just around the corner or the rapture's coming. I did my math wrong and it's actually. Did I say June 16th? I actually meant, you know, so.

[Janine Jackson]

But let's totally. People, People have called the singularity the rapture of the nerds.

[Sam Cedar]

Yeah, there you go. And let's. Eliezer Yarduski.

[Janine Jackson]

Yudkowski.

[Sam Cedar]

Yudkowski. Sorry.

[Janine Jackson]

Yeah, it's okay. Yeah, so he's, he's sort of in a similar boat to Kurzweil. He also believes in this sort of, you know, self improving, godlike AI being imminent, but instead of bringing in a utopia, he's worried that it's going to kill us all. And so he, he says, you know, until we figure out how to get it right.

[Sam Cedar]

We just lost you for a moment, Adam. Hold on one second.

[Janine Jackson]

The outcome is that a God like AI shows up and kills all of us. And of course the assumption that these two guys and these two sort of camps they represent have in common is that this, this super intelligent AI is imminent and coming soon and inevitable. And there's no reason to believe that it's just a religious belief.

[Sam Cedar]

And as we talk more about it, we'll also find like both those perspectives, whether you think it's going to bring about nirvana or hell, as it were, they feed into the same idea of the inevitability of this development of something that's going to be this powerful. It's just a question of whether it's going to be good or evil on some level. Talk about William McCaskill.

[Janine Jackson]

Will MacAskill is a philosophy professor at Oxford who is the champion of a thing called effective altruism and a particular strain of effective altruist thought called long termism. Effective altruism is one of these ideas that sounds pretty good on the face of it, that you should just do the most good the most effectively. The problem is, when you get into the details, what does it mean to do good? What does it mean to be effective? And long termism is a particular strain of this idea that, that says, oh, well, the thing that matters most that we need to pay the most attention to is people who live in the future. We need to make sure that future generations are, you know, taken Care of. And, and there's again, there's nothing wrong with that. As stated, we, we do care about future generations, right? That's why we do things like conserve natural. But the problem is that he goes full galaxy brain with it. He says, oh, you know, the more people there are, the better the world is. And therefore we need to colonize the galaxy and colonize the universe and have as many people as possible. And the major barrier to that, the major danger that we face until that happens and even beyond, is the same thing that Yudkowski is worried about, a super intelligent AI that will wipe us all out. And you know, one of his colleagues, Toby Ord, has made the claim that super intelligent AI wiping us all out is 50 times more likely than humanity going extinct or having civilizational collapse from global warming and nuclear war combined. Which is just ridiculous. It's not true.

[Sam Cedar]

So, and we should say, obviously people know Sam Bankman fried in terms of the effective altruism and, but talk about Sam Altman too because I want to just get a sense of like, you know, who are the ones inspiring these guys? Some of them are the sort of the money and some of them are sort of the idea people. But of course the money people can't help but think they're also the idea people because that's because they're so rich. But, but, but, but tell us about Sam Altman too.

[Janine Jackson]

Sure, yeah. I mean like you said, Sam Bankman fried, you know, he got his inspiration from Will MacAskill. Sam Altman is a different kind of creature. He, he genuinely believes that this super intelligent AI is coming soon. He's been saying lately that it's coming in the next four years. He said, you know, it's coming this administration and, and there's no reason to believe that and lots of reason not to. You know, he, he genuinely thinks that AI is going to solve every single problem in the world. He has said that the best way to address global warming is to build super intelligent AI and then ask it, and I swear to God, I'm not making this up, he said, essentially ask it for three wishes. And, and like he said, yeah, this is what you do. You build the super intelligent AI, which again, nobody knows how to build it. Nobody even knows how to define exactly what that is. So you build a machine that nobody knows what it is or how to build it, and then you ask it how to build a lot of clean energy, how to build a lot of carbon capture and how to deploy all of that really efficiently. And, and that's what he said, and that's three wishes. And also, you know, the funny thing about that, to me, one of the funny things is we already know how to do a lot of that. The problem with solving global warming is not primarily technological at this point, it's primarily political.

[Sam Cedar]

I want to, I want to put a pin in that because that to me is the, is largely the whole point of the book. Not necessarily in terms of thing, but, but, but rather all of these problems that supposedly this technology is set to, to address, is really not a technological problem, but rather a political one. But what I find fascinating about that, about the idea of, like, first off, why do we only get three wishes? Like, why do we only get three wishes? Like, like we. That's it. Like they're going to go, it's a genius. The other thing is, is like, what if we build it, whatever it is, and they, it says, yeah, no, I don't know.

[Emma Vigland]

Also, it is running primarily on coal and other fossil fuel, like really intensive energy systems, which is hilarious because if the AI was so intelligent, shouldn't it have taught itself to run on nuclear by now? Which is what we were told by all these, these tech utopians.

[Janine Jackson]

Yeah, I mean, I think that if we did somehow build such a machine and turn it on and asked it, hey, how do you solve global warming? What's a good way to address it? It would say, well, you shouldn't have built me.

[Sam Cedar]

Right. Number one, your first mistake was unplug me.

[Janine Jackson]

Yeah, exactly.

[Sam Cedar]

All right, let's talk about this notion of like, you know, what is. So how do all of these people. It obviously emanates out of Silicon Valley, largely. Yeah, but, but how is this taken, like, how has this taken shape as an ideology? How did this, like, sort of come about? What are the different strains that are involved in it?

[Janine Jackson]

Yeah, so, I mean, a lot of it gets traced back or can be traced back to both early 20th century, like Christian apocalyptic movements and also mid 20th century science fiction. And a lot of this ultimately comes from bad readings of science fiction, misunderstanding the science fiction that these guys read. And they are almost all guys when they were growing up. So, you know, you get Peter Thiel saying things like the message of 1950s and 60s science fiction is to develop space and develop the deserts. And like, I don't know, I read Dune. I'm pretty sure the message of Dune is not develop the deserts like the people mining the desert and Dune are.

[Emma Vigland]

Not the critique of that.

[Janine Jackson]

Yeah, yes, exactly. It's ecological science fiction, but.

[Emma Vigland]

Right.

[Janine Jackson]

I don't think Peter Thiel cares about ecology.

[Sam Cedar]

So.

[Janine Jackson]

So he has trouble understanding that.

[Emma Vigland]

He's also the guy that said Greta Thunberg is the Antichrist. Right. That's his other thing that he's on top of.

[Janine Jackson]

I think he might have said that someone in tech said that, but I don't remember who.

[Emma Vigland]

Okay, fair enough. Sorry. Go on.

[Janine Jackson]

No, no, it's okay. So. So, yeah, I mean, ultimately, as you said, it's. It's this sort of religious impulse. The idea is to go to space and live forever under the watchful eye of an AI God in the same way that, you know, in Christianity, I guess the idea is go to heaven and live forever with God. And so it's just sort of reimagining and re. Inscribing, like putting back together this religious idea, but using technology to do it is there.

[Sam Cedar]

And we should say, you know, this crew includes, you know, people like Elon Musk and Andreessen, Marc Andreessen and Horowitz. I mean, all people who we have seen sort of like, really emerge in the past, I want to say, year, in a. In a political context. I mean, obviously Peter Thiel has been there for. For a lot longer, and Andreessen and Horowitz were there too, but, you know, now they're getting out there, trying to sell their vision. But, like, would we be at this point in terms of what we have with AI, which is, you know, I find it helpful to sort of integrate search function and, And. And I think you've described it as like, sort of like it's mid. Like, you know, like the pictures you get are sort of cool, but not, you know, you know, it's going to improve and whatnot. But are these guys, like, how important do we know of these people simply because they were the lucky ones who got. Who bet on PayPal or bet on Facebook or bet on, you know, they made good investments, some of them. I mean, you know, they all have some measure of science background. But would we have any of these things without these people? Are they just the ones who are sort of out there championing it because they have this sort of evangelical, evangelical perspective on it and the money for, you know, press people to pay attention to them?

[Janine Jackson]

Yeah, I mean, I think that a lot of the reason why these guys have the money they have is luck. Right. You know, they're there. There's a way in which Silicon Valley is just one giant casino and they happen to be at the right slot machine at the right time. And, you know, some of that might have been Due to like some sort of like skill in picking out the right bet to make. But a lot of it was just luck and being in the right place at the right time. And as for, you know, what they've aimed at, the things that they want to do, the kinds of AI that they want to build, the way that they want to go to space, on the one hand, yeah, we're, we're seeing that and doing that because of the choices that they've made. They want us to think that this is the inevitable future of technology, that, that AI and space are just, you know, the way that the future has to go. And they believe that because that's the way that it often goes in science fiction. And they read science fiction very, very literally. But, but you know, the one way in which I'll say they were right that, that it's quote unquote inevitable is that if it hadn't been them at the slot machine, it would have been somebody else. And all of this stuff is just so suffused into the culture of Silicon Valley that the likelihood was that whoever became wealthy was going to share these obsessions. So it is a matter of choice that they made. But it's, it's, you know, it's not inevitable that we'd get here. Uh, but the culture of Silicon Valley is, is what made it so clear that that was where things were going to go. Not because it had to go that way, but because it was just this massive group of people that want all of these sci fi dreams to become reality without thinking about, wait, why or do we have to, or will that even work? And the answer to the last one is almost always no.

[Emma Vigland]

Well, it's the move fast and break things thing, right, in Silicon Valley. And you have, for every Elizabeth Holmes, you have an Elon Musk who's also over promising and still is the richest man on the planet as of the last count, I guess. But I'm sure we'll get to him in a sec. But it is just fascinating to me how this ideology is very conveniently being put to the fore, whether it's effective altruism or this like, type of kind of futurism about AI, when the social media model for a lot of these companies has kind of flatlined and they're looking for new ways to attract capital investment. And this AI thing, it's an arms race, right? So they're able to get Republicans and Democrats agitated about it. And when it's framed in the context of competition with China, like there's a level of convenience here, Adam, that I'm, I'm wondering if you could expand on, because, yeah, they may be sincerely insane, but it's also that they're pushing this kind of narrative when their traditional financial, like, model is, is expiring a little bit. They can't milk social media for all this money anymore.

[Janine Jackson]

Oh, yeah, totally. I mean, it's very, very convenient for them to frame this as an arms race with China. And, and of course, you know, if the goal at the end is to have an omniscient and omnipotent God living inside a machine, they can say, yeah, we need that machine to be ours. We need it to be American. And you know, that's not the end goal. That's. Or rather that is the end goal, but that's not going to be what happens. But I mean, the thing is, like, there's a sense in which this is nothing new, right? The venture capital ecosystem in Silicon Valley requires hype, like oxygen to breathe. It needs this hype for exactly the reasons that you're just talking about, Emma, because it needs that in order to keep the money flowing. And so without that, you know, the whole thing just sort of dies. They, they want to grow at all costs. This is the business model. And, and they don't care actually about profitability. Right. They just want to grow, grow, and they think that that's the most important thing and that profitability, yeah, that can come later. And that's unsustainable. Right. And so they just need hype in order to allow that model to continue to be like the dominant way that business is done in Silicon Valley. And the, the problem is, is not just that that's unsustainable and doesn't work, but that they want to take that idea of perpetual growth at all costs and just sort of export it out into the rest of the world onto the rest of us and, and make that be like, what humanity does forever.

[Sam Cedar]

I mean, it's. They want abundance, if you will. But, but we also, we should also all be able to agree that God is American. Right? I mean, that's.

[Emma Vigland]

Duh.

[Sam Cedar]

But, but talk about, like, are we at. Do you have a sense that maybe we are at sort of like the, the from the market? Right? I mean, this ideology is obviously been very profitable for a lot of these people. It is also sort of, in some ways, ridiculously, I don't say childish, but like, you know, the whole living on Mars thing, it just seems like what, you know, what, what are we talking about here? Like, whatever technology is going to allow us to live a decent life on Mars, whoever the lucky, you know, 200 people are, whatever it is, that technology, we could apply it down here too. Like. Like what? Like what? But putting that aside, the, this notion of, like, have we hit the, at least this round of, of how far you can go with the growth of this without it actually being profitable? Because it sort of feels like some of the money's been choked off. I mean, obviously the billionaires have the money, but for everybody else to buy into it, the, you know, all the barnacles on these ships essentially, that are, that are law, the AI ship, it starts, it's starting to feel like it's not paying off in the way that they had thought it would at this point.

[Janine Jackson]

Oh, yeah, no, it's totally a bubble. And I mean, they're hoping that they can ride that bubble until the arrival of this God, this, you know, AGI, Artificial General Intelligence. But AGI, nobody knows exactly what that is, how to define it, and there's no reason to think that it's coming soon or that it's even possible. So, yeah, I mean, what I expect is going to happen is at some point some company is going to see that the bubble is bursting or about to burst and then just announce that they've got AGI, and then people are going to point out, oh, yeah, this thing sucks, and they're going to say, yeah, but it's AGI. We decided that it is. You know, they've been predicting so many of these places, have been predicting for so long that it's coming so soon. I mean, they're, they're talking about it coming this year, next year, they're going to have to either say that they were wrong or claim that they've got it. And given that the second option is the more profitable one, they're going to make that claim and see if they can ride the bubble a little bit longer. But I think it's just going to pop.

[Sam Cedar]

And let's talk about what's problematic about this because we're not, we may or may not get to AGI, you know, anytime soon. It sounds like probably not. No, they're going to say that we are.

[Janine Jackson]

Yes.

[Sam Cedar]

And when I think of AI, what I think is, you know, having done a voice on an animated series is that we, within five years, that's going to be done. Like, the actors are no longer going to be. They're going to have a bank, you know, like, you know, on the, on the Simpsons, they've got 30 years or whatever. It is of audio there. They don't need the actors anymore. And you know, we'll do a buyout, we'll buy you out and then we just save a ton of money. We don't need you to come into studio, we don't need you to, but we don't need to cut it. We just write the script and boom, it's done in some way. And I think, you know, this is one of the points that you're making in the book is that the way that they talk about these goals in the future and this sort of like transcendent, you know, sort of nirvana that's coming ends up laying the groundwork for a very miserable, you know, now and near term future. I mean, it's sort of like the argument I've had with libertarians broadly is that like this nirvana you're talking about is never going to come, but the road there is even worse because it ends up cutting whatever it is, health care from people, et cetera, et cetera. Can you expand on that? That, that, that idea that what it's bringing in the meantime is going to end up being basically just a way to soak extract.

[Janine Jackson]

Yeah, totally. That's definitely the idea. I mean, it's a way of painting people who have legitimate concerns about the way AI is being deployed right now as enemies of the future and enemies of utopia. Right. You know, if you're getting in the way of utopia or if something is the price that has to be paid along the way to utopia, what price could be too high for, you know, a perfect world? And, and the other thing is, you know, this brings the, the dream of the management class is labor that can't organize against them. Right. If you can't form a union and you can't, you know, agitate for higher pay and better benefits. Yeah, your manager's going to love that. And so the idea that you can replace the employees with AI and then say, oh, you don't like that? Oh, you don't like the singularity? You don't like a perfect future where we all get to be immortal and live in space forever and like, no, man, I just don't like that you're firing me and taking away my ability to form a union and get better pay in order to, you know, bring in this significantly worse and mediocre machine to do my job, but less well.

[Sam Cedar]

And. Yeah, well, what I mean, give me a sense of like how much they, I mean, you know, we touched on this, but there is this notion, there is this sort of dynamic where AI and this type of tech is supposedly addressing social problems we have and just by simply sort of before they even provide the solution, they have already narrowed the vision we can have of addressing these problems. They have basically said this is a technical problem, this is a policy problem and not a political decision. Can you talk about that?

[Janine Jackson]

Yeah. I mean, you know, the Silicon Valley believes that, or the leaders of Silicon Valley believe that they're the smartest people in the world. Right. And that they know best, they should be allowed to make all decisions. They, they also believe that technology really is inevitable, that, that there's not any human decisions being made in, you know, where these things go. Right. The singularity is part of that idea that there's this inevitable utopia that we're heading toward. And Yudkowski's ideas are a twist on that, that there's this inevitable, you know, apocalypse that we're heading toward, and if we avert it, then we head toward the inevitable utopia. And, and so, you know, one of the nice things about inevitability is it takes away human agency. And you can say, oh, you know, really the only thing that matters is technology. And really the only thing that matters in technology is going faster or going slower. And so, you know, you speed things up, you get more AI out there, you get it bigger and more powerful, feed it more energy and more, you know, computing power and it'll just solve everything. And, and they don't ask questions like, well, hey, what about, you know, even if all of that's true, which it's not, what about, you know, a democratically informed decision making process about how things should be done, rather than just saying, let's go faster. And there's this contempt for democracy that's sort of innate in this. And it's why it's not that surprising that the tech oligarchs have seemingly suddenly shifted to the right and lined up behind Trump. They were never big fans of democracy. They're always much more enamored with free markets than they were with democratic elections and allowing people like the general public to help make decisions.

[Sam Cedar]

I mean, I think this is important stuff. I mean, obviously Courtesy Arvin comes out and has the most explicit, like, we should have a king. We did have a king. We, his argument is we have a king in absentia right now, fdr, and we're still living in his kingdom and we should, we should have a king. But this idea of, of, of it being anti democratic, I mean, there's two elements of it. One is, it seems to me, is, and we can see this even in the context of, like, the idea of, you know, the problem we have with government functioning well is a function of too many cooks in the kitchen. We have too many groups that have, you know, a vested interest in constituencies, and that's slowing things down as a general rule. Right, like, as opposed to, like, in, in certain circumstances, sometimes democracy is effective. In certain circumstances, democracy can be inefficient. But then there's this other notion too, of, like, you are avoiding any choices society is making. Like, you are obscuring the political dynamics that exist. Like, you say, we don't need a supercomputer to tell us how to deal with climate change. We're just not willing to confront the choices that we want to make, many instances, because there are incumbent interests who are like, we're going to lose, you know, I'm going to lose my petrodollars if we go whole hog into, you know, other means of, of generating power. Essentially, how, how conscious do you think they are of that dynamic? Like, how, how conscious are they that they are alighting the sort of political economy, if you will, and that's what their ideology functions to serve.

[Janine Jackson]

I think some of them know that, but I think a lot of them have no idea and just don't think about things that way. Right. They, they're pretty uninformed, especially about anything that would be studied in, like, a humanities department. Like, they don't know much about political science. They don't know much about, you know, history. They don't know much about, you know, they don't have very good reading comprehension in a lot of cases. And, and so, you know, there are definitely people in the tech world and, and tech billionaires who are exceptions to this. But I think by and large, this is, this is something that has worked out well for them that they genuinely believe. And the fact that it's making them money makes it easier for them to genuinely believe it and not really question it or look at it too hard. And the fact that they believe that money sort of correlates with intelligence means that they don't have to listen to anybody else. Right? Because if some, you know, academic comes in and says, hey, you're wrong about all this, they can just say, ah, yeah, what can. You know, you're poor. And if you were, if you were so smart, how come you're not rich?

[Sam Cedar]

I mean, I think that's a, that's why Donald Trump is president right now. I mean, frankly, yeah, he got on stage in 2016 and was just, he was the richest guy and automatically wins the argument in that worldview. Let's talk about the reconciliation bill that came out of the House a little bit, just turning away from the book. Although, like it's, it's an extension of this. One of the provisions in the House reconciliation bill is a ban on state regulation of AI. And I mean on its, on its face it just seems sort of a vague thing. But you know, we just saw the American Prospect has a, as a good sort of series of like pieces on the various areas in which AI is applied. And it would mean things like the, that real page lawsuit on the, the technology that essentially price fixed all the real estate. Whitney Wimbish, who, who writes our AM Quickie, wrote a piece for the Prospect on autonomous vehicle registration, state by state, that how much does an AI ban on, you know, regulating AI is implicate in that. And there are others, like give us a sense of like how far reaching this is and what the implications of it are.

[Janine Jackson]

Yeah, I mean it would basically make it impossible to stop. I mean the part of the problem here is that AI, the things that these companies are calling AI, it's a lot of, it's a marketing tool, right. And they're calling any sort of automated decision making process AI. And I believe I'd have to go back and double check, but I believe the bill actually says that the ban includes automated decision making processes. And depending on how you interpret that clause, this could make it essentially impossible to regulate almost any algorithm that's being deployed by these, these tech companies. And, and of course that's what they want. And they're framing this again as, you know, race with China. And so therefore they can't have, you know, state level regulators who are uninformed on their view, getting in the way of this really, really important race. But like this is, this could, you know, for example, there was this, you know, report recently about how you can use these tools to create like pornographic deepfakes of pretty much anybody you want. And there are already several state legislatures that are working to make that illegal. And this would make that impossible. You know, and so we just have 10 year spree of pornographic deep fakes of literally anybody with no legislative ability to stop that, no legal ability to stop that. That's not a world I want to live in.

[Sam Cedar]

No. And I wonder if we can even imagine the different areas in which this gets applied to when you're talking about whether it's an algorithm or even a hint of AI in there. And yeah, I don't know. I'M hoping that will get stripped out of the Senate bill.

[Janine Jackson]

Yeah, me too.

[Sam Cedar]

Probably will. It doesn't seem like it fits with reconciliation, but who knows? By then they could fire the parliamentarian and there'll be no one there to say stop it. Talk about this story that's come out about Palantir being tapped to create a massive database. I mean, we have so much data has been hoovered up by the NSA over the years. But one of the things that has been, to the extent that one could feel comforted by, is that there wasn't a particularly like, good way of them, of them to deal with the material. In fact, in some ways people were saying this is problematic because you have them just hoovering up all this stuff and they're not really doing anything to protect anybody because they don't know what to do with it all. But Palantir coming in, I mean, what are the implications of that and how much is it perhaps related to like Musk hoovering up who knows what kind of data from our government systems?

[Janine Jackson]

Yeah, I mean, this is what Palantir always wanted. Right. Palantir always wanted to build like a private security state, as far as I can tell. And, and, and then, you know, use it for the government. But, you know, there's always the question, are they going to use it for the government under all circumstances or only, you know, feel like it? And, and Musk, you know, similarly, like, you take all of this data and that the government has and, and you use that to train an AI, and now you've got an AI that can, you know, it can, it can recognize everybody, it can identify everybody. It basically takes all of the apparatus of a state level security system. Security, not the right. Like, it basically takes the federal intelligence abilities, like, you know, the stuff that the CIA and the FBI can do, and it puts it in the hands of these private companies. And it means that like, you know, Elon Musk can now, you know, keep an eye on you in a way that previously only the government could without democratic accountability. It means that Palantir and Peter Thiel, who is one of the co founders and chairman of the board at Palantir, can do that too. Like, we, we don't know what backdoors Doge put in to the government code systems. And even without those backdoors of Palantir has been tapped to, you know, handle all of this data that's being collected. This is exactly the nightmare that we were afraid of when it was first revealed that the government was collecting all of this data. Right. That somebody would find a way to use it against Americans. Right. Like, and against, against the rest of the world. Like if Peter Teal, who, you know, sued Gawker out of existence because it said stuff that he didn't like about him. If that guy gets a hold of all of this data and then, you know, finds out that people are saying things about him that he doesn't like, what's he going to do about that? I don't know. But he literally has more money than we know. Right. There was a, there was a report out of ProPublica a few years back revealing that he had more money in one bank account, one Roth ira than had been. It was like double the money in there than his estimated net worth was, you know, that year in what, the Forbes 500 or whatever. And, and so, you know, these are people with enormous resources, the resources of a small nation. And now they've got the surveillance resources of a large nation and there's no democratic accountability. You know, we don't elect the CEO or the chairman of the board of Palantir. They will be able to find people who don't like them and then God knows what they'll be able to do from there.

[Sam Cedar]

We should add that any safeguards we have in our government of our civil liberties are completely useless at that point. Because an agency that is not supposed to have this material can go and buy it now from a Palantir, let's say, and they can use it. They're just not allowed to collect it or to surveil. But if they buy it from somewhere else, there is no, you know, all those civil liberty safeguards, to the extent that they're even, they're insufficient at the moment, are essentially gone. And then I also not hard to imagine, like I'm an employer. I don't want anybody who has been to. There's certain music that I think is indicative of someone who's politically problematic or somebody who's been to protests, let's say. I just, you know, for whatever it is, I just do that check, whatever, you know, that's just.

[Adam Becker]

Sam hates that I listen to Kalani.

[Sam Cedar]

Yeah. The consumer facing aspect of it, I mean, it is really, it is nuts. And I, I mean, as evil as people say that Palantir is and et cetera, et cetera, this is sort of like the, this is the, the, this is the culmination of it, the idea that they would have all this data and.

[Emma Vigland]

Yeah, and also it feels like to me, the culmination of the war on terror. Too, where there's like a surveillance state apparatus that the tech. Right. Or now or just the tech billionaires have completely taken a hold of. And it's what people were warning about, like with Snowden and with the lack under Obama, honestly, the continuation of the war on terror, terror era, surveillance technologies and that lawlessness, like it's just built on itself. And now we have Trump 2.0 in bed with these people.

[Janine Jackson]

Yeah, yeah. No, I think that's right. You know, there was, I think this idea that. Oh, you know, I know I had friends saying this back when Obama was president. Oh, you know, if Obama doesn't do anything about this, I guess that means that it wasn't so bad in the first place. And I don't really think that that's how that works because what if, you know, what if someone's president who's not Obama and. And here we are. Yeah, exactly.

[Sam Cedar]

Adam Becker. The book is more Everything Forever. AI Overlords, Space Empires and Silicon Valley's Crusade to control the Fate of Humanity. Thanks so much for your time today. We'll put a link to that book at Majority FM and in the podcast and YouTube description. Fascinating stuff. Terrifying and. But I guess it's just a question of who gets the three wishes from our AGI overlord. And then maybe if we just get the right person who's who gets to ask one of the three wishes, then everything will be fine.

[Janine Jackson]

Sure. Yeah. Do you want it to be you?

[Sam Cedar]

I mean, okay, I'll just say make it all good and then we're done. I don't even need the first raise.

[Adam Becker]

The cap on Social Security.

[Sam Cedar]

Exactly, exactly. Appreciate you coming on.

[Janine Jackson]

Thanks for having me. This is a lot of fun.

[Emma Vigland]

Thanks, Adam.

[Sam Cedar]

All right, folks, we're going to take quick break and head into the fun half wherein we will take your IMs, we will take your phone calls, maybe we'll do some clips. We'll have a lot of fun. Just a reminder, it is your support that makes this show possible. You can become a [e-mail] when you do, you not only help the show survive and thrive, but you get free show, free of commercials. You get the fun half. You can IM us and then all sorts of other unnamed benefits that will really be here when. When the. When the true AI arrives because we got a lot of plans for that. So get in early because you don't want to be shut out when the real AI gets here. Also, just coffee, co op, fair trade coffee, hot chocolate, use the coupon code, majority get 10% off. We got a lot of like emails. I don't know what happened. We got a bunch of emails recently extolling the virtue of just coffee.

[Emma Vigland]

I mean, I'm not surprised.

[Sam Cedar]

I just don't know, like why, why did I just get five emails in the past, like, I don't know, week or two saying I just tried just coffee and it was fantastic. And also people don't know just coffee. It's, it's not that they only serve coffee, it's that it's all fair trade.

[Emma Vigland]

Right.

[Sam Cedar]

So, Matt.

[Adam Becker]

Oh yeah. Left Reckoning had Sandeep Vahesan on talking about public power, for instance. Did you know that back before we electrified rural areas, private utilities were saying, we'll never be able to do that because it's going to cost like $2,000, which was prohibitive back then. Good old FDR's New Deal government got into power and said, actually, we can standardize a lot of this and make things much more efficient than you private sector losers are suggesting. And they did that. And that's why rural America got electricity. So check that out for the public role in innovation and technology. Patreon.com left reckoning.

[Sam Cedar]

See you in the fun half. Three months from now, six months from now, nine months from now. And I don't think it's going to be the same as it looks like in six months from now. And I don't know if it's necessarily going to be better six months from now than it is three months from now, but I think around 18 months out, we're going to look back and go like, wow, what is that going on? It's nuts. Wait a second. Hold on. Hold on for a second. Fun Hat. Emma, welcome to the program. Fun Half. Matt. Boo. Fun Hat. What is up, everyone? Fun Half. No. Mickey, you did it. Fun Half.

[Emma Vigland]

Let's go, Brandon.

[Sam Cedar]

Let's go, Brandon. Fun Hack. Bradley, you want to say hello?

[Adam Becker]

Sorry to disappoint everyone. I'm just a random guy.

[Sam Cedar]

It's all the boys today.

[Janine Jackson]

Fundamentally false.

[Emma Vigland]

No. I'm sorry. Women.

[Sam Cedar]

Stop talking for a second. Let me finish.

[Janine Jackson]

Where is this coming from?

[Emma Vigland]

Dude?

[Sam Cedar]

But. Dude, you want to smoke this? 7A. Yes. Hi.

[Janine Jackson]

You're safe.

[Sam Cedar]

Yes. Is this me? Is it me? It is you.

[Janine Jackson]

Is this me? Hello?

[Sam Cedar]

Think it is you? Who is you? No sound Every single freaking day. What's on your mind? We can discuss free markets and we can discuss capitalism. I'm gonna go Snow white. Libertarians.

[Adam Becker]

They're so stupid.

[Sam Cedar]

Though common sense says of course Gobbled Eco. We nailed him.

[Emma Vigland]

So what's 79 plus 21?

[Sam Cedar]

Challenge. Man, I'm positively quivering. I believe 96. I want to say 8, 5, 7, 2, 1 0. 8, 5, 5, 0. 11 half.

[Janine Jackson]

3, 8, 9, 11.

[Sam Cedar]

For instance.

[Emma Vigland]

3, $400. $1900.

[Sam Cedar]

5, 4, $3 trillion.

[Janine Jackson]

Sold.

[Sam Cedar]

It's a zero sum game.

[Emma Vigland]

Actually. You're making me think less.

[Sam Cedar]

But let me say this poop, you.

[Janine Jackson]

Can call it satire. Sam goes to satire.

[Sam Cedar]

On top of it all. My favorite part about you is just like every day, all day, like everything you do. Without a doubt. Hey, buddy, we see you. All right, folks, folks, folks.

[Emma Vigland]

It's just the week being weeded out. Obviously.

[Sam Cedar]

Yeah. Sun's out, guns out. I. I don't know.

[Emma Vigland]

But you should know.

[Sam Cedar]

People just don't.

[Adam Becker]

Like to entertain ideas anymore.

[Sam Cedar]

I have a question. Who cares?

[Adam Becker]

Our chat is enabled, folks.

[Sam Cedar]

I love it.

[Emma Vigland]

I do love that.

[Sam Cedar]

Gotta jump. Gotta be quick. I gotta jump.

[Janine Jackson]

I'm losing it, bro.

[Sam Cedar]

2 o' clock, we're already late, and the guy's being a dick. So screw him. Sent to a gulag.

[Emma Vigland]

Outrageous.

[Sam Cedar]

Like, what is wrong with you?

[Janine Jackson]

Love you.

[Sam Cedar]

Bye. Love you. Bye. Bye.