Better Offline - Investigating Altman With Ronan Farrow and Andrew Marantz

Episode Date: April 9, 2026

In a special episode of Better Offline, Ed Zitron is joined by writers Ronan Farrow and Andrew Marantz of the New Yorker to talk about their massive investigation into Sam Altman, his ouster from OpenAI, and the consequences of trusting Silicon Valley with the future.https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2026/04/13/sam-altman-may-control-our-future-can-he-be-trusted Save $10 off a year of my premium newsletter: https://edzitronswheresyouredatghostio.outpost.pub/public/promo-subscription/gzqwkv54e1 - I’d be so grateful! YOU CAN NOW BUY BETTER OFFLINE MERCH! Go to https://cottonbureau.com/people/better-offline and use code FREE99 for free shipping on orders of $99 or more. Buy our new “FUCK DATA CENTERS” shirts today! --- LINKS: https://www.tinyurl.com/betterofflinelinks Newsletter: https://www.wheresyoured.at/ Reddit: https://www.reddit.com/r/BetterOffline/  Discord: chat.wheresyoured.at Ed's Socials: https://twitter.com/edzitron https://www.instagram.com/edzitron https://bsky.app/profile/edzitron.com https://www.threads.net/@edzitron Email Me: [e-mail] omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

This is an IHeart podcast. Guaranteed Human. Run a business and not thinking about podcasting. Think again. More Americans listen to podcasts than ads supported streaming music from Spotify and Pandora. And as the number one podcaster, IHearts twice as large as the next two combined.

Learn how podcasting can help your business. Call 844-844-I-Hart. Another podcast from some SNL late-night comedy guy, not quite. Unhumor me with Robert Smygel and friends. Me and hilarious guests from Bob Odenkirk to David Letterman help make you funnier. This week, my guest,

SNL's Mikey Day and head writer, Streeter Seidel, help an a cappella band with their between songs banter. Where does your group perform? We do some retirement homes. Those people are starving for banter. Listen to humor me with Robert Smigel and friends on the IHeart Radio app, Apple Podcasts,

or wherever you get your podcasts. There are times when the mind becomes a difficult place to live. This is David Eagleman with the Inner Cosmos podcast, and for Mental Health Awareness Month, We'll talk with singer-songwriter Jewel about anxiety. I started living in my car, and then my car got stolen. I was having panic attacks.

I was agoraphobic. This is a month of deeply personal and honest conversations about what happens when the brain goes off course. Listen to Inner Cosmos on the IHeart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. Hey, everyone, it's Ryder Strong and Wilfredel from PodMeets World. And now the Pod Meets Twirled podcast. We're two men who were completely clueless to reality TV, and we're gearing up for the season finale of Survivor.

I know we annoyed a lot of our listeners by our severe lack of survivor knowledge. That is the point of the show. I'm just going to remind you. Again, we are experts. Listen to Podmeets Tworl on the IHeart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. AllZone Media. Hello and welcome to Better Offline. I'm, of course, your host, Ed Zitron.

No monologue this week. Quit complaining because I've brought you all something far better. I am joined by Ronan Farrow and Andrew Morance of the New York who just put out a massive piece about Sam Altman, the dampest man in Silicon Valley history, which is my comment, not theirs. And I think I want to... Thank you for joining me, both of you, first of all. I want to ask a really just blunt question, Ronan. Considering your history of the people you've reported on, why Sam Altman? What drew you to him?

Well, this is fundamentally different than stories I've done that started with, you know, a single clear-cut lead of about criminality. This was a situation where I was coming off of reporting you may be familiar with about Elon Musk and his whole empire. And I had a lot of sources in the world of AI, including Sam Altman, who was on the record in that piece. And, you know, this was no novel, uh, uh, uh, a genius projection on my part. Obviously, it was at a moment when AI was becoming the kind of fulcrum of Silicon Valley. And it became apparent to me that there were under-examined questions about the trajectory of the technology and the integrity of the stewards of it.

We really started looking at that with an open mind. you know, Andrew is on this beat of big tech all the time and is also well sourced up in this world. And we both, I think, sat down and were having our conversations about what the most salient points of contention were in this world. And we're equally open to criticism about all of the labs, all of the figures. This question of why Sam Alton was fired, what the specific alleged proof, points were, and whether those questions were something we should care about, were they right to care then, and should we still care now? Are those problems ongoing? Those really emerged as just a lingering, unanswered set of questions that hadn't been, you know, fully proved out and backed up

in this kind of a forensic way. Right. So why was he fired? Like what did, because the piece kind of got into it, but it's all over, like the answers are all over the place from everyone, and each person seems to have a different interpretation. Andrew, you want to start? Yeah, I think one of the abiding frustrations and curiosities from this is the whole world saw Sam Altman get fired, and then the whole world watched as he returned, and that was never really adequately explained in the public narrative. And so we really go into with sort of more documentation, I think, than, than ever before exactly what was going on. And as Ronan says, you know, it was not this sort of one smoking gun thing. Like it wasn't, you know, oh, you know, Sam Altman was strangling baby puppies in the

office and nobody knew it until now, right? This is a much subtler, slower accumulation of what his critics say are manipulations, telling two different stories to people. The, the idea of telling different people what they want to hear comes up a lot. And so this is, this is, you know, the kind of thing where you kind of need a New Yorker story. I say sort of self-interestedly, but like I do think that you kind of need to put all the facts in one place for them to make sense. And there have been really good books about this. There have been a lot out there. I mean, we're obviously not first to this story. But I just think it's hard to understand what the allegations even are without lining it all up in one place. And you kind of have to centrally start from this

premise of Sam Altman did not go to everyone and say, AI is going to be a really big deal, it's going to be a product, we can try to sell, it's going to be a good investment pitch for us, let's all go and make a bunch of money, right? What he was saying was, you guys, you engineers, you need to come along with me and build this technology with me specifically because I will be circumspect, I will be safe, I will argue for regulation, I will keep it in this nonprofit AI safety research lab format, and it was the betrayal of those promises that they felt was the fireable offense, more so than any one smoking gun thing. Except he was kind of brought back by capitalism.

Like it was very, it was, I remember when it happened, there was a journalist posting that they were crying with happiness about it. It was genuine, one of the darker moments I can think in Silicon Valley history, because it's like, wow, Brian Chesky and Satchinadella got together and held hands and got that Sam Altman back up. It was just so bizarre. It is weird, and it speaks to, you know, this thing. again, that people consistently allege in the documents we saw and during our interviews of this

sort of telling different stories to different communities of people. I mean, one of the most basic examples of this, right, is turning to the safety nonprofit people and saying, this will always be a safety nonprofit, and then turning to the VC investment community and saying, let's go, guys, rocket to the moon, let's go make a bunch of money, and kind of simultaneously holding both of those communities seemingly in the palm of his hand until he wasn't able to anymore. You're exactly right to frame it as capitalism winning. And I think we were fascinated in this case of what's called the blip, this brief firing and then undoing the firing,

because it does feel like it is about much more than Sam Allman. The thing that OpenAI originally was when it was founded as a nonprofit and in the way Andrew described was pitched on the basis of these fears, from the people developing the technology where the founders of this company were saying, listen, this is so dangerous that we're comparing it to nuclear weapons and we need to create a noble-minded research lab

without a profit motive. They recruited on that basis, people took pay cuts to go there on that basis. And this moment, when the board that was empowered to remove a CEO if they felt that CEO could not be trusted, with that mission. When they tried to do that and basically investors who really didn't know what the hell

was going on at the time, that's one of the things we document. You know, the board really fumbled the ball. We can talk about how. But the long and short of it is that those investors rallied around Sam Altman, who really stood to make them a lot of money, and they were worried that their money would go away if the company fell apart. And so it is a part of a bigger story about the way in which Silicon Valley builds companies

based on hype and at least not solely real value and where the initial promises very often don't pan out. And what winds up governing is, I think it's valid when people in this piece have the criticism of, you know, we're now seeing a race to the bottom on the very safety issues that OpenAI was supposed to be founded around. And the blip was a turning point that encapsulated that.

Yeah, with that in mind, do you buy that Sam Wharton gives a shit about safety? Do you actually think that the safety mission matters to him at all? You've spoken to him a few times. I think when he talks about still caring about and prioritizing safety, look, maybe I am just kind of too generous in my assumptions about people. I assume that he believes the story that he is telling himself, which is very often has the same contour, namely what he cares about is winning. That's the word he uses.

And he has set up the rationales in his mind and in the way he conveys it to others so that him winning and consolidating as a. much power as possible, is the same thing as humanity winning. So for him, when he talks about these things, there is no daylight between them. He says in the piece that his definition of winning is a crazy uplevel for everyone. We're all going to be curing diseases and forming blockbuster startups. I'm really paraphrasing, but barely exaggerating. He talks about it in these terms, and I think he really does think that him controlling the technology is the most direct path to that. He often says in conversations that accusations are the truest form of confessions

or variations of this thought, you know, that when people launch a criticism about someone else, they're very often projecting something about themselves. And it's interesting because in the course of my Elon Musk reporting, he talks about Musk in this very specific way where he says, on the record, you know, I believe Elon is interested in saving humanity, but only if he's the one who can do it. And I thought about that quote about Elon a lot as I was in my conversations with Sam. I mean, the other thing I would say on this safety question, right, is a lot of these terms, safety, AGI itself, super intelligence itself, these all are vague enough terms and they're, they're poorly defined enough that there can always be this kind of slippage and equivocation. And sometimes

that's unavoidable, but sometimes people can use it to their rhetorical advantage, right? So on questions of safety or alignment, what you would often find is that the Sam Altman of 2015 or even frankly 23 would be talking about the alignment problem as a literally existential problem. If we don't solve this, a rogue AI could kill literally every person on Earth. And then you go back to him two years later, and he's saying, the alignment problem is this slightly annoying thing that kind of tempts you to, you know, spend more time on chat GPT, the way that algorithm, you know, Instagram's algorithm is out of alignment with the way you want to spend your time. That is absolutely not what he meant by it two years prior, but the word is the same. So he can kind of skate by with that. I mean this is

the nicest way. Why do you believe him two years ago, but not, but, but, like, what, do you think he's changed? Do you think he just, well, that's, I'm not accusing you of it. I'm just like, Sam Altman's whole vibe is to me personally just saying quite deceptive. So I'm just, I'm just wondering what you've seen. I'm not saying that I believed him. I'm saying that his employees believed him. Congress to some extent believed him. The public. I think actually that's a very important point, Ed. I think your analysis is correct. And actually the perspective. from which we write the piece is these have always been shifting assurances. And actually, part of what we emphasize and document is that even at the time of those older assurances,

where Sam Alman was the biggest dumer in the industry, he was saying and doing conflicting things at the same time in many cases. You know, we document through a lot of internal communications a period of time in which many researchers were joining the company on the promise that this would forever be a noble nonprofit. But simultaneously, Sam Altman and Greg Brockman, his co-founder, were having very concerted conversations about how quickly and effectively they could get out of the nonprofit structure, essentially. We talk about cases where he's saying on the hill, we need regulation.

We need to start even a new government agency to regulate AI. And then simultaneously, he's working against regulations. Well, just to bolster the point you're making, like, what really does seem clear is that whether they should have believed it in retrospect, a lot of these early employees, early recruits, early co-founders really do seem to believe it. I mean, unless there was this kind of, you know, long game where they were like, we're going to write these emails to each other in 2015, and then 10 years later, they'll come out, and it'll all look like this was all.

I mean, I guess that's possible. But from all appearances, it really seems like at least a lot of the key people, really did believe this pitch at the time. Another podcast from some SNL late-night comedy guy, not quite. Unhumor me with Robert Smygel and Friends. Me and hilarious guests from Bob Odenkirk to David Letterman help make you funnier.

This week, my guest, S&L's Mikey Day and head writer, Streeter Seidel, help an a cappella band with their between songs banter. Where does your group perform? We do some retirement homes. Those people are starving for banter. Listen to humor me with Robert Smigel and Friends on the I-Heart Radio app. podcasts or wherever you get your podcasts. Run a business and not thinking about podcasting, think again.

More Americans listen to podcasts than ads supported streaming music from Spotify and Pandora. And as the number one podcaster, IHearts twice as large as the next two combined. So whatever your customers listen to, they'll hear your message. Plus, only IHeart can extend your message to audiences across broadcast radio. Think podcasting can help your business. Think IHeart, streaming, radio, and podcasting. Let us show you at IHeart advertising.

That's iHeartadvertising.com. The story I've told myself about love or relationships can then shape my behavior, and that can lead me to sabotage the possibility of connection. This Mental Health Awareness Month, tune into the podcast deeply well with Debbie Brown and explore the journey of healing, self-discovery, and returning to yourself. We explore higher consciousness, emotional well-being, and the practices that help you for. find clarity, peace, and self-mastery in a world that can feel overwhelming. The world is becoming lonelier. We're not becoming more social and connected. We're becoming more individualized, but we actually meet people in connection.

If you've been searching for a soft place to land while doing the work to become whole, this podcast is for you to hear more. Listen to deeply well with Debbie Brown from the Black Effect Podcast Network on the IHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts or wherever you get your podcast. If you're watching the latest season of the Real Housewives of Atlanta, you already know there's a lot to break down. Gorsha accusing Kelly of sleeping with a merry man. They holding Kay Michelle back from fighting Drew.

Pinky has financial issues. I like the bougie style of Housewives show. I think it looks like it's going to be interesting. On the podcast, Reality with the King, I, Carlos King, recap the biggest moments from your favorite reality shows, including the Real House Wise franchise, the drama, the alliances, and the team everybody's talking about. As an executive producer in reality television, I'm not just watching it.

I understand the game. As somebody who creates shows, I'll even say this. At the end of the day, when people are at home, they want entertainment. To hear this and more, listen to Reality with the King on the IHard Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcast. Although my way of reading it personally is also, it felt like a lot of rich guys kind of farting around. It was just the conversations they had back and forth, just the banality of it all. Just like, oh, what if this happened and this happened?

I believe Ilyosutka, but he seems to, however people may feel about him in general, he seems to at least buy this. The Altman Elon Musk emails were very much like two guys at an airport bar after a few waiting for their flight. It was very interesting watching this unfold over time because the modern Sam Orlman is very much more like a tech CEO, capital T, capital C. Like he's very much a, like maximizing profit and growth. And the, like you said, the safety stuff kind of seems just like on the side now. It's more important that we just get this thing public. Yeah.

Well, and I mean, it's sort of like two guys at the airport bar, except that the hundreds of millions of dollars of investment they're talking about actually are real. I mean, you know, so, so it is, I think you're right. There's a kind of combination of things going on here. And I would be prepared to believe that in that particular case of Musk and Altman emailing each other, that there is some kind of gamesmanship or brinksmanship going on and that even what they say in private might not be fully what they mean. But when you get outside of that tight of a circle, when you talk about the early recruits to Open AI, the later recruits, the people who took massive pay cuts to, you know, give up $6 million salaries at Google to come

work for them. Clearly this pitch of where the good guys was doing some work for those people. And I also think that we should keep in mind how effective the public pitch was. I mean, coming on the heels of Mark Zuckerberg and, you know, all these other, you know, sort of social media tycoons going out to the public and saying you should be so grateful for these, you know, convenience machines that we're building and you should, you know, give us all your data and you should feel bad anytime you want to regulate us. Again, Altman's pitch was totally the opposite. It was, we're going to be conscientious. This is so dangerous that you actually have to regulate us and we are just begging for our hands to be tied. Again, whether in retrospect that seems like a genuine pitch or not is sort of separate from the question of how effective it was.

So let's talk finances. Within the piece, there wasn't a ton of stuff about money, but there was this quote from a senior executive at Microsoft who said, I think there's a small but real chance. Altman is eventually remembered as a birdie made off of Sam Bankman, freed level scammer. Did you, what kind of financial stuff did you hear about Open AI, if anything? I mean, this is all very far out there already. We have a board member in the piece talking about how the company is levered up in a scary way right now. I mean, this is a company with one of the fastest cash burn rates in the history of startups.

The spend level is almost unimaginable in the real. towards H.E.I. And so it really does require, it's almost not an exaggeration to say all the money in the world. And this governs a lot of the different activities that we write about in the piece, right? Sam Altman for years courting Middle Eastern money. Everyone in Silicon Valley is courting Middle Eastern money and sidelining concerns about working with autocrats to various extents. Sam Altman is doing it on a unique level, you know, agreeing to, and catalyzing the building of massive infrastructure, even including in the Middle East.

You know, and over the objections, we talk about, like, concerns that short-circuited a security clearance vetting process because there were so many red flags in the national security establishment about these dealings with the Middle East. We talk about, you know, gifts and trips to, on yachts with UAE officials.

So, you know, this is a drive for more. and more and more and more. And we talk to, you know, startup experts and economists who say one of the consequences of that is a whole lot of circular deals. You know, none of this is new either. But this is a situation where it is the general Silicon Valley archetype of building companies on hype and promises before actual value, inflating a massive balloon of valuation. And it's putting it on a far grander scale where there's a whole ecosystem of partners that are just borrowing and borrowing and borrowing from each other on the assurance that they're all going to buy each other's products. It's an I'll scratch your back, you scratch mine situation over and over again.

In some cases, you know, Altman is running into problems because there are conflicting or at least allegedly conflicting deals being announced like on the same day. We talk about tensions in the Microsoft relationship, particularly around this recent Amazon deal. Was that frontiers? Yes, it's to do with, you know, the exclusivity having been reaffirmed for Microsoft in terms of the underlying stateless models. And then OpenAI announcing, well, now at the same time, in the same day, well, we have

this additional deal on top of that with Amazon, you know, for our enterprise products that allow the building of agents, which they're saying is going to happen in a stateful environment. And that's going to be because they're creating new technology that will de-conflict this with the underlying stateless models from Microsoft. The long and the short of it is a bunch of people at Microsoft feel this is not technically possible. And you have to rely on the underlying stateless models to create agents that are stateful essentially with memory. That's a lot of technical jargon to get at the point, which is there's a slew of deals where critics say they're circular and someone's going to have to pay up. Maybe a lot of people are going to have to pay up. Sam Altman's one of the people who has said we're looking at a bubble and that a lot of people are going to lose a lot of money.

Which is, it's funny, though, whenever he talks about it, it's never him. He's never like, I'm going to lose, I will be, but it kind of gets back to what you were saying. It's like, the only one who can usher in this AI future is Sam Altman. The only person who will not get destroyed in the bubble is Sam Altman. Makes me wonder if he's like a fantasist or a narcissist or a sociopath. It's like, I think at least one of those words was in the piece. Those words are definitely in the piece. Yeah.

Not from us, to be clear. Yeah, yes, yes, yes. These are quotes. Closely with the man. But it's remarkable. You know, you're rarely on a story. I don't know about you, Andrew, where so many people use the word sociopath unprompted by us. And, and look, I mean, again, I think it's very, I think readers should come to this with a lot of skepticism about how much of this is kind of industry.

competition and we tried to not, you know, let people launder talking points through our story, right? We're very, everyone in this world is kind of a ruthless competitor, right? So it wouldn't be a very high bar to say, you know, I talked to this guy's corporate competitor and they called him a sociopath. Like it's not that kind of criticism that we're talking about. We're talking about these very longstanding kind of documented patterns that people can dispute, but it's not just kind of these off-the-cuff observations. I think to your point about the bubble stuff, like, you're audience will be very familiar with this because I know you cover this stuff a lot, but this question of, is it a bubble or is it actually a very useful or even potentially economically transformative

technology? It's not really as clean a binary as that, because a lot of the biggest bubbles in market history have come from, you know, infrastructure projects that ultimately got used, right? I mean, this is a kind of basic economic history point, but I think it's worth reiterating the railroads, the canals, the even fiber optic cable, all of this stuff eventually gets used. The question is, does the speed at which the investors are building it match the usefulness in real time? Yeah, and I mean I would debate that point and have done so many times because GPUs depreciate in three to six years and there's no way that this gets used afterwards. But putting that all aside, it is still this weird thing of, and it's something in my own work I've noticed,

it's weird we're discussing this still. Like, it's weird that we have no clarity because even within your piece, we don't really have clarity about what is going on. Like, the one thing that stood out to me, like they're still trying to work out a business model. That whole thing about pitting world powers against each other was truly insane.

Like, Greg Brockman, you'll have to run through it again, but it was like, as I understood it, it would be Greg Brockman suggesting that they make something powerful enough to sell the different nations and create a bidding war. like Mission Impossible, except with a chat bar. Yeah, yeah. This is, again, you know, like you say, there's a lot of kind of guy at the bar speculation

going on. And so this is in the early days when because Open AI back then was a nonprofit whose legally binding fiduciary duty was the safety of all of humanity, they hired someone to come in and say, okay, how can we deploy this, you know, potentially dangerous thing safely? And this person, the way it was told to us, came in with all kinds of, you know, 50 page, you know, detailed white papers about how we can model it on the Baruch plan and the way that, you know, the nuclear weaponry was first brought safely into the world. And the way that

that was told to us again was that that plan then somehow morphed into, okay, instead of doing this, you know, kind of safe international game theory, non-zero cooperation thing, why don't we just, you know, start an auction between China, Russia, the U.S., maybe a few other world governments, and see who either wants to be given the technology or who can be sold the technology. Now, obviously, this is disputed and also even more obviously, this is not something that happened. But the fact that that kind of idea was being batted around and apparently was taken outside the walls of the organization and was pitched to potential investors, it really does speak to how volatile. Yeah, it's really a crazy situation. And the way, you know, we got people denying this, but they didn't say, like, this is made up.

They just remembered the details of it differently. So, you spoke to Sam Oatman a few times, right? Yep. Like, what seemed to actually get under his skin? Because it's over the last, I've watched a lot of Samuel. I've watched the Oveman channel for hours. And he seems fairly calm most of the time, but occasionally something will really irritate him. Like, very suddenly, like Brad Goertz, no, I think it is, the venture capitalist who was talking about valuations.

and he said, well, I'll get someone to buy your shares. Or when he was on the hard fork podcast, on one of the glazing sessions, he got very angry about the New York Times suing him and suing Open AI even. What was his mood like? What were the questions he was up for? What were the things he got a bit worrisome about? Well, he, the truth is, I think both of us picked up on from both Sam and institutionally from Open AI. some degree of apathy about the integrity and lying allegations that got him fired.

I think that there is real sensitivity and concern about the reporting in the piece around the law firm investigation that was used to kind of validate his staying on. and my background is as an attorney in part, and I went very deep on talking to people at the law firm, and Andrew and I really looked at this question. And look, the defense of that outside investigation from some of the lawyers involved is on full display in the story. But I think the widespread criticism of it is meaningful and has merit, which is we report for the first time. that nothing was put in writing except for the 800-word press release that OpenAI put out,

which acknowledged only a breakdown in trust. It is true that private companies sometimes keep outside investigations when they want the outcome to be exonerative out of writing to limit liability and because of privilege issues. But when you look at the annals of high-profile scandals like this, where the goal is to restore trust and confidence,

I think there is a much better case that this should have been memorialized in a more intensive way, that it should have been released, at least within the company, if not publicly. And look, you don't have to turn to us. There was a whole set of executives and stakeholders in this company who were shocked that there was no actual report released. So, you know, there was a real effort to obfuscate some of this stuff in the view of many people around it and we report on a number of alleged irregularities there. That's a good example of a nuts and bolts matter where there is concern. And honestly, my legal analysis is there should be

because if this company goes through its IPO, there are actually legal standards by which shareholders could demand more information about that. And we talk to people around this who are saying, well, there might need to be a new investigation at some point. So there are some practicalities like that. Obviously, he was, as you might imagine, also very concerned about all of the Elon rivalry stuff in the piece and all of the scuttlebutt that is so far out there in Silicon Valley about his personal life, you know, which we looked at very incisively and fairly. But I think your point is well taken, which is the core allegations about integrity and honesty. don't seem to much get under his skin.

And when I asked him even on a personal level, from the perspective of someone where if this was said about me so widely, you know, that I had a real problem with honesty and was in the view of many people around me compulsively lying and telling people conflicting things, that would be devastating and would trigger a lot of deep self-reflection and work on myself. And so even when I asked him within that personal framework,

You know, listen, are you, is this something that you have talked about in therapy? How do you talk to yourself about this trait? How do you carry the weight of that? I don't know about your impression because you were in that interview, Andrew. I did not sense a lot of like deep bracing self-reflection or self-confrontation. There was kind of a slightly anodyne discussion of like, yeah, I've tried therapy on occasion. You know, I love breath work. And not a lot of, I mean, look, and maybe.

he is just choosing not to reveal how people to carry this. That's also potentially true. Another podcast from some SNL late night comedy guy, not quite unhumor me with Robert Smygel and friends, me and hilarious guests from Bob Odenkirk to David Letterman

help make you funnier. This week, my guest, SNL's Mikey Day and head writer Streeter Seidel help an a cappella band with their between songs banter. Where does your group perform? We do some retirement homes. Those people are starving for banter. Listen to Humor Me with Robert Smigel and friends on the IHeart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.

Run a business and not thinking about podcasting, think again. More Americans listen to podcasts than ads supported streaming music from Spotify and Pandora. And as the number one podcaster, IHearts twice as large as the next two combined. So whatever your customers listen to, they'll hear your message. Plus, only IHeart can extend your message to audiences across broadcast radio. Think podcasting can help your business. Think IHeart. streaming, radio, and podcasting.

Let us show you at iHeartadvertising.com. That's iHeartadvertising.com. The story I've told myself about love or relationships can then shake my behavior, and that can lead me to sabotage the possibility of connection. This Mental Health Awareness Month, tune into the podcast deeply well with Debbie Brown and explore the journey of healing, self-discovery, and returning to yourself. We explore higher consciousness, emotional well-being, and the practices that help you find clarity, peace, and self-mastery in a world that can feel overwhelming.

The world is becoming lonelier. We're not becoming more social and connected. We're becoming more individualized, but we actually meet people in connection. If you've been searching for a soft place to land while doing the work to become whole, this podcast is for you to hear more. Listen to deeply well with Debbie Brown. from the Black Effect Podcast Network on the Iheart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcast.

Hey, I'm Jared Adano. You might know me as that loud guy who yells out, help on the internet. Help! Somebody! Please! But there's so much more to me than me. I'm an actor.

I'm a comedian. And recently, I've become quite the helper myself. And on my new podcast, Hope from a Hypocrite, I'll be changing lives, helping people in need with my sage advice. and thoughtful solutions. Sike! I'm a comedian!

I'm not qualified to give good advice! Join me and my comedian friends as we riff, rant and recommend some of the most legally dubious advice known to man. If I'm calling you, even if you're on your phone, let it ring twice. One ring is too scary. Oh, cream a chicken suit.

A cream... Cream a chicken suit. This is Help from a Hypocrite, the worst advice from the dumbest people you know. Listen to help from a Hibon. Hypocrat as part of the Mike Cultura Podcast Network available on the IHartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. Yeah, it's, I was literally talking to a friend of the show, Steve Burke from Games Nexus about this the other day. It's like if someone, if everywhere on, like, I don't know if you saw the Iran was threatening Stargate UAE, so the Open AI Data Center in the Middle East.

Everyone was talking about it like, yeah, fuck them up, destroy it, blah, blah. And it's like, now that you said that I'm wanting. wondering if he cares about that either, because if I'd made a product and I went online and like, okay, a large contingent of very annoying people liked it, but tons of people were like disgusted about, I would be a little more concerned. And it sounds like he doesn't really care. Like, you brought up like the person who's killed themselves because they were using chat GPT as well. Did he have any reaction to that or the negativity against open AI or was it the same kind of anodyne reaction? Andrew. I mean, we, we, we,

We got statements to the effect of, you know, this responsibility weighs very heavily and, you know, I have no judgment about what's in his head or heart. I think that one way that this might seem different from like a sort of more standard microhuman scale reaction could be that a lot of these people, based on their public statements alone, see themselves as kind of playing in this big sort of Enders game kind of. galactic simulation scenario, right? So I don't, you know, this is not something that Sam Altman said to us, and this is not something that I'm imputing to him. But you know if you, you know, follow the way that Musk and Altman and a lot of these people think, they are, they are avowedly playing on this galactic scale. Now, there's a possibility that that's just hype and that's just to get the next investment round and that's a totally plausible possibility. But to the extent that that stuff seeps into their self-conception at all, there's a way of reading it that says, you know,

maybe some eggs are going to get broken to make the big galactic omelet. Yeah, it's, I keep thinking about how many times people call them a sociopath as well, because it's just, this profile is very interesting because a lot of it was going through stuff that being reported, but like getting it deeper and deeper and deeper. But in the end, compared to like other monsters you have covered Ronan, just being blunt, Altman almost seems quite tepid. Despite the scale of all of this, despite how much is theoretically or otherwise at stake, he just seems, and all of these people, Daria Amadeh included, just seem like business guys.

They talk about the big philosophical things, but when you get down to it, business guys, there's regular business guys. There's like a distinct lack of emotion to it, but not in an interest. not interesting, it's not the word, but like, colorful way. It's just very cold. Yeah, I hear you. I think, so first of all, I really stay away from in my own mind in how I frame things, these terms like, you know, monster or villain.

Yeah. Even by the way, when reporting on, you know, someone who's like a very clearly guilty of, like, serial violent crime, I think my job, like, almost especially when the fact pattern is really damning is. is to kind of excavate what's sympathetic, be strenuously fair. This is more in line with, you know, reporting I did on Musk, reporting I've done in other cases that's, you know, more about national security issues, where the centerpiece is not some portrait of damning criminality. The analysis of Altman's alleged, you know, pathological or compulsive lying is very

subtle. It is undertaken with, if anything, I think maximum generosity to him. In the course of any piece like this, you have a lot of conversations with the subject of the reporting about what's in and what's out. And I really erred on the side in a lot of cases of generosity towards Sam. I feel for anyone who's under this kind of a microscope, I think it's correct, you know, if you have this much power to be held accountable. But I want to do it. in a way that is not unkind. And that is tough, but really fair. So I've been struck actually by the range of reactions to the piece.

I think Andrew and I did our job well in the sense that I see people who are like, this is the most horrifying thing ever. And this is a completely untrustworthy person who needs to be kept away from any position of authority. And I also see people who are like, you know what? This feels actually like a sympathetic portrait. My mom was calling me last night.

having read the piece saying, you know, I just see interviews with him and I sense this kind of charm and vulnerability. And, you know, I read the piece and he's a complicated guy. But I think you did a really good job actually also making him sympathetic. So I think the fact that the fact pattern can accommodate this range of perceptions is telling. And my hope is that the power of what we've done is precisely in that kind of forensic nuance. The facts are very unimpeachable. I think it is very difficult to argue with the idea that there is a serial honesty problem here and a preponderance of people around him who consider it to be a problem. And to your point of like, is this all milk toast doesn't matter? I think what it comes down to is yes, he is a businessman,

and this is a world of businessmen that we are looking at. Sam Altman's degree of dissembling appears to be so noteworthy that it transcends and breaks through and becomes a constant topic. What do you mean by dissembling, sorry? The allegation that Sam Altman says conflicting things to different people and at times says things that are simply untrue, it is so pervasive that it breaks through and becomes a topic of conversation around him across his career over and over again, is one thing we document, even against the backdrop of all of the Silicon Valley businessmen, all of the expectation,

which is, you know, to a dismaying extent, increasingly, just what people assume is normal, that there will be some degree of pitchmen, you know, hyping based on things that aren't totally grounded, in fact. Even with all of that, even with the kind of race to the bottom in terms of truth and trust in Silicon Valley and America right now, particularly in American business,

Sam Altman is noteworthy. And that, to me, made him actually an extraordinarily interesting and challenging subject to write about. Because while it does exist in subtlety, the accumulation of facts that got him fired is striking, even above and beyond that backdrop and that set of norms. So as we wrap up, you spoke with Dario Amadea of Anthropic a few times, right? Or at least one, it wasn't clear how many conversations happened. how does he compare to Sam personality-wise, and as far as believing it all goes? I mean, I think personality-wise, they're quite different, and we've seen them sort of clash,

you know, the sort of like memes of them being unwilling to even, you know, touch hands and all of that stuff. I think that's pretty real. And, you know, there are many different styles of this. I think, you know, Sam and Elon have obviously very different public personas. as Ilya Sutskiver has a very different public presentation. The Dario thing, I think, is complicated, right, because Anthropic spun off from Open AI. They were, you know, the Open AI safety people who left to form their own company. And now there's this danger of them perpetuating this race to the bottom with, you know, getting the same, you know, Middle East autocracy money that they critiqued other companies for doing of, you know, there was this whole dust up around the Pentagon

stuff, but that only was able to have. happened because Anthropic was doing so much classified work for the Pentagon in the first place, right? So it's not that there are these very clean distinctions, at least to an outside the industry kind of perspective. And look, I mean, I think your point about like how much of this is just par for the course business stuff is a really important one. And also your question is the right one. Like, why should anyone have invested so much in this rhetoric in the first place? And I think one way of approaching that is like, to the people who are really close to this, I think this does go beyond like narcissism of small differences stuff and like who puts the nicer

rapper on the, you know, who does better branding. Like these people, again, in their private correspondence, when they don't think anyone's looking, they talk about this like it's Lord of the Rings, literally. Like they talk about, you know. And so again, you can think that's all diluted and many people do. And frankly, a lot of people we spoke to said, in retrospect, I can't believe I was so naive that I bought into all this stuff. But when you have convinced yourself that that's what's going on, whether it's right or wrong, the stakes feel

extremely high. And if you believe the rhetoric, you know, it's kind of, you know, it's funny. I was listening when you were talking about this, like, you could say the same thing about someone who was really taken in by a political movement and say, oh, did you really believe Obama when he said he was going to go after the banks, you know, on the campaign trail? Or did you really believe Trump when he said he was going to not start any new wars, yes, people believe it. And the betrayal of that belief can hit really hard. And so, you know, yes, politicians lie and yes, you know, business hype men tell stories to investors. But like, it doesn't mean that people don't get taken in by it. So final question, actually in line with that, do you think Sam Altman sees himself as a businessman

or as a statesman, almost? That's a really interesting question. I, think that, you know, I honestly sense in my conversations with him that he sees himself as something quite singular. And the grandiosity of his claims about his mission, you know, when he was telling recruits that he believed that this technology could eventually, what was the exact quote, Andrew, capture the light cone of all the value in the universe. I think he exactly. He exhibits a trait that I have seen writing about various Silicon Valley moguls of this era, which is they do have a kind of messianic quality to how they see themselves, you know, not as businessmen, not as statements, but statement, but as everything to everyone,

as super governmental. I think Elon is a much more extreme example of that, psychologically, the kind of Messiah complex. There's much more mania there. Sam is someone who, you know, as evidenced by the fact that he participated in this story so deeply, still wants to kind of play by the rules and within a system to some extent. But the reality around all of these guys is we have let Silicon Valley grab all of the levers of power in the United States. It is such a center of gravity economically. it is, I mean, one could say more or less the entire economy at this point, and it is bankrolling a huge, huge swath of politics now.

So it is very hard, I think, for the people at the forefront of that to consider themselves anything but messianic. And you add to that the specific contour of AI in which these guys really believe, and not without reason that they are birthing the future of the earth, that this may supersede the human

species as the next dominant thing. I think that really magnifies the messianic quality. And so that all goes to the responsibility question. Like, yes, to Andrew's point, you know, business people, they fib and

they dissemble and they are guilty of empty hype, and that is the whole, saga of Silicon Valley from the beginning. The fact that Sam Altman is not, in my view, a villain in any clear-cut way, and the piece goes to pains, to be generous to him, to me makes this a more interesting story because both things can be true.

You can have someone who is not a monster, but who is still in a position of so much power that if they have this particular trait of no one can trust them. And what they say is going to happen with the most dangerous technology on Earth might not be what happens. That is something that we should all care about. And I think it just speaks to this wider set of structural issues where this is the most acute need we have as a species for proper governance and regulation. And that is all falling away. And it's all in the hands of these private, unaccountable individuals. Well, thank you so much.

Andrew Rowan for joining me. It's been an awesome conversation. The piece be linked. Yeah, thank you for joining me. Thank you so much, Ed. Thank you so much, Ed. Thank you for listening to Better Offline. The editor and composer of the Better Offline theme song is Mattosowski. You can check out more of his music and audio projects at Mattisowski.com. M-A-T-T-O-S-K-I.com. You can email me at E-Z at Better Offline.com or visit Better Offline.com to find more podcast links, and of course my newsletter. I also really recommend you go to chat. Where's Your Ed.at to visit the Discord

and go to R-slash Better Offline to check out our Reddit. Thank you so much for listening. Better Offline is a production of Cool Zone Media. For more from Cool Zone Media, visit our website, coolzonemedia.com, or check us out on the IHeartRadio app,

Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcast. Another podcast from some SNL, late-night comedy guy, not quite, unhumored me with Robert Smygel and friends, me and hilarious guests from Bob Odenkirk to David Letterman help make you funnier. This week, my guest, SNL's Mikey Day and head writer Streeter Seidel, help an a cappella band with their between songs banter. Where does your group perform? We do some retirement homes.

Those people are starving for banter. Listen to humor me with Robert Smigel and friends on the IHeart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. Hey, everyone. It's Ryder Strong and Wilfredel from PodMeets World. And now the Pod Meets Twirled podcast. We're two men who were completely clueless to reality TV, and we're gearing up for the season finale of Survivor.

I know we annoyed a lot of our listeners by our severe lack of survivor knowledge. That is the point of the show. I'm just going to remind you. Again, we are experts. Listen to Pod Meets Twirled on the IHeart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. There are times when the mind becomes a difficult place to live. This is David Eagleman with the Inner Cosmos podcast, and for Mental Health Awareness Month,

we'll talk with singer-songwriter Jewel about anxiety. I started living in my car, and then my car got stolen. I was having panic attacks. I was agoraphobic. This is a month of deeply personal and honest conversations about what happens when the brain goes off course. Listen to Inner Cosmos on the IHeart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. Most people out here think that taking care of one another is important. And most people would step up for a neighbor going through a tough time.

Most people around here help out friends and family when they need it. But the funny thing is, most of us won't look for help when we need it. Talk to someone if you're struggling with mental health. Because most people out here really care. Find more information at loveyourmindtay.org. That's loveyourmindtay.org. Brought to you by the Huntsman Mental Health. Institute and the Ad Council.

This is an IHeart podcast. Guaranteed human.