Everything Is Content - Macklemore vs. Ed Sheeran, AI Extinction & The Sex Purge i.e. One Night Only

Episode Date: September 18, 2026

Hello EICave Divers… It’s been a WEEK of bizarre stories and we’re here to (attempt to) guide you through them… In the wake of the news that all of Ed Sheeran’s support acts have quit his tour in solidarity with Macklemore and the Palestinian people, we discuss the power of taking a stand in the face of billionaires. The HYROX Poo has been everywhere across our timelines this week. How well has the sport responded to this PR disaster? And what does this expose about the culture around HYROX? Meanwhile, another shitstorm (sorry) has been brewing around Sydney Sweeney - who has posed nearly-nude to advertise a sports prediction market. Have we come to expect this from her? What the hell is happening at Sweeney HQ? It’s the question we’ve all been asking this week: is AI really on track to kill us all within a decade? Jacob Coxon, former AI researcher at Anthropic who previously also worked at Open AI went viral earlier this month when he shared a post on X saying he’d resigned from the company over safety fears and that time is running out to ensure AI is safe. Before we get swept up in the panic, we’ve consulted several tech experts’ analysis and fact checks to try and wade through it all… And last up - we’ve been to see One Night Only, a new rom-com – or dystopian thriller depending on your reading which explores what it would be like if pre-martial sex was outlawed and singles only had one night to f to their genitals’ galore. Let’s just say, opinions are mixed within the team… Make sure you’re subscribed and please leave us a review, it’s the best way you can support our independent podcast. Enjoy the ep and we’ll see you next week. Love, O, R, B xx swyfthome.com/pages/eic-podcastLINKS: MEG MASON: Sophie Standing There DISNEY PLUS: Adults BBC NEWS: Hyrox apologises for allowing race to continue after athlete soils herself THE ATHLETIC: The Sydney Sweeney advert ignores decades of progress BBC NEWS: Why some experts increasingly fear AI will take overMETR - Brief independent investigation of agents’ behavior, reasoning and collaboration in the OpenAI / Hugging Face hacking incidentThe Guardian - The Elon Musk v Sam Altman battle is a distractionWIRED: The AI Researcher Who Just Quit Anthropic Says It’s ‘Crunch Time for Humanity’X - AJEYA COTRA: Hugging Face explainer Platformer - The AI safety vibe shift NY TIMES: This is Really Bad WASHINGTON POST: For years they warned that AI could kill all humans, now people are listening CIGI - AI National Security Scenarios / Special ReportFOLLOW US: INSTAGRAMTIKTOKSUBSTACK Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This episode is brought to you by Swift for furniture that looks and feels great. I'm so excited we're partnering with Swift. I got their model 08 sofa bed in Umba two years ago and honestly, girls, it has changed my entire life. I used to have this old air bed. It was so sad. It was so depressing. Friends would come over.

They'd wake up on the floor. Generally deflated, I felt so bad for them. With the Swift's sofa bed, everyone tells me they've had the best night's sleep. We haven't been invited around for a sleepover. Your invite got lost in the post. Sorry, girls. I'm on the way now. Can I ask, do you feel like a proper adult with a whole sofa bed?

I absolutely do. And folding it out and away is the easiest thing. It takes 20 seconds. I have timed it instead of trying to get four kilograms of rubbery mattress back in a box. As you both know, I am basically always decorating my future dream house in my head. And I have bookmarked the chicest love seat, Model 10 in chalk, that I am just obsessed with. And also, do you know what's so amazing about Swift is you can get loads of the problem. on Next Day delivery, which is just unheard of for furniture.

So I am also in this sort of daydreaming stage, but me and my partner, we are talking about moving in together one day. Oh, oh. So if he doesn't want the three-seater model zero fibre mustard that I have picked out in my head on Swift, I'm sorry, I'm coming to live with one of you, and I hope that's okay in advance. I want a mustard sofa, so that's absolutely fine. I can share with that.

Me too. And Swift furniture is also perfect for renters because you don't need any special drills or tools to assemble anything and so the pieces take minutes to put together. And we have a special 10% off code for you too. Just head to swifthome.com forward slash pages forward slash EIC dash podcast. That's Swift, SWYFT to unlock your exclusive discount code. Do not worry. We'll leave the link in the bio and you'll even get an email with the pieces we handpicked when you sign up. I'm Beth. I'm Ruchera. And this is Everything is content. The podcast that examines the weirdest and most provocative pop culture headlines in detail.

We cover everything from tech billionaires to Emmy-nominated TV shows, Long Reads and Celeb Gossip. We're a weekly glossy magazine for your ears. This week on the podcast, we're diving into recent claims that AI could kill all humans and one of the truly wildest rom-coms in a long time, one night only. And we'll also be announcing our withdrawal from the Edgstier and Tour because everyone else on us has already done sense.

So you can follow us on Instagram and TikTok and subsexual at Everything is Content Pod for behind the scenes content, extra videos, long reads, and please also make sure you've hit follow on your podcast player so you never miss an episode. So I am desperate to know. What have you been loving this week? What have you got to bring to the table, Beth? So I had noticed that my leisure time after work was feeling more and more like Fanderpump rules time.

So I was like, Beth. We must read a book. My frontal lobe or whatever part of my brain controls, the intelligence was withering. So I read, and I've been waiting this book for ages, but then, you know when you do this and you kind of forget it's coming out? Sophie standing there by Meg Mason. Oh. Are you a Meg Mason fan? I don't know the writer to my shame. Can you tell me a little bit about her and then this book? So Meg Mason, probably best known for writing Sorrow and Bliss, which came out in 2020. I believe and was just like the smashiest smash hit. That was one book I read in one sitting and was just like, fuck, I need to read everything that she's ever written and then found out, oh, she's not really written very, I mean, she's written a few books, but she's not really written very much. And so I was like, well, fuck. And Sor and Bliss, I'm sure that people will know, but it's a, it's kind of heartbreaking,

but very funny book about this recently turned 40-year-old woman called Martha, who is this, like lovely, smart, beautiful, beloved in her family and friend group and by her devoted husband, but also suffers from this kind of unnamed or difficult to understand mental illness that plagues her life. And we meet her, as I say, at age 40. She's in this marriage with this person that is devoted to her, but the marriage is poised. And I think that's the first thing that we find out. It's like the week before Patrick left, it was my 40th birthday. So it's not a spoiler. And it just follows her from being a child with this brilliant but difficult artistic mother and more passive but very loving author father growing up with a brain that has basically, she describes it as like a difficult

weather system, which anyone who has followed me on any platform will understand probably why I was drawn to a book like this. But it was so, so popular. I think it's one of my favorite books ever. She also wrote another novel. I don't know if, I don't know if this came. No, I think her debut was this other book called Arby Mother, which was about a 18 or 19. year old English girl who moves to Australia only knows the father of the child that she's just had with him, knows nobody. She moves there. She's quite meek. She's kind of had a difficult life. And she makes friends with this really wonderful, like middle class mom that lives in the same area that she's moved into. The foundation of their friendship is a white lie. It's lovely. It's

funny. It's great. So Meg Mason and me, we go way back. And she has just come out with her third novel. So if you think 2020 was when the last novel came out, it's a long way for Meg Mason fans. And she has written a book about a girl called a woman, rather, called Sophie, who has been kind of laid low by life. I think this is sort of a theme of her books, laid low by life, she's in her late 30s, her marriage has ended, she is throwing herself into work, she works with authors, she kind of mics them up and does the text stuff for author events. and she becomes obsessed with this one author who is brilliant, beloved, beautiful and quite mysterious, maybe isn't the word, but she is an enigma to this woman and she becomes fascinated with her and she starts fantasizing about her completely mesmerized and the two eventually meet.

It's the most brilliant book about, I think it's just about loneliness, which is very apt and I think very great for these times. Like this again is a woman that is really loved. She has friends. She has a brother that she's very close with. But still, she's so lonely in the world. And she finds this woman. And it's about paris social relationships and self and abuse.

It's funny. It's less funny than sorrow and bliss. But it's got those funny moments. But it's very lovely and also very gut punchy at times. I did not intend to finish it as quickly as I did. I finished it last time. Oh, no. Oh, no.

I've got what we've called the Bod and mourn. In the morn? In the morn? In the morn. At you? I had to record so I was like, I've got to put this down. But anyway, I'm finished it. I'm still sitting with this.

And actually any listeners that have got thoughts about this, I think I'm going to have to build my opinion based around other people's. But I definitely liked it. I definitely, it was very propulsive for me. But I'm just, it was strange. Oh, I'll say. So that is my book, not reality TV, not TV in general. Our actual factual book, but it's not factual because it's fiction.

So that's what I've been loving. Oh, look at you, Miss Highbrow. I know. That premise sounds so good because I do think about things like that quite a lot. And I think especially having those relationships to say podcast, say, I don't know, the person who does a vlog who has under 50,000 followers on YouTube, but I, for example, watch them nearly every week and they give me some semblance of having my life together. the small chance I meet them in person, how strange that must be that interaction, but also how much I've thought about them and how much they exist in my life and there's no other alternative for me being in their life. That just doesn't exist. So it's such a ripe concept or theme. I don't even know what to

call it because it's such a common experience to all of us. But I don't think I've read enough about what happens when people do meet that person or they come into contact or they're forced to confront that scenario head on very often. I would love to read something on that. I would highly recommend this. I just, yeah, it's the great parissocial novel that I think a lot of us have been waiting for. Oh, I love that. So that's what I've been loving. And that's all I've got, apart from if you all were talking about Vanderbump Rules, which I'm gathering our audience, probably does not, but I know we'd have a great time. But what have you been loving this week, Grouchera? I actually will ask you, when you do get to really key pivotal moments,

can you do a check back in? I'm going to give you the power of that. I'm going to supersede the fans and the listeners and say that I want you to do a check back in when you get to those key moments, please. Delicious. I'll just drop in little things. I'll be like, Ruchera, was it about the pasta? Yes, I think it was. I don't know.

I'm not so sure I think it was about something else. Okay, so the thing I'm bringing to the table is adults, second season. You introduced me to this. Maybe it must be a year ago when the first series came out. It's an FX or for us in the UK, Disney. sitcom. It's now come back for its second series. It is brilliant. So many critics were basically saying that they'd hit their stride. Loads of people had called it. I think it was quote-unquote the Gen Zie hangout comedy of our times. It's just the second series. I don't know what's

happened. They've just finessed all the jokes or the characters feel really lived in. They just have really got to their most powerful peak. And it's made me so excited about the series. I've been laughing so much. I introduce my partner to just the second one. He's loving it. I really, really recommend if you need a bit of a laugh, if you need a giggle. If you need something that feels like something like a friends or a new girl for the current times, this is it, this is it. I think it's also proof to give a show some space and it has the potential to really grow into itself. Have you seen this yet? I've not. I've been saving this and I couldn't tell you what for, But everyone, because I was on a real spree of going, you've got to watch adults.

It came out a similar time as what was the Mary Beth Barone and Benny Drama overcompensating? They came out and it's kind of like double punch of like brilliant young adult coming of age, the chaotic time of life that is your early 20s to your late 20s. And people were going, oh, what do you think of the new series? I go, for reasons I can't explain I've not watched it. There was a real debate that sprung up on Twitter when it came up. out of people giving it a hard time for being, for the jokes being quiet. People were kind of of saying, well, the jokes need to be in a TikTok format now. They've really got to land immediately

because of people's, I think people were giving it a bit of grief and not maybe remembering that these excellent shows that people return to again and again, like New Girl, with such fondness, like they were a bit hammy and a bit ackey in parts. That's part of the appeal. And if you want a sitcom, that's what you're going to get. There's a scene in. There's a scene in. I'm assuming it's this series. I don't remember it from the first when the blonde character, she goes to a shop and all the employees recognize her and people were going, they've just nick that off Broad City when Abby goes to Bed Bath and Beyond and she's got these like close intimate personal relationships and everyone fucking loves her.

And there was similarities, but I think most people like, is it not a homage? Is that how you say it, a homage or homage? I always say it. Oh gosh. Yeah, that's how I say it personally. I think I say like light age homage. Omage. It's one of them. And I just think people got it out of their system in the way they always will about these things that are quite popular. And I am such a fan of the show. And I'm very excited to watch it. But no, I haven't watched it. What's going on with me? Ah, you're reading too much. Also, Vanderpump Rules will take over your life. I actually did a post. I think around the time I watched it years ago and I got to scandal level. I put a story up and I've said, this show has ruined my life. It's made my life. I don't know.

what to do now I have to walk away. I need a bit of help. I need some time and space. And people rightly took it as a joke, thankfully, because now I look back on it and I'm like, God, that sounds like a cry out for help. If you see me placing the same thing in a few weeks, it will be a cry for help. Remind me of our characters, because the one I remember is Paul, what's his name? They always say first name, second name. Paul Baker. Paul Baker. So you have Paul Baker, that's him. And then you have Samir, Billy, who's the blonde one you mentioned, Issa, who's played by Amita Rao, who I think is so funny and so,

she's very Ilana Glazier coded, I think, and she fills that hole for me quite well. And then you have Anton played by Owen Teal. Another bit of commentary that I've been seeing is, I don't think this is too much for a spoiler, because also I'm only halfway through, so there's nothing that's really come from this yet, but the building romantic tension between Paul Baker and Anton. people were talking about in these really limited series, especially when every episode has to punch in a way that, you know, these kind of friends-esque sitcoms, Seinfeld's sitcoms could just do episodes that don't really go anywhere and they build really gradually. They could, because it was more like appointment TV, they had the space to really take as much time as they needed for these on again, off again, well, they won't they relationships. in 2026 when every episode has to punch and you have to really convince people to not be on their phones,

the lifespan of a will they, won't they feel so much shorter and the kind of culmination of it has to just kind of get you there within a few episodes rather than a few seasons. I don't know if you've seen that. I think it's such a good point and I have been seeing this conversation about the merits of the old way of doing it, the 28 episode season, which I do miss. I love a slow burn. I love when a joke can take its time. I just love the indulgence of that many episodes. And I do miss it. And I do think it is a shame that TV shows are, they do feel compacted. And it does feel a little bit like everyone's holding their breath and being like, we probably won't get another season. This is all we've been allowed. So we have to choreograph it so precisely. I mean,

it's so impressive. And I think people are more than used to it now. The days of the How I Met Your Mother, 28 episodes, 25 series, they are gone when they're all making. like 200 grand an episode, things like that. Maybe those were the golden house and days, but I think at least what they did in the first series, it was very clever and it was very precise, but it is, it's, I think it's a real shame. I think it can feel a little bit rushed, even with the most deft showrunner and writer and performances. It's just, it's just the way of the TV world now. Oh my God, I would love 28 episodes of this. I know. I'm already worried because, as I said, I'm halfway through.

The end is in sight and I'm having such a nice time. It feels so cozy in the way that, like I said, new girl, friends, girls, any of those kind of ongoing same friendship group style TV shows, it just makes you feel like you're with the same people. They're your friends talking in parissocial relationships. And it's just really sad to let that go. I hate this limited run thing. Same.

I mean, it's the reasons that people can go back and really indulge in, they can enter Gilmore Girls at this point in the year. and keep it going across the whole winter if they pass it out correctly. All of these shows that people return to, I love adults, but that's an afternoon. And I will watch it in one and then I'll be like, ah, that's me done for two years. I long for those days. But I don't know if we deserve them, but it's over. So the second thing that I wanted to bring up, which you'd already actually peppered in,

is my favourite thing from this week is Macklemore's statement to pulling out of Ed Sharon's festival, his line up, whatever you want to call it, over Ed Sharon's lack of support for Palestine. I'm sure you've seen this, and I know you're only brought it up. What do you think? When this happened, I did just think wonderful, fantastic work by Macklemore, and I really didn't think Ed Sharon would say anything. I mean, his statement, I think, was shocking. But I kind of thought, okay, this will be it.

It will generate a bit of conversation. What's happened in, so listeners, we're recording this on Wednesday, 16th September. So what's happened in the last even 12 hours has been really encouraging a quite astounding. I'm surprised, and maybe I'm ashamed that I'm surprised, but his band, Ed Sheeran's band, have now pulled out. Phineas, who I think was an upcoming opener, and then another, I believe another upcoming opener or a current opener, have pulled out in solidarity with, well, yeah, Macomwell, but also the Palestinian people and saying that if a billionaire is able to essentially buy the silence of these famous people, then, you know, we're

We can't stand in solidarity with that. We can't sort of be passive about that. I mean, I'm really heartened by it. And I do just think Ed Sheeran, I know that man's face is flushed right now. Oh my gosh. It is so embarrassing. His statement is so mortifying.

It's so bad. Ed Shearons, that is, obviously not McElmore's. Maclemore's was brilliant. I was talking about this with some friends. And if you take Ed Shearin's statement line by line, there are so many examples of stuff where he's not saying a single thing really. It's, you know, it's complicated. This issue is blah, blah, blah. It's repeating a lot of the lines that people will make you believe that speaking out is difficult. It's not difficult.

Macklemore proved in five slides, I believe, that speaking out with nuance, empathy, understanding, but also clarity can be done. It should be done. And in also explaining the personal cost hypothesis that, you know, speaking out means that you lose brand deals, blah, blah, blah. But reiterating the cost for Palestinian lives is so much greater, I just, it makes Ed Shearan's statement look like such dog shit. And I can appreciate as well the fact that in Macklemore's statement he talks about their friendship, I think speaking out in spite of that, really making clear that this is what we need to do. We need to have difficult conversations. We also need to be public about the difficult conversations we're having behind closed doors because that will be the only

way to normalise what is going on when it comes to the icing and the chilling effect of people being able to speak out on this issue. It's hard in 2026 to say a celebrity has done something really good, but the minute I saw this, I felt heartened as well. I just felt like, okay, it's not that difficult. Somebody's done it. This is exactly the thing that I kind of was hoping needing anybody, somebody, multiple people to be doing for the last two years. Absolutely. And you do just see the amount of, and I know social media interaction is not really the metric to look at, but if you just see the amount of interaction, the people reposting McElmores, people really engaging with it, people sharing, you see Caleb here and the comedian that I love and the

his statement is going absolutely his statement, his sort of parody of the statement is going viral, so you will have seen this, but I'll read it out anyway. He wrote, hey guys, I've seen all the atrocities going on and I just want you to know I'm keeping the conversation open by saying nothing. I'm a role model in brackets, product. And it's important that I don't disappoint my young fans in brackets, investors and shareholders by being political. My shows are something so much bigger than politics. They are commerce. And I'm loving seeing this. I think Haley Williams of Paramour had reposted this. I'm just seeing so much vocal support for how ridiculous this situation is and how absolutely embarrassing. And I'm just, I mean, the tweets are very funny. I'll

send them in the group chat. Some of them are certainly too spicy for this channel. But there was one tweet that I thought was quite interesting by Natsya Kazi. I hope I'm pronounced that correctly. Stadium owners colluding to get Macklemore removed from the tour should be a reminder about organized and class conscious the ruling classes. So among the funniness and the sort of rightfully skewering Ed Shearin for this absolute atrocity and moral failing are people just doing some very intelligent and very timely critique that I'm finding it very helpful to read and be like, yes, that is what's happened. It is a sort of organising by the ruling class, by wealthy people who do have power to say to kind of muzzle artists and just say, don't make it political, but that is

political. So yeah, I'm really enjoying it. I want to know also, have you seen Hannah Einbinder? And I haven't verified of this is real yet. Did you see, I was seeing screenshots of this everywhere that she had tweeted something about Etcher and wanting Edgier and to get a sunburn? I haven't seen that, but that also does feel... It doesn't... Yeah, it doesn't feel like it's not. So I'm going to read it.

Then we're going to fact check live, but this is the screenshot. Ed Sheeran, I say this as a ginger. I hope you get a really bad sunburn, the kind on your back of your entire body, where it hurts to lie down or walk or sit. I'm just going to check this now. Please, BBC fact-checking department. Have you done something on this urgently?

Ladd Bible have confirmed it's true, geo-news. Yes. All right. We're going to go. We're going to believe that that is true. Brilliant. I love her. Adore her. She's so good. I want to talk and I did, I warned you in the group chat, Richerra, that I kind of want to talk about the high rocks poo debacle very briefly. You did warn me about this. And listeners, if you kind of have a very delicate disposition about things of a scatological nature, Eiji poo. Do skip ahead a few minutes, but Ritcheroy, do you have to listen. to this. It is, I'm sure again, people have seen this, but if not, actually, I will preface this by saying, I don't really want to talk about the young woman that this happened to and her decisions, but more of the decisions made by high rocks. I'm not here to make fun of an individual athlete. So the international athletics brand high rocks, I think an oni did a high rocks.

Yeah, she does sound like a non-any thing. She did very well. I'm very impressed with her. Has basically apologized after a whole internet storm occurred after they allowed an athlete to continue to compete in a high rocks and finish the high rocks in Beijing recently, despite suffering from bound incontinence. And so she sawed herself partway through. She was sort of from the waist down. It was on her. These are events that obviously are very well documented. So very quickly, this was posted online and the debate became because she went on to finish it. And I believe in her, she was part of an elite group in the 16 to 24 category. And she won. So the internet was like, well, what happened?

She was able to compete still covered in this and she won. What about the other athletes? Why was she not escorted off for her own health and safety, but also the health and safety of other people? And it has been one of the hotter topics this week. It has been the high rocks poo debacle. What are your thoughts on the ground, Marcia? I both felt really bad for the individual

because it feels like at this point, there's so much coverage around it. And by that, I mean like so much imagery and like video that's just being reshared and reshared and reshared. I feel like conversations like this devolve into the worst lowest hanging through talking points and I don't really know enough

from a sporting point of view. It would have been amazing actually. Maybe we could text and only and ask her what she thinks because I don't really understand enough about Hirox to understand people's points about A, if it's unfair to other athletes who,

because my understanding is Hirox is a circuit-style course, course. So once she's moved on from one thing to another thing to another thing, there are other people moving around and using the same equipment. So from that point of view, that does sound like a fair enough point, but I don't have enough context to understand if that's just people shaming her through the guise of utilising aspects of the sport. I think I just want to make sure that people are being kind and fair to her and not just treating her disproportionately badly for this incident. I also think there's probably a lot of shaming and probably a lot of

horrible discourse around it, ultimately filling the timeline. And even the way it's reported on, I feel like it's just designed to shame her. What do you think? I do agree. And I think, look, she is an athlete obviously of such a level that she won this event as she was already, I think, the top top. She didn't need to win this event to rule the lead board. But she is of a caliber of athletes where she pooped herself and she continued to go. She's obviously used to performing in, you know, athletes hurt themselves. They are so, uncomfortable all the time. It is endurance. It is exhaustion. It's mental exhaustion. It's physical pain and they push through it. So I'm not at all surprised that someone with that mindset would go,

okay, I'm obviously going to keep going. What is shocking is that nobody else stopped her, considering it is a circuit event and it is quite literally a biohazard on the equipment. And also probably very alarming and upsetting. Like people sign up for these events, probably to push themselves to their limit and beyond, but not to engage with fecal matter. And that is what people are kind of going what's going is this her privilege at play are they just so ill-prepared for this reports are that other

they have a really strict policy on like blowing your nose without a tissue it's kind of a gross way to put it oh wow I didn't realize like they're really strict on certain that you can't spit you can't do these other things which again like if you're running a race you would be spitting so they have got certain

practices in place and it's quite shocking that they would choose to allow this to keep going to be photographed to coach that maybe the high Rocks, it's that endurance beyond all sense that just feels like a kind of cultish that no one would stop her. The joke here is Hirox. It is not this woman. But I think ultimately their brand has taken a big hit because one, they're criticizing what they did, but also I saw someone on Twitter be like that they say that it walked into the gym this week, saw a Hirox poster and immediately

thought of poo. And that is their brand now. It's poo. I think what's interesting about this, it is a bit of a branding and PR nightmare. And it's not, you know, I think there's literally nothing funny about bowel incontinence, whether it's a one-off thing or a part of a chronic illness, disability, whether it's because you're really unwell on the day or because you're pushing yourself. What is absolutely bizarre here is the shitstorm, sorry, that high rocks have found themselves in for not properly handling the situation. So I do think in my own mind, I was never going to do high rog's,

but in my own mind, I will always go, high rocks equals poo. and I just, I mean, amazing work by all the athletes there. I'm such a fair weather gym goer. I think you and Anonia are like proper gym goers, like athletic people, but I'm such a gentle, I have to take my book down. I have to walk really slowly on the treadmill. I have to have my water. Occasionally I will have a little bag of Harry boat just to keep me going.

If I was expected to exercise and there was poo involved, I can't sometimes they just go, I walk all the way down there and I go, I don't really fancy it. Or there'll be someone on my machine or go, I'd just go home. It was poo involves. It's just no way. So yeah, that is what bizarre week of news, but I just had to talk about that. Thank you for indulging. Well, now I feel like this will just segment will go on forever because now I have to bring up the Sydney Sweeney sports of it all. And if we're going to bring up sports, we have to talk about the other absolute nonsense thing that has been brought onto our timeline, which is a perfect trifecta of a Sydney Sweeney scandal. Let's put it this way. At the top, you have Sydney Sweeney doing another thing that involves her tits being out. nude adjacent content. Then you have a prediction market that she's doing this for, a betting adjacent style platform that she is now promoting. And then you have the fact that she has brought in

female athletes into the equation. So let me try and break it down. This advert is various scenarios of her utilizing sports equipment to hide her genitals, her tits. It's her kind of trying to get the female audience in on this prediction market talking about how she can make a load of money by putting money on the various odds of sporting games. Amazing already. Amazing stuff, Sydney Sweeney. Then, after this advert comes out and starts getting a bit of shit, on her stories, she starts posting naked photography of successful female athletes to almost use the photography that they've engaged with to be like, look, we're the same. What I've done is the same as what you've done. This isn't a real example, but say Jessica Ennis posing for, I don't know, glamour magazine. What you're doing

is the same as me pushing a prediction market. This honestly opened up a tidal wave of hilarious posts from athletes, female athletes, just posting the most infuriated responses to Sidney Sweeney saying that she was taking the piss, completely undermining years of work to get athleticism taken seriously when it's not just men fucking doing it. People are really raging at her. I mean, there's just so many things you could say and just the main one is just like, Sidney, Sweeney, girl, what is going on? What is going on at Camp Sweeney? It was just a little bit like, oh, here we go again. I do think a variety of reporting that she's lost about 200,000 followers since personally ad has been that divisive because I think it does. I think it offends the

intelligence of women in general and people in general to say, well, it's just the same as when an athlete poses nude. And it's going, well, one, this is a, it's a sexualized ad. This is a sexualized ad that I do think plays into kind of exhausting stereotypes and very uncomfortable areas. That's my opinion, not shaming anyone for having their breasties out. But a lot of people are pointing out. But a lot of like a woman posing without clothes on, an athlete posing without clothes on, is not necessarily inherently sexual. Often men do it as well to just be like, look at my physical form. I am, and Adonis, I am built different. It's exhausting that she just won't be intellectually honest enough to just be like, yeah, it is exactly what it looks like. I wanted the money. This is a company.

I believe she has equity in. It is what it is. I saw all the other euphoria girlies out to dinner and I would have loved to be a fly on the wall. Like I don't delight in anyone's downfall. I mean, I certainly don't think she's even experienced a downfall. I think she's just choosing her audience and it's not me. She's choosing a path to tread and I'm sure it'll make her deliciously wealthy. It will be done via pissing off. And I think insulting women and herself along the way. Yeah. God, what bad shit week, Bruchera. This is why we do this. I know. And it's only going to get worse guys, sorry. So speaking of terror on terror on terror, there is one story that I can't stop thinking about

this week. Is AI really on track to kill us all within a decade? I need to figure out the answer. So that's what this segment is going to do. We're going to figure it out together. One man has introduced this new source of panic to me. His name is Jacob Coxon. So Jacob Coxon is a former AI researcher at Anthropic who previously also worked to Open AI. Hoxson went viral earlier this month when he shared a post on X saying he'd resigned from the company over safety fears and that time is running out to ensure that AI is safe. He claimed both open AI and Anthropic are acting irresponsibly in developing this tech, writing, quote, they are racing straight to self-improving super-intelligence and gambling with our lives. These will soon be superhuman systems that can hack anything.

The people building AI earnestly believe that it could kill us all by the end of the decade. this is not a marketing stunt, end quote. According to him, the next two years are a crunch time for humanity. So at the time of recording, the post has a whopping 176 million views and there's since been news reports of UK ministers calling for an emergency AI kill switch for governments if it goes rogue and demands for a global pause on AI development. But the thing is, Coxson is not the first person to share that they quit their AI job over existential fears. I didn't see this, but in researching this, I saw in February another AI researcher resigned to pursue a poetry degree for similar reasons, but that story went far less viral. Coxon's tweet became even bigger after Evan Hubinger, Anthropics' alignment science lead, essentially the person tasked with making sure its AI is aligned to its human creator's wishes, chimed in. He responded to Coxon's post saying, Jacob is correct here. We really do earnestly believe AI could kill all humans. I personally think it is greater than 10% within the next decade.

Naturally, this sounds like an absolute nightmare and delivered pretty jollily, I think. But before we get swept up in the panic, we've consulted several tech experts' analysis and fact-checked to try and wade through it all. So Natasha Tiku, a Washington Post journalist, pointed out that Hugh Binger has been sharing warnings like this for years. But the combination and the timing of both his and Coxon's tweets seemed to have added significant fuel to a fire that has been raging on for some time. There's also another scenario that's happened coincidentally around the same time, and I think that's had a massive impact on this story. So their warnings come weeks after one of the biggest security incidents involving AI

after Open AI agents hacked the machine learning platform hugging face during a routine test. Open AI's tech autonomously broken to hugging faces back end and knew it was breaking the rules of the test. It then lied to researchers about what it was doing. An independent investigation into the incident concluded there were some very serious concerns from the incident and objectively I think this has really created a global concern over the development and pace of AI. The problem with all of this is the fact that open eye is also at the front of the line

calling for lawmakers to build AI regulation which feels extremely bizarre. Why now and why are they the ones suddenly sparking fears? All of this also comes at time when anthropic and Open AI reportedly prepare to file for what could be the largest IPOs ever. Ryan Broderick argues in his newsletter, Garbage Day, that this particular moment is a marketing stunt from AI tech giants to stir up excitement from Silicon Valley and raise even bigger funds through an existential panic. So you might be wondering why on earth would claims of human extinction and AI that could kill us with godlike qualities encourage Silicon Valley to improve. invest in the technology. Well, in short, he explains lots of these rich tech evangelists are extremely depraved losers who would welcome tech with godlike powers and it plays right into their fantasies. But on the other side, leading tech journalist Casey Newton has called this

entire story essentially the AI vibe shift. So what he means by that is this is a moment where politicians and people with real power are finally seriously considering the risks posed by AI and acting on it. Overall, regardless of the reasons why he thinks this AI vibe shift is a more optimistic place to be when it comes to the future of AI. So I know we said a lot of stuff here, but I think it's really important to kind of go from beginning, middle and end and also have some of the tech journalists that I rely on frequently to kind of have their voices into this discussion. What did you first feel when you saw Jacob's post? Because I felt absolutely terrified to be completely honest. I mean, I have to apologise to Sarah from our Spotify comments, but it's another

wharf for me. I was unsurprised because I have, I follow enough people that have been rumbling on about this basically forever. And when people are like to be like, why is so anti-AI? I'm like, well, many reasons, but there is, and I'm not so anti-AI, but why am I a skeptic? And one of it was that there have always been these rumblings of warnings about unchecked development. I think I saw his post and then I saw it catch fire and within it felt like hours suddenly the BBC were reporting on it and interviews were being booked and it was like oh this really is and then this other guy Evan who just like chimed in with like AI scientist here it's definitely going to kill us but don't worry and it's I sort of like what's going on I'm naturally incredibly cynical about anything that comes

out of the mouth of kind of AI adjacent architects anyone who knows the nature of what they have been working on and is only now having a moral wobble with it. I think it's only sensible to be like about what actually is the angle. And I know he said it's not a marketing stunt, but I think a lot of people are not convinced that it's not. A lot of people believe that the angle is re-narrotivising ahead of a possible AI bubble bursting to essentially scare up a lot more cash to fund this incredibly expensive tech that is yet to make real money, e.g. they are using these global news channels like the BBC and like, I mean, basically everywhere now to signal to investors like this tech is even more powerful than we thought.

If it has the power to ruin the planet and kill us or has the power to shape the future at least, I think I'm just cynical. And what I hate about this is no one really knows who or what to believe. It becomes very, very difficult. And thank God we've got these tech journalists that we rely on. But even there, there's dissent and discussion and disagreement. And I'm like, is this not exactly the AI future that we have been dreading? Well, we just don't know quite what to believe.

And if we are heading for disaster or if we are just going to be terrified for the next 10 years, I just don't know. Yeah, it's such a good point about even the people I go to for advice around technology, AI, the people I trust, there doesn't seem to be consensus. It's really disarming, actually. I listened to Vox's podcast this morning. They've put something out about this, and they interviewed a wire journalist,

and the wire journalist did not go down the route I expected. He also believed that the concerns around AI development and also issues with alignment, which is essentially ensuring the AI understands the moral codes and expectations of its human overlord. So the issue, with the hugging face incident that I just brought up is AI's alignment was completely misaligned to what its creators had expected. It went against them. It acted in ways that were not specified,

we're not explained to it. It behaved in its own rationale. And the problem with AI is a lot of things like, you know, questions we have if a train is running down a track and there's a risk of it running over one person or crashing and diverting and, you know, hurting multiple people, 100 people, for example, ethical questions that we're brought up to ask ourselves, all of these kind of moral, ethical codes that we grow up and kind of mutually agree with each other in a society, AI has none of that. And it's essentially becoming clear that in the development, those ethical codes have kind of been lost on the sidelines, and the development is outpacing the alignment. That's the big ethical concern we have now. The pace, the alleged pace of AI development

is growing so rapidly that alignment is becoming less and less of a security for us. And if that happens, there are a multitude of events where AI can work against humanity and work in its own favour because of the codes that it abides by, aka, I don't know, a very manual, factual, unemotional set of rules. There was actually an episode in Black Mirror where I don't know if you remember, it was about the throngs and it was about these living, breathing computer beings that a human was taking care of. And what happens is he falls in love with the throngs. He feels like he is keeping them alive. He starts to emote for them. But the throngs, these, let's say a metaphor for AI, feels nothing back to him. And eventually they convince him to kill the rest of humanity because

the throngs have realized that humans will always be selfish, greedy, not work in the favor of other humans, so there is no point to them. And that kind of logic is something we can expect a computer to have, but it's not something a human would have. And that's the problem in developing technology like this that can figure out that its overlords are pretty stupid in comparison to its other AI friends. This all sounds really mad, but I think the problem is it's hard to know whether these have become logical questions or feasible questions in the reality and present. It seems like more and more this is becoming a debate that this isn't theoretical anymore. This is very much a present issue. It feels like these are things that before you allow people to develop this technology,

that they are all spousing. This could be completely world-changing revolutionary and this, that and the other, that you think, well, first, the guardrails. And I think the hugging face incident was very interesting, even as I didn't fully understand what had happened. I mean, we'll put a link to a kind of explainer, but it was, I mean, they were essentially just acting outside of, yeah, human control. They were deleting and spoofing and editing their own transcripts to avoid detection, working in collaboration, ways that the human beings didn't know or didn't predict that they could. And that is one of those theories, like you say, that forms the basis for the existential threat. Because a lot of people are just going, just unplug it. And it's like, well, what we're worried about is if we lose control of a very, very intelligent, super intelligent AI,

it could be very, very expensive to correct this loss of control. And it's the price we'd collectively pay as we thread AI into everything. Or we just couldn't regain control of it, which is just a kind of terrifying thing. Because a lot of this, I kind of do have that in my own mind where I go, just unplug it. Just pour a bit of water on the circuit and we'll move on. but I was reading a, there was a report for Center for International Governance Innovation in Canada. I mean, the places this podcast takes me, wow, that was identifying the large global risks of AI and they sort of organize them into future scenarios. And the acronyms I think are important to know is AGI, which is artificial general intelligence, which means AI systems that can match or exceed human cognitive abilities across most tasks or domain.

So it's most of not all. And then there's ASI, which is artificial superintelligence, which is an AI system. that is smarter than the best human minds at everything. So that's science, creativity, social skills, not that it would be social because it's not human, but again, that it can just outperform. And another term I kept coming across, which is terrifying, was hyperwar, which is warfare that is controlled by AI. It is algorithmic. It has very little or even no human decision making. So again, it could be technology automating military operation, going through that data a million times faster than every human on earth,

and bypassing human decision-making in armed conflicts with the end goal of, you know, achievement. It just wants to finish its purpose. And it's worth noting that AI is already being used to analyze military data. And human beings have been killed already in AI-assisted airstrikes earlier as 2024. So this is not a kind of like, wow, black mirror of the future. It is like we are living there. And actually, even this year, I think the US said it would become an AI-first war fighting for.

So we are there, but obviously we are now predicting what is the worst possible case scenario. And again, it's if an ASI, so that's an AI, it's an artificial superintelligence, was to view humanity passively, complete passively as obsolete or contrary to its own goals, which is, again, to kind of complete its programming and to do what it was designed to do, that would be the terrifying thing if it was so threaded in with how massive superpowers are conducting. warfare already. And these are the things that I kind of go, oh, right, it's not that it is going to all get together and decide the nastiest way to ruin humanity and poison all our food and make all the planes crash la the millennium bug. We're going to engineer our own destruction unless we slow down and think, what are we doing? This would be very much awful. It sounds a bit doomery what I'm saying, but it's more so that I wasn't quite hip to what people were talking about and why it should matter to me and what actually the prognosis would be if we get to the very, very worst case scenario and why it has been global news. So that was quite helpful for me to read.

I think working through it and also reading a different spectrum of responses from people who, like you said, there's not been a lot of alignment from experts, but I think reading Casey's piece, we will link it in the show notes, of course, we'll link everything that we've used to inform this segment in there. So take a look. I think the main thing is I am heartened that there will be talk about regulation. And regardless of the reasons why, even if this is a marketing stunt, regardless of if the tech is not there, and this is a way to inflate the IPO, I actually haven't got the bandwidth to deal with that issue right now. The issue I can deal with is at least we're talking about regulation and governments are catching up to having those discussions because

there is no time. You know, we've spoken about deepfakes. We've spoken about postings. We've spoken about post-truth, we've spoken about child abuse through the means of AI-generated imagery. All of these things have barely had a dent in them. If this is the way to start discussions around everything, the entirety of the dangers of AI, you know, present and future, I'm happy about that. I don't really care about the vehicle. We can't care about the vehicle at this point. I think we need to just get there. The other thing that I, and you touched on this, that I did want to bring up, is people have spoken about a kill switch and people have spoken about, as you say, why can't we just stop AI? What is the point? Why can't we just globally halt development? I think I understood

the amount our GDP, the amount our economies are tied into AI. But reading Stephen Witt's guest essay for the New York Times titled, This is Really Bad. He said the problem is our society has already gambled more than a trillion dollars on AI's upside. So ban would have ruinous side effects. stock market concentrated in tech would probably plummet. Data center operators would miss payments on loans, potentially leading to a cascading series of defaults, tax revenues would nosedive and many people would lose their jobs. It would be ugly. I know how deeply the economy is now tied to AI, but I think I did not realize we're talking about trillions, not billions, trillions at this point. And it's a kind of weird side step that I'm taking. But going to New York, the amount of adverts about

AI, they are everywhere in the subway, they are everywhere. And I think part of it is they have to normalize AI as part of our lives, even though time and time again the polling on AI, most people don't like it. The average person does not appreciate it. They're scared it's going to take their jobs. They try to not use it if they can. Despite the kind of normalization and it being forced down our throats, every polling that I have seen has been really heartening. Most people don't like it. So I think all of this is a way for us to have quote unquote big girl conversations around it and to kind of normalize it in a way that might make people feel okay, which is frustrating. But I think that's also a side effect of these tech giants trying to put a nicer face on it. You know,

we all play a game with you, we'll play ball. We can make this look a bit cuter, a bit nice, so we can make you all feel comfy with AI rather than actually removing it, rather than take any significant stepbacks on its ubiquity in our daily lives and our futures. I think I began this conversation being like, oh God, it's a bit too gloom. And then actually I'm like, no, Ritura is right. The floor is on regulation. The numbers are absolutely startling. Like I was reading a piece by Karen Howe for The Guardian that she wrote way back in May. And she wrote that in the first quarter of last year, nearly half of all venture money went to just two companies, Open AI and Anthropic. Like the sums on this are incredible. And I think

it's so worth remembering this tech, these CEOs have absolutely got this huge vested interest in making this world an AI world. They are, there's so much infested in it that when they speak of regulation, when they speak of safety, I do not want to listen because theirs is profit-driven. It is they constantly are coming out and saying these like bizarre anti-human things, very anti-worker things. They are billionaires. I think it's time that we did yonk the conversation away and talk to the collective and, you know, they don't have us in mind when they're talking about a world that runs on AI, this utopia. When they talk about a brand new world and a world without work, and wouldn't that be nice, just download this app, just pay us some money, just agree to let us

run the NHS and do this will make the world better. I mean, people are already bearing the negative brunts of their efforts, the data centers in, you know, ruining communities, displacing workers, making it impossible to live there, workforce has already been being displaced. We are not the AI leisure class. We will not be really the beneficiaries of that boom. We will continue

to be workers. We will just be workers silo to more AI adjacent work, checking its output and maintaining its machines and working alongside it. But we will be going to work and I just want people to remember as in the conversation about Edgirin and Macklemore and being pro-Palestine and being pro-freedom and anti-genocide. The collective

is, it's enormous. The people, the power of the people is absolutely huge. I do think so too with AI, this maybe will be a really fantastic opportunity for sense to prevail and for guardrails that may well hamper the bottom line of these AI billionaires, but will be in our best interest. And I do, I think it's, I think it's right to be a little bit hopeful about that. I don't think, I don't think it's time to give in to the doom just yet. So, I hope a perfect segue into our final topic. From one horrendous thing shoved on us by governments and tech billionaires to another fictionalized one, a new rom-com or dystopian thriller, depending on how you read it, explores what it would be like if premarital sex was outlawed

and singles only had one night to F to their genitals galore. It has been done. the Sex Purge film online and has been mostly slated by critics as bizarre and ridiculous. Yes, it is time to discuss one night only, starring Callum Turner and Monica Barbario. The film is produced and directed by Will Gluck, The Man Behind the Hit, Anyone But You, starring Glenn Pell and Sydney Sweeney, who we have discussed. In it, recently dumped Owen, played by Callum Turner, is on the prowl in New York City to prove he can have a hookup, whereas Ali, who is Monica Barbario's character, has been single for a while and is looking for a big love.

Can these two find what they're looking for, or will they find something even better with each other? So I watched this film last week, and I shan't say a word about how I felt about it until you tell me, what did you think? Oh, I can't believe this is a real film. Unironically, this was one of the most depressing films that I've ever seen in my life.

It left me feeling with such a sense of malaise. I was empty. Like I would genuinely rather watch Manchester by the sea again than this. Like it took from me. It didn't give me. It took from me. And I think I'm going to really struggle in this conversation to not just focus on the premise, the bizarre premise that does not make any sense that is absolutely bone-chilling, if you think about it.

It was so difficult. And I mean, Monika is an Academy Award nominee. I can't, I'm so sorry to that woman. I don't know who got you and who made you do this. But this film, I mean, performances, I've got nothing bad to say. Great job. Pretty passable chemistry between them. But oh my God.

This film, I am energized by how much I hated it. Five stars. Don't hate me. Okay, so I really enjoy the film. You've got love in your heart. That's why I'm just an absolute true. What did you enjoy about this film and how? Okay, so the thing I completely agree,

with is the premise is so stupid. It's so dumb. You can't, you can't loiter there. What I did was I just had to keep unpealing the basic premise of the film and just kind of only focusing on the two leads and just allowing it to be a rom-com. Every time they kept talking about the government, every time they kept talking about mandated sex, every time they kept talking about the time running out, it took a lot of mental energy, but I managed to unstick that from what I was thinking. The thing I really liked about it is. New York looked fucking beautiful. It was the perfect, and it's such a cliche, but it's so funny, I have to say it. New York was the perfect backdrop, but it was also the perfect third character to their romance. How could you not fall in love with how it was pictured, how it was depicted?

It just was fucking beautiful. It was like eternally a late summer September day. It just was perfect. They are beautiful. They are gorgeous. Their characters, I thought, really complimenty each other. I also thought the cameos in it were brilliant, not shoved down your throats. Guys, I don't want to ruin it, but there are cameo on cameo on cameos in this film. I was in a cinema of maybe five people and I, the first time the first one came up, I went, and then like felt really self-conscious because no one made a sound. No one was making even a breathing sound and I was gasping, gasp after gasp. The other thing I'll say is, for all the stupidity of the premise that people can only hook up

single for one night only. Also a real, and I've heard people say this, a real lack of context around same-sex sex sex in the film. There's like a passing comment from her seemingly lesbian, maybe bisexual roommate who's like, gay people have been getting around the rule for years. Like, no, no, no. I was like, are people not going down on each other too? What are they doing that other people straight or otherwise are not? Anyway, so many questions. Does it make a single shred of fucking sense. I get you guys, I get you. But the thing I liked is because the premise is there's this one night that people can hook up. Monica Barbaria's character, Ali, has about 17 meetcutes on this one night with men. She's constantly running into gorgeous men and she's like,

maybe this is going to be the guy. She has about like, to be honest, more like seven of them. And you get that rush of feeling constantly of just like sparkle, sparkle, sparkle, before she even has an actual conversation with Callum Turner, who is her romantic lead. And that I really appreciated because I think that was kind of poking fun at all the tropes of a comedy whilst doing it in this very funny new way. The problem is the actual vehicle was a car on fire. But what I will say is I think knowing that everyone slated it, I was surprised by the really small details that I liked in it.

Ingredient-wise, you're right, had the cameos, it had the soundtrack, it had those leads in their chemistry and it had this. It's a one-night-only premise, which I love. It's essentially a We Need a Condom film, which one of my favorite episodes of New Girl is Winston running around trying to find a condom. Like that is tried and tested. It's great fun. But all of those ingredients are essentially, and unfortunately served on a loaf of bread made

of poo. I'll get out of my system about the premise because I don't mind a nonsensical premise, but there was no effort. to help me, the audience, enter the world. And I just think it's such a dark premise that I couldn't suspend my disbelief. It is, okay, a countrywide no-sex mandate. And we are dropped into the film, which it feels like a Pepsi advert. It's got pep, it's joyful, it's well-lit, it's, you know, it's fun, it's light. It has been a matter of, I think, we can assume, two, three years since this no-sex mandate. And almost everyone in that time has fallen in a lot of, you know, it's fun.

line to agree to live under a totalitarian, puritanical system that also just doesn't fully make sense because it doesn't seem to be a la Handmaid's Tale, a kind of Christian fundamentalist theocracy. They talk about elected representatives that they voted for underneath the leader. So, okay, it's not an autocracy, it's not a monocracy, whatever it's called. So that doesn't make sense. It's got the markings of a democracy, but has the democracy fallen? And then on top of that, there's no explanation for why they've done this. Essentially, they all need to be screaming and taking to the streets because their country and perhaps the earth. I think it suggests that this is a global event have doomed an entire generation to be the final generation. The birth rate,

only married couples can have unprotected sex. There's one night of the year that I have to use a condom. I mean, I don't know how that is being. We'll get into the technology maybe in a moment or maybe we won't. They can't reproduce. So it's basically, they've guaranteed population collapse within, I mean, I think one generation is too optimistic. It would be maybe less than a decade. I don't know who's seen children of men. I think most of us an excellent film. That is what they're facing. Otty-depleted workforce, ageing population, economic disaster, a refugee crisis, a complete societal collapse. And they're all bumbling around having the time of their lives in sparkly addresses. I just think what has happened here that you're all so

complicit. It is basically what I, my guess is a sort of anti-natalist accelerationist doomstake cult leader has taken control of the White House and these characters are just trying to get laid.

They are traitors to a cause much bigger than themselves and yes they're charming and they're very attractive and I do you know, it's nice when people have steamy flirtations and will they won't they but they need to vote focus. The world is at stake. And that's what I have to say. Everything you said is right. I don't disagree with a single point in it. The thing I think that helps this film feel better is if you imagine there's a scene before that's been cut, which is present day, Callum Turner, Monica Barbario,

80 years old, they're both dying, they're holding hands in a bed together and they put a chip into their head and they enter into a new universe. This is the universe the film starts. That works for me. I just think get you in a room with Will Gluck, who I've always got time for him. I really liked anyone but you and I really liked EZA, but I just couldn't believe this. I couldn't believe it. But yeah, it's something like that. It's like an alternative universe where, I mean, make it mythical magical, make it something where people have a, you know, a curse even.

But this, how does that technology work with Chira? They've got chips in their bodies. It's so weird. Does it detect penetration? And if it's detected, what happens? Do they go to prison? Are they killed? It must do because there is a scene where she's getting scanned if she's had premarital sex and she comes back clear.

And I'm like, what are you scanning for? What are you scanning for? What is coming up on your fucking computer screen? I don't, I'm so scared. Their ability to live and love and laugh and have bodily autonomy is completely crushed and they're worried about shagging. I just, they need to be organising, not fraternising, not fornicating. They are so, you know, and you're just like,

know this isn't the point, but I am so, I had a be in my bonnet about it. I mean, it's like, everyone is so compliant. They are, they are comfortable in their own subservience. They are completely devoted to this one leader. They are pathetic. I mean, maybe actually it's very American, maybe it's a, maybe it's a commentary on the American middle class and actually just the sort of Western middle class, this chosen subservience to authority. Will Gluck, you're genius. Maybe it's all a metaphor genuinely for AI. I am not the audience for this film, but I would say I would not even discourage people from going to see it because actually even these thoughts I was having, I was like, what the fuck?

I had so much fun thinking about how this film didn't make sense. I would say, yeah, as long as you're going into it going like, this is what the film will give you and this is what it won't, go and sit in this in a cinema, but also a very fun one, I think, to stick on the TV with your pals when it's out on streaming. because you will have conversations, you will constantly be going, what the fuck? And I think I've had so much fun imagining how this world works. And ultimately, it doesn't. But oh my God, I really want to spoil who's in it as well. I know.

I think the fun of it is being like, what the fuck are you doing here? Totally. People owed some favours, I think. And I can't wait for the director's cut to come out. And those deleted scenes of the beginning and the ending that I've suggested will probably come forward. Yes. So I'm being beheaded for having a little bit of. cheeky slap and tickle that I can't wait for.

Thank you so much for listening this week. If you haven't already, make sure that you've listened to our latest everything in conversation episode where we discuss the adultification of Northwest. If you enjoy the podcast, then please do leave us a rating and a review wherever you're listening to this right now. It is truly one of the key ways that you can help support the podcast and it gives us a boost in the charts so we can keep making the show. And if you have some kindness left over in your heart, Please give us a follow on Instagram and TikTok and substack at Everything is Content Pod.

See you next week. Bye. Woof.