Technology, Connected - The Real Reason Elon Musk Left Open AI - Empire Of AI, By Karen Hao

Episode Date: September 1, 2025

OpenAI, Sam Altman, and the Empire of AI are the focus of this Thinking on Paper Book Club episode on Karen Hao’s Empire of AI. We examine OpenAI’s founding promise to build AGI for the benefit of humanity, the power struggle between nonprofit ideals and commercial reality, and how compute, capital, Microsoft, Elon Musk, Greg Brockman, Ilya Sutskever, and Silicon Valley networks shaped the company’s rise. The conversation covers AI governance, open source, AGI, ImageNet, bias, anthropomorphism, power concentration, and whether a technology built by a small circle of founders and investors can ever distribute its benefits equally.--Chapters(00:00) Introduction to Empire of AI(01:54) The Empire Strikes Back(05:13) Karen Hao, The Journalist(07:38) Do You Trust Open AI?(10:18) Why OpenAI Made ChatGPT(11:47) Scaling OpenAI(12:33) Google, Deep Mind and Ai For humanity(15:12) Greg Brockman(17:02) Sam Altman's Personal Brand 24:46 Timnit Gebru(25:25) How does AI benefit humanity?--Other ways to connect with us:⁠Listen to every podcast⁠Follow us on ⁠Instagram⁠Follow us on ⁠X⁠Follow Mark on ⁠LinkedIn⁠Follow Jeremy on ⁠LinkedIn⁠Read our ⁠Substack⁠Email: [e-mail] the book club on our dedicated YouTube channel: https://youtu.be/OfQu65-6GuA  

Disruptors and Curious Minds, CEOs, founders, book lovers. Welcome to Thinking on Paper Book Club. The Rebellion to the 15-minute book summary. There will be no AI chat summaries. We will read every sentence. We're reading Empire of AI. Some, Jeremy, you're calling this the most important book of the decade. I mean, if you've got any interest in AI technology

and where we're heading as a species, I'd say it's pretty important. Let's set the scene. Perhaps you are a professional who has sped up your administrative works in ways that have boosted your productivity. Maybe instead you are a company leader who's been able to trim your workforce

while increasing your margins to stay competitive in the market. But like the cotton gin in the 1790s, the education technology startup in Massachusetts, the facial recognition companies in South Africa, and the many more examples, detailed in the coming pages. The costs of this vision are pressing down on vast swathes of the global population who are vulnerable. This is the empire's logic. The perpetuation of the empire rests as much on rewarding those with power and privilege as it does on exploiting

and depriving those, often far away and hidden from view. Without them. Jeremy, Empire of AI, Karen Howe, dreams and nightmares in Sam Altman's Open AI. first impressions off we go first impressions off we go first impressions what's up guys uh drop drop some questions in the chat good to see everybody glad we're doing this live again this is kind of back back to where it all began right mark starting off just the word empire i think is pretty arresting just that word in general just puts you put you on a sense of awareness it's like yeah we're going to understand some of the some of the deeper, more important connections of this thing, but it's a dark word. Empire is kind of a dark word. The empire strikes back. That empire is a dark

word. You know, empires in general, you know, colonialism, all that stuff that will get into pretty dark, pretty dark stuff. But I think it's important. What's happening with AI right now, we're just seeing things running and gunning and building and, you know, more compute, more power, more compute, more power models get better that way. And before we know it, it's like down the road. I'm excited to dive into this kind of call for pause to at least understand what it is that we're building and how it's going to affect us. Our minds, society. The thing that scares me the most about a lot of this stuff is, you know, we're already, humans have a proclivity to shortcuts. And this is like the ultimate shortcut.

And are we going to shortcut things like creative thinking? Are we going to see that atrophy? Are we going to see creativity, atrophy in light of an easy buttoned? Well, empires crumble, and if you're going to, the word I think is obviously it's a very, we speak a lot about language on this show. To build an empire, to create an empire, the damage, the collateral damage, the side effects, the doom, the gloom, what has to disappear to create that empire is monumental. Obviously, my first thought of empires, I just resort to cinema, so the godfather. and I see that Sam Altman as Michael Corleone and then during this book, we'll get into the book, but I've drawn a mind map.

I'm starting to draw a mind map of all the characters that we meet in Empire of AI because although Sam Altman is the face of open AI, it took a lot of ego maniacal, you know, ego maniacal psychopaths behind him with him. Wrong language. Woo. To get, we're talking about empires. Come on.

Like, you don't build an empire with like a passive, lethargic, empathetic personality, do you? Fair enough. These are all the billionaires

and the trillionsaires and the VCs and it's the same names. Paul Graham, Kevin Scott, Emmett Shear, Brett Taylor, Larry Summers,

Reid Hoffman, Peter Thiel, Greg Brockman, Elon Musk. I mean, it's the same names cropping up everywhere, isn't it?

Yeah. LinkedIn, Airbnb, Nvidia. Well, let's let's let's let's let's talk about let's talk about the the name at the, uh, on the binding right here, Karen Howe. So the reason why, and she sets the sets this in the first chapter and kind of in through chapters, you know, one through four. And we're dealing with one through four today, folks, uh, part one in the book. She essentially was embedded in the open open AI organization. She's been researching a lot of this stuff for a long,

long time. And her perspective is really interesting because it catches it what the intent was at the start and how we'll notice through this building of empire methodology that that intent has morphed, nefariously perhaps. She spent the day with Brockman and Susceva. She spent a lot of time with the people in this book. Any quoted emails, documents or Slack messages come from copies or screenshots of those documents and correspondences or are exactly as they appear in lawsuits. In other words, anything which is quoted, she says she has read in official documents. Do you trust it?

Yeah, I think I do. Everything's about trust, man. We talk about trust a lot on thinking on paper. So let's dive right in. So a lot of the original intent for some of this stuff that, you know, Sutskever and a bunch of these other leaders. are talking about. There's a quote from him, this early commitment to say, hey, you know, as we ramp this thing up from an opening I perspective, as we ramp this thing up, you know, if someone else gets ahead of us

and someone else does a better job than us, we are just going to stop and join forces and we're going to make it all happen together for the benefit of humanity. But guess what? When capitalism comes in, guess what? When fundraising and expectations from that fundraising come in, the mission changes. One of the questions that ran through my mind, how do we govern AI? What does that look like? And there's governing from the building of AI. So there's a lot of focus on, all right, how many chips are getting built? Who gets the chips?

Who has the money for the chips? Who can build the facilities to house the chips to let the chips do the things? And when are we hitting limits from that perspective? But then you have like, how do you govern the use of AI? And how do you deal with things like right now that you met as AI? This is in the news presently. but met as AI actually like flirting with with kids or like talking about the idea, which is like, holy crap, like that's nuts, you know, and how do you manage that?

How do you govern that? What do you think about when you say how do you govern AI? I'm very skeptical. Yeah. About how is it country-based? Like how do you create a global, interactive, interoperable system of governance or guardrails? It's impossible because you have all of these competing teams, competing teams called nations who want to be the best at what they do.

And that'd be like asking two of the best Premier League soccer teams to cooperate, right? So how do we just trust, trust, trust, trust, trust. We trust them. Reading this book, I don't trust them. She slams at home how often at the beginning they speak about for the good of humanity, AGI for the good of humanity, for the good of humanity, and how that message just gets diluted and weaker and weaker as the opening chapters pass by, and to the point where, okay, it becomes an afterthought.

It isn't what's driving them. By chapter 5, that isn't what's driving them. It isn't for the good of humanity. It's for the good of them. It's for their egos, for their, they want to be first. So how do you govern? And when they're paying off Congress, when they're in Congress, when they are more powerful than the political bodies that might put in any global regulation.

How do you do that? As the time passes and more and more models and there's no data left, there's no human information left. When does it become too late? When does the question have to change? Yeah, yeah, yeah. We're building something that's going to get so out of our realm to control that at some point it's just going to be there. I wrote this earlier in a reference to kind of like the big bank situation where the big banks, oh, we got to throw money at these big banks because they're too big to fail.

I mean, we're going to get to a point where whoever's holding the reins of all of this compute and, you know, capability, are we going to get to a situation? I'm going to be like, shit, it's, you know, it's too big to fail, man. We got to, we got to, you know, support it or help it. So let me read something here that I've found really interesting in the prolog and on page 16 related to empires that, you know, it was a great little level set, but Empire C, and extracted resources that were not their own and exploited the labor of people, they subjugated to mine, cultivate, refine those resources for the empire's enrichment.

They projected racist, dehumanizing ideas of their own superiority and modernity to justify and even entice the conquered into accepting the invasion of sovereignty, theft, and subjugation. She continues, I mean, very, very powerfully written stuff, to kind of say, well, yeah, there are some parallels to this. You know, when you can look back at history and go, man, how different is this exactly? And it puts your mind in a very thoughtful space to kind of consider instead of like, man, look at all the cool shit I can do with this technology. It's kind of like, well, there's that.

Don't get me wrong. There's really interesting stuff being done. But there's also like, whoa, we definitely have to keep our eyes on stuff and, you know, what rules can be made. And also who's making the rules. and for what benefit? They didn't know. They did it. Like we now,

because we parrot what big tech has told us about the advantages of AI, what it's going to do. They're not our thoughts for the most part. We've been fed those by the marketing, by the tech giants, by these voices who say, oh, AI is going to do this, this and this. When they were building it,

they had no idea. GPT that we've all become familiar with wasn't part of it. And they had all this company set up, up, they had all this money coming in, and they didn't know what they were going to do with it. They didn't know what AI was for. And Bill Gates was the man responsible for what came, what happened because Open AI needed more investment. After Elon Musk left, he took his investment with him.

They needed more money. They were flirting with Microsoft. And in the end, Microsoft invested a billion dollars, but that rested on a useful tool. And they didn't have one. And it was Bill Gates who said, I want to, I want to. one on an AI that can summarize books for me in short. And they had this GPT model that was a bit very basic. They used that.

They demonstrated that to Bill Gates. And it was enough for him to sign off on the investment. And that was kind of the domino to where we are. When everyone's on your on social media, AI is great for this, this, this and this. That's not what it was for. They didn't know what it was for. Kind of still, we still haven't figured out the, the, what is it for in a lot of ways. And just a quick comment on the scale of this, everybody.

This is, this is, was listed in the prologue as well. Open AI GPT5 was recently released, but GPT4 was 15,000 times larger than GPT1. And guess what? That was five years ago. You think things were moving a little faster than they were five years ago? Probably so. So one of the big power struggles in the book, because every empire has a power struggle, doesn't it? Every, every empire is built on power struggles.

this is no different. So the big power struggle between Elon Musk and Sam Alt is this idea of being an open source for the good of humanity, non-profit organization. And that's how it all started because they were fearful of what Google were doing. They wanted to build the opposite to what Google were doing, something good, something humane. What happened? Well, you know, money got thrown into the mix and the drive to be the first. first and the best and the fastest and not even knowing what that end result target is.

You know, they talked about being the first to get to AGI and PS and distributing the benefits to humanity. That's like a little subtitle or a sub set to that first goal. But, you know, without even understanding the full definition of AGI. GPU as well. Like eventually they figured out that in order to stay ahead to be the first, they needed, well, they talk about Moore's law and then open AI's laws. know and it was GPU and that insanely expensive and just as a nonprofit Sam Altman and they all believed it just wasn't possible. Well, let me ask you this. Do you think it was really truly the intent of these guys? Let's get like a, let's get a nonprofit like board together to do what's

best for humanity. Was that really the intent or was that like just a bit of a spin to, you know, because they're looking at Google, they're seeing Google and they're like, Man, was it we want to protect everybody from them or we want to beat them? Fortunately, I'm not in their heads, so I can't answer that question. We got Nomsom Michelle commenting in the chat. She thinks their intentions were not good, were not good but naive. And then once they saw what they could do and what they could get away with, off we go. Insert Homelander meme.

It was very young, wasn't he? maybe they had that childlike naivity of, yeah, we're going to, we're going to do this. And then that reality breaks down and people change. The way things scaled, like the way technology scales, the way the world rewards the building of something is, is not tied to what's the best for humanity. It's tied to what kind of return can come back to an investment on building something that people are seeing as novel enough. to spend money on. That's the internal mechanic of how this stuff works. And I think until you

redefine the evaluation mechanic, I don't think, I don't think things will change in that regard. There's an interesting question in there that she poses about, has a technology, the benefits of a technology ever been successfully distributed? I think she asks that to Greg Brockman when she's actually in Open AI and he, you said, I'm very wishy-washy. He was very wishy-washy and he's, Oh, man, that interview was like, yeah, that interview was just like, you're saying, you're saying words, but there's no substance to the words. You're dancing. There's a comms person in your ear for sure. It's embarrassing. So, so NUMSA also had another comment about governments can open doors that no dollar amount can. So that jumps me to an interesting little discussion here. Here's a quote from the book. The current AI paradigm is also choking. off alternative paths to AI development. So we're seeing the number of researchers not funded by big technology decreasing.

And if these ideas aren't tied to this quick short-term commercial benefit that Bill Gates was like, oh, yeah, let's push a bunch of money into it. You know, they might not get the resources and guess what happens. The diversity of those ideas comes down and we end up with AI defined by systems that are commercially viable. Yeah, there's a very stark numbers isn't there about how many researchers have turned their back on AI for good for the money? Because there's such vast amounts of money being thrown at it. There are a question for you on that.

The issue is speaking about Jeffrey Hinton and the other godfathers of AI. And part of their deal was that they could continue teaching and be professors at their respective universities. should they be allowed to have these jobs at the tops of these something and still be professors at universities? Should they be allowed to do that? That's a bit of cake and eat it too kind of thing. It definitely tightens up the parameters of what research is. We need to figure out the things like social cohesion and global cooperation because guess what? AI is jet fuel on whatever the hell we're going to be doing.

And if we continue to do the things that aren't tied to the benefit of our future, the benefit of us as humans, we're going to go quickly. We're going to move quickly to the spot where we would have ended up anyway. So chapter one, divine right, talked about superintelligence. The paperclip factory example pops up. Nick Bostrom, I think is always thrown into these kind of discussions. AI alignment, Y Combinator, YC. Well, yeah, it talks a lot about Sam Altman's political background, his upbringing, his mentors,

Peter Thiel, Paul Graham, about how he saw economic. value in Silicon Valley. But this was where the beginnings of the Michael Corleone race power started because he was creating, curating part of his life to get to the top of the Silicon Valley network. And his decisions and his success or lack thereof with looped, his former company helped him work up. And he seemed to be a bit of a genius. Oh, as far as like positioning and navigating and like inserting himself into all of these systems and connecting them to to power opportunity for him and his business as an organization, pretty pretty incredible navigation of, of that system out there.

He pushed Elon Musk out of the nest. That's how good he is. Was it the quote from Paul Graham? If Sam Altman was dropped onto an island full of cannibals, you'd go back in three years and he'd be the king. Yeah, that was pretty crazy quote. So back to the YC stuff, the idea was told in the book that by, see start a Manhattan project for AI. Holy crap, those are pretty crazy words to throw in together

because we know what's spun out of that. But then coupled with create the first general AI and use it for individual empowerment. Yeah, again, we're talking individual empowerment. Everyone's hugging. It's great. We're going to do the best for the world until the dollar signs and incentives start rolling in. But Sam's dad, the little story about Sam's dad in here, I thought was really interesting and I don't know if he is still around or not but Sam's dad had a brilliant quote that you know some of the things that I tell my kids and I'm sure you tell your kids that you know Sam's dad told Sam you always help people even if you don't think you have time figure it out that's a pretty awesome quote from from dad to kid right and I wonder I wonder how

that's translating to kind of what he what he is doing and building and the scale of it and that sort of thing. Maybe we, I don't know, possibly he was, he is very generous. There's a lot of evidence that he was generous. He helped a lot of people in Silicon Valley. He was a great listener. He is a great listener, they say, but it all

seems to fuel his meteoric rise to the top. In chapter two, she talks about, he changes his image. Doesn't he? He got bigger. He got nicer clothes. He curated his personal brand. Well, there was a potential run for a governor

at some point too, right? Yeah, his manifesto, the United Slate. I actually tried to find it. It's no longer on the website. I don't know if anyone has ever read that or has a PDF of that hiding anywhere. I know a language model that might have read it. Oh, fair enough.

Actually, you know, that's really, man, that's really interesting. So all the stuff that gets yanked off the internet, could we find it in chat GPT or Claude? or that's a really interesting piece of the puzzle. I'd like to know who makes him feel pressure. Which people in his life is he accountable to? Which people in his life say no to him, how many of his entourages are yes, man, because they're mostly men.

I think that the societal pressure, you know, not that society is calling him on the phone, be like, yo, hey, this is society. Yeah, please don't put us in a deep dark hole for the remainder of the distance. As a human, you have to somehow feel the tinge of the impact. of what's cooking and how it could go. So chapter one, give me your quick, the best takeaway from chapter one that you have. Really, I learned that behind Sam Ommon is a lot of other people.

He might be the face, but there are other people behind him. They had no idea what they were doing. They just knew they had to do something. So they're pushing this technology forward without an end game in mind. Where we are is a result of circumstance rather than design. I learned, I don't really like any of these people.

They're not painted as nice people. In the context of this, in the context of this story. Yeah, yeah. Because Mark has never broken bread with Sam Altman. I'm sure he's a charming individual. What I did notice as well was all of the dots that we're connecting. So there's so many callbacks to other books in the book club. Obviously, Nexus, Yuvanahari is called back a lot.

There are callbacks to quantum supremacy. there are callbacks to numerous episodes of the show that were covering the same subjects. So that I enjoyed that. My favorite in chapter two was ImageNet, obviously, and the cats for the win. Cats for the win. I thought my cat cook, but yeah. Namsa, thank you for all the engagement. This is awesome.

Are we going to talk about the part with the board shenanigans? I think Mark jumped into that a little bit before just the whole board shuffle and then Sam's out and then, you know, the big weekend on everyone's at Sam's house trying to figure out how to get him back in. I mean, there's a, there is an episodic, similar to you reference White Lotus, very white lotusy kind of stuff that went down there. And it's, and it's, it's very important as well because there's one of the things that Elon Musk brings up is there's a lack of talent back in the early days. And it would have seen that all of the talent back in 2020 was at Sam Altman's house and there were Samoa's house because they believed in him and so he literally had an army

of believers and any other AI there was maybe little pockets of AI talent elsewhere at Google most notably but they all ended up anyway with him and just the sheer power of his personality his dream his vision whatever it was is they were all at his house and essentially to the listeners who haven't had the book, Sam Haltman was kicked out of Open AI. Jobsian, you know, with his boot from Apple. He was kicked out because the board didn't think that he was open enough. They thought he was, you know, he's a little bit dodgy. Such a great word.

All the employees rallied around him and eventually the board had to reinstate him as the head of Open AI. It is incredible. What did you think about the communication coming down from the, but what if you were an employee at OpenAI and you got this series of bullshit communication from the top about the future of the company and what's heading. Basically, words without answers, and it's just like, I thought that was mind-blowing, how they handled the communication. Yeah. Yeah. And as you know, Jamie, I don't do slack, so I wouldn't be, I wouldn't have been employed anyway. But yeah,

just almost infantile. Yeah. Infantile behavior. Yeah, we're still trying to figure out communications as a species. Chapter two rolls through the societal impacts, really. And Everyone knows, listen, discrimination, whether racial, gender, class, whatever it is, is embedded in the internet. And like you said, how do these models get trained? That's how they got trained. And what was really eye-opening? I'd heard about Timnett and her work. And, you know, I'm actually going to be following that work a lot more closely.

Just kind of got reminded and highlighted about it. But NURIPs, the big AI conference, the stat in 2016, six black researchers among 8,500 attendees, I don't care what you say. Like with that kind of representation and the models being trained by the internet with these inherent biases, that is, that is a, that's not a model for something that's going to serve humanity at scale, is it? No, it isn't. And how do you benefit all of humanity when everything lacks global representation? What's that quote a long time ago? The future's here. It's not just evenly distributed. Power and water are not evenly distributed. Power and water aren't evenly distributed. And if you start thinking about like the Maslow's

hierarchy, if you don't have water and you don't have power and maybe don't have access to a fuel source, you're in that level. You're not in the level of the top thinking about about, well, how do I educate myself? How do I develop new products? How do I help my society grow? You're figuring out how to have a sanitary experience, how to be fed. And, you know, it's a different thing. So until, like, that level set gets bumped up a little bit,

I think it's very difficult to evenly distribute something that is aimed to solve all of humanity's challenges. Yeah. Pause. I'm just letting that rest just to people can. I think we should do that more of thinking on paper, when we should let thoughts and ideas and questions just sit for a moment. Somebody's on a walk,

maybe give them a little bit of time to think about what to answer the question. Or to let that shake out of my brain, too. Let's fire into chapter three, the nerve center. So one quote I want to throw out here, there's a definition of AGI that was put out. So as open AI defined it, there's a quote from book, page 77, a piece of software that has just as much sophistication, agility, and creativity as

the human mind to match or exceed its performance on most parentheses economically valuable tasks. And I think that's a key piece economically valuable, because not all things that we do can or should be monetized. What is the purpose of technology, Jeremy, listeners, what is the purpose of technology to move on with a let's say it? And then I'll read what Brockman says. What do you think, Jamie? What is the purpose of technology for you? Extension of ourselves, right? Technology is an extension of us. It's like a microphone. And I was back, hey, guess what, guys, Jeremy's going to use a musical analogy, right? So I've got a brilliant microphone. I've got an awesome microphone preempt. That's technology.

I've got a computer that all of that stuff connects into. The computer has plug-ins that makes my voice sound good, bad, weird, strange. But guess what? If the melody and the lyric that I put together going, into the microphone, you know, that's, that's an extension of me. That's an extension of us. But where technology is going, is it going to take away even that piece of the puzzle where now we have easy buttons for, hey, make a melody, hey, give me a lyric, hey, generate this, hey, generate that. Man, that's a big question mark. Great comment here. Technology is a tool like anything else. I completely agree with you. Augment what we're trying to do, maybe speed up some of the stuff that that we'd rather not do and open our eyes to things that we would rather do.

Greg Brockman replied quickly, this is one thing that's really important. What is the purpose of technology? Why is it here? Why do we build it? We've been building technologies for thousands of years now, right? We do it because they serve people. AGI is not going to be different, not the way that we envision it, not the way we want to build it, not the way we, they're my italics, by the way, We think it should play out. We, we, we, we, us, us. Talk to me about the concentration of power, of the concentration of benefits, the concentration of resources and the concentration of rewards.

Because AI technology, yeah, okay, it's a tool. But who's designing that tool and what is the purpose of that tool? Because a tool is all encompassing. I don't remember if it was Brockman or Susque, were talked about other technologies like fire, like cars. But fire wasn't coaxed into existence or built from zero. It was something activated in nature. It's not like the fire reference was a Freudian slit of the God complex in these people.

Wow. Maybe so. Like comparing what they're doing to the creation of fire. Come on. Got complex. But again, fire, that'd be like you and I in a room. We figure out how to make fire. We control the parameters of how fire is made the ingredients needed to make fire happen,

the access to turn on fire, you know, all built by the you and I, we. And someone funded us to make fire. And now we're limiting the access of fire. And we're actually, there are now laws in place, Mark, based on all of our work and lobbying that certain people have to come to us. for a permit to light a fire. Yeah, all right, I'm off my soapbox. But at least that point, the veil, that the shutters are drawn down.

This is when Open AI close things down, don't they? It's okay, we're not allowing journalists in. We're not going to say what we're doing, and they're going to shut up shop. Telling. Let's move into Chapter 4 and try to land the plane here. What stood out? For me, the most interesting part was the part from Cade Metz, a long time. time chronicler of AI and he's speaking about the tradition of anthropomopor. I can't say this word.

Nobs had just talked about it. Anthropomorphizing of text. She calls it Erdum, which I agree, but continue, Mark. Well, yeah, and he continues, aided by Hollywood tales combining the idea of AI with age-old descriptions of human-made creations suddenly waking up. AI developers speak often about how their software learns, reads, or creates, just like humans. Not only has this fed into a sense that current AI technologies are far more capable than they are. It has become a rhetorical tool for companies to avoid legal responsibility. What they've done to anthropomorphize it

as they have is so smart because it puts us all on an equal footing. It is like us. We are like it. Therefore, it's not a technology. We should accept what it says. Yeah, it is very dangerous. This has been a blast, Mark.

I'm so glad we're doing this live again. A little bit more energy, a little more fun. Thanks for listening. Mark, any closing thoughts? Some are calling it the most important book of the decade. I don't know if I go that far just yet, but it is very enlightening. I'm learning a lot. It's asking a lot of questions and it's removing some of the veneer, some of the public marketing veneer that this industry has. And I'm grateful for that. And I'm looking forward

to reading part two and getting into the weeds of the empire of AI. So yeah, thank you. I think that's all there is to say. Stay disruptive. Keep thinking on paper. Boom. Next time. Bye.