The AI Daily Brief: Artificial Intelligence News and Analysis - The New Politics of AI

Starting point is 00:00:00 Today on the AI Daily Brief, the new politics of AI. Before that in the headlines, Apple looks to be heading towards a partnership with Gemini on a newly updated version of Siri. The AI Daily Brief is a daily podcast and video about the most important news and discussions in AI. Hello, friends, quick notes before we dive in today. First of all, thank you to today's sponsors, KPMG, Blitzy and Superintelligent. To get an ad-free version of the show, go to patreon.com slash AI Daily Brief, where monthly subscriptions start at just $3 a month. And if you are interested in sponsoring the show, shoot us a note at sponsors at AIDailybrief.aI. We are officially booked through the end of 2025 and starting to book now into 2026. So if you want access to this unbelievable audience of AI practitioners, enterprise AI trendmakers, AI entrepreneurs and builders, etc, shoot us a note.

Starting point is 00:00:57 With that, though, let's dive in. Welcome back to the AI Daily Brief Headlines edition, all the daily AI news you need in around five minutes. We kick off today with a story that depending on your perspective is either a sad reflection on how far Apple has fallen, a positive reflection on how much Google's Gemini has started to assert leadership in the AI race, or just an OMG, thank you, my goodness, how long can Siri be bad for before we bring this thing out behind the shed? Yes, it appears that Apple is going to solve its Siri problem by turning to Google. According to Bloomberg's Apple Insider Mark German, Apple recently approached Google to, quote,

Starting point is 00:01:32 explore building a custom AI model that would serve as the foundation of the new Siri next year. His sources said that Google had already started training a model that could run on Apple's servers. They added that Apple is still weeks away from making a final decision on whether to partner on the Siri model or continue to use their own internal models. Still, for months, we've heard rumors that the AI Siri project is seen as a dead end and that Apple had been looking around for partners. This, however, is the first time we've heard that they're close to making a final decision. According to the reporting, Apple is in the middle of a bake-off with an internally developed

Starting point is 00:02:03 series going against another that uses outside technology. And while it may seem initially strange for Apple to outsource the defining technology of the moment to a key rival, they do have a long history of being pragmatic and seeding ground to Google when it makes financial sense. Google, for example, famously pays Apple around $20 billion annually to have Google search as the default setting on iPhones. Given that, if a deal does come together, it'll be interesting to see which way the money flows. The economics of search are clear, but it's still pretty early to know exactly how the money

Starting point is 00:02:33 works when it comes to AI-powered search. Still, even if AI chatbots have not shown yet the same ad revenue as traditional search, it is obviously a massive data stream that Google could benefit from. Also, whatever happens, it's not going to be like Google just pulls their existing Gemini model off the shelf. Whichever model Apple ends up going with, they want it to run on their own servers. That means it's going to need to be compatible with Apple Silicon rather than being optimized for invidia chips or Google or presumably Google's TPUs. It's also an open question whether the architecture of iOS itself is a roadblock. Google recently demonstrated most of the functions that had been originally slated for Apple intelligence running on their Pixel 10 handset. At the same

Starting point is 00:03:11 time, Android is far more open to cross-application interactions than iOS, which could prove a limitation for an agenic Siri. The responses are pretty much what you might imagine. Zero hedge writes, Apple has completely given up on AI. Now, former quantum investor Jeffrey Emanuel did note that, quote, Google is probably offering to pay them a lot of money to do this, just like they do to make Google the default search on iPhone and Safari. It's still crazy, though, that Apple would advocate a leadership role of any kind in the most disruptive technology of the last 40 years. Delphi Ventures partner Tom Shaughnessy wrote, if Apple chooses Google's Gemini to run Siri, it's game over. Gemini would be running AI on all Android and Apple devices around the world.

Starting point is 00:03:49 Billions of devices RLHFing the models, providing data, and improving the models make the moat even stronger, would be impossible for a competitor to keep up. Apple could be using this to get better deal terms from OpenAI, who they already have a deal with, though, I also think it would get touchy on antitrust. I think that last point is a salient one, where there's no guarantee that this would get through, given how much scrutiny Apple's search deal with Google has had in the last couple of years as well. One very expansive analysis came from Robert Scoble. He writes, it makes sense for Apple to do a deal with Google. This would be good for Holodeck fans. Google's Genie 3 is something I want on the Vision Pro in the worst way. It would be good for Google fans who

Starting point is 00:04:25 will see its AIs and ecosystems strengthened by such a move. It'll be bad for Nvidia and OpenAI. I keep dreaming about Tim Cook doing a deal with Elon Musk, but Google is the best other choice. It has the best real-world data, a very decent AI model, and the best holodeck we've seen so far, and with Waymo has a credible autonomous car network to compete with Elon with. And this is where Scoble's analysis gets even more expansive. This move, he says, strengthens Waymo against Tesla's Robotaxy. Apple hates Google culturally, but hates Mark Zuckerberg more. Back a decade or so ago, someone at Apple PR told me that Zuckerberg got in a yelling match with Steve Jobs, and Apple hates Meta's privacy stance. Google isn't the best at privacy, but at least it's a known entity and hasn't

Starting point is 00:05:03 done anything nasty on the privacy front, and has put the best security protections into Gmail and its other services that I've seen. Google makes its own GPUs and AI inferencing chips for its data centers, which gives it a lot of benefits and its advertising network is top rate, in many ways better than metas. And in the future, advertising will play a big role in funding Hologdeck experiences. Apple knows consumers aren't ready for AI glasses yet, but is planning on its own sometime between now and the end of 2027, and its Vision Pro sets the stage for the future very well. Apple also knows that Sam Altman is gassing up to go into consumer devices over the next decade, so doesn't want a new hot competitor to take its lunch in robotics or brain computer interfaces

Starting point is 00:05:37 either. If Apple makes this deal happen, we'll see a duopoly form like Microsoft and Intel had for decades. It will be hard to disrupt by Zuckerberg or Altman. Now, Scobel, for those of you who don't follow, is much more interested in the hardware, VR, AR kind of world than currently the average consumer is, but I think the patternicity here of how he sees these big tech relationships changing is pretty interesting. Now, staying on Google for just a moment, the company is rolling out AI mode worldwide and taking their first tentative steps towards Agenic Search. AI mode, which allows users to perform complex queries and ask follow-up questions within search,

Starting point is 00:06:11 will now be available across 180 countries. The first agentic feature will be the ability to use AI mode to make restaurant reservations based on user preferences. Google says they will soon roll out the ability to make local service appointments and book event tickets as well. The agentic features are only available within the experimental Google Labs and will require the $250 a month Ultra Plan, so this is a very, very limited rollout. In fact, given that they are only available in that high-priced tier, it seems pretty clear

Starting point is 00:06:38 that they want to test the features with a very friendly and highly enfranchised audience to begin. Now, some are, I think, quite limitedly dismissing this as a one-trick agent. And yet, quite obviously, this is just the beginning of a much grander vision. Google DeepMind Research Scientist, Anmal Guladi writes, we just launched Project Mariner in Google Search AI mode, one of the most fun project we've worked on lately. Behind every search query and agentic system works quietly for you. Maybe one of the most profound interfaces ever built.

Starting point is 00:07:04 What's interesting about this, especially given our previous conversation about Apple and Google, is that it kind of seems like Google is making all the moves to integrate AI, into people's normal lives in really subtle, simple ways without smashing it over their heads that it's AI that Apple intelligence was supposed to be. Some definitely see this as a trajectory play. Anchor Roy writes, Project Mariner integration is the real story here. Search becoming an agent that acts versus just retrieves changes the game completely. Reservation booking feels like the obvious first step. Now, staying on the theme of big tech and their battles, Elon Musk continues to be lawsuit happy, suing Apple and OpenAI on Monday for anti-competitive practices.

Starting point is 00:07:43 Now, if you've spent any time on Twitter slash X lately, you will know exactly what this is about. The information explains that the suit accuses Apple and OpenAI of working together to basically direct people towards ChatGBT-GBT and away from competitors like GROC. The information writes, XAI's lawsuit also claims that Apple has given ChatGPT favorable placement in its app store and, quote, dragged out its App Store app review process for competitors like Grog, wrote the lawsuit, this is a tale of two monopolists joining forces to ensure their continued dominance in a world rapidly driven by the most powerful technology humanity has ever created.

Starting point is 00:08:15 And although everything that Elon does is mostly a Rorschach test on how you feel about Elon, I would say that this one has even less resonance than normal. Accelerate Harder really summed up the feelings of many denizens of Twitter slash X when they wrote, does anyone really find it plausible that Apple needs to suppress the XAI app for OpenAI to continue beating it on the app store? ChatGPT is the only AI that most consumers can name, and XAI has a porny brand problem in a much smaller install base. Responded at an OpenAI spokesperson, the latest filing is consistent with Mr. Musk's ongoing pattern of harassment. Now, this not being a soap opera show, we will end it there.

Starting point is 00:08:49 Look, at the end of the day, GROC's models are really good and they're moving fast. If you haven't tried out GROC4 yet, I highly suggest you take some time to do so. I'm still in a phase where I'm running a lot of different strategic prompts by a number of different models, including GROC4, alongside GPD5, 03, etc. Ultimately, it all just seems like noise, and the real battle is going to be won just by out-competing. For now that that's going to do it for today's headlines. Next up, the main episode. What if AI wasn't just a buzzword, but a business imperative? On You Can with AI, we take you inside the boardrooms and strategy sessions of the world's most forward-thinking enterprises. Hosted by me, Nathaniel Wittamore, and powered by KPMG, the seven-part series delivers real-world

Starting point is 00:09:30 insights from leaders who are scaling AI with purpose. aligning culture and leadership to building trust, data readiness, and deploying AI agents. Whether you're a C-suite executive, strategist, or innovator, this podcast is your front-row seat to the future of Enterprise AI. So go check it out at www.kpmg.org.us slash AI podcasts, or search you can with AI on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. This episode is brought to you by Blitzy, the Enterprise Autonomous Software Development Platform with Infinite Code Context. Blitzy uses thousands of specialized AI agents that think for hours to understand

Starting point is 00:10:08 enterprise-scale codebases with millions of lines of code. Enterprise engineering leaders start every development sprint with the Blitzy platform, bringing in their development requirements. The Blitzy platform provides a plan, then generates and pre-compiles code for each task. Blitzy delivers 80% plus of the development work autonomously while providing a guide for the final 20% of human development work required to complete the sprint. Public companies are achieving a 5x engineering velocity increase when incorporating Blitzy as their pre-I-D-E development tool,

Starting point is 00:10:35 pairing it with their coding co-pilot of choice to bring an AI-Native STLC into their org. Blitzy is providing a limited time, 30-day free proof-of-concept for qualifying enterprises. The team will provide a 5X velocity increase on a real development project in your org. Visit blitzy.com and press book demo to learn how Blitzie transforms your STLC

Starting point is 00:10:54 from AI-assisted to AI Native. That's BLITZY.com. If you are a regular listener, you will have heard about Super Intelligence Agent Readiness Audits at this point. But I wanted to tell you today about the full suite of Agent Readiness products that go beyond just the initial Readiness Report. Over the last six months, Super Intelligence has built out an entire agent planning suite. We help you move from discovery to planning to implementation.

Starting point is 00:11:21 After you've completed your agent readiness audits, we help you double-click on your most important use cases with what we call our use case planning reports. These reports are going to help you understand what sort of technical preparation. you need to do to be ready for a use case, what challenges you might face in implementation, and whether you should be thinking about building, buying, partnering, or some combination. After that, you can even get a spec document in what we call our technical blueprint that gives either your developers or the developers of the partner you work with what they need to build exactly the agent that you're looking for. If you want to learn more about superintelligence

Starting point is 00:11:53 agent planning suite, we've built a custom GPT to answer your questions. Just go to bit.ly slash super super agent. That's bit.l.ly slash super super agent, all one word. And if you have any questions, the agent can even help you book an appointment with our team. Welcome back to the AI Daily Brief. Today we are talking about the new politics of AI. And I will make note that in general, I have found that most of this audience seems to be proportionally more interested to the practical and business aspects of AI than you are to the general. macro issues around AI or the politics of AI. And I try to keep that in mind when it comes to designing the content of the show. However, we hit one of those balances of stories where it was

Starting point is 00:12:38 enough that it felt relevant and appropriate to do the main this time about this. I promise I will balance it out later this week with some more hyper-practical content, including an actual rubric for judging how your company is advancing in AI, just to even out the scorecard a little bit. But today we're going to talk about the new politics of AI, and specifically it coming into its place as just a major salient national and international geopolitical issue. As you might not be surprised to learn, part of the context for this is the completion of this deal for the U.S. to take a 10% stake in Intel. This is something that had been possible in the headlines for a little while now, and is

Starting point is 00:13:15 the latest in the very frankly beleaguered story of Intel. On Friday, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnik announced, the United States of America now owns 10% of Intel, one of our great American technology. companies. The historic agreement strengthens U.S. leadership in semiconductors, which will both grow our economy and help secure America's technological edge. Thanks to Intel's CEO, Lipputon, for striking a deal that's fair to Intel and fair to the American people. As Bloomberg writes, the deal represents a dramatic reversal from earlier this month when Trump called for Tans Oster and accused him of being highly conflicted because of concerns over his earlier chies to China. It was those remarks that led to

Starting point is 00:13:53 an ultimate sit-down between President Trump and the Intel CEO, which ultimately led to this deal. Trump told reporters at the White House, they've agreed to do it, and I think it's a great deal for them. Now, under the terms of the deal, the government will receive a 9.9% stake made up of newly issued non-voting shares. The government won't be taking a board seat and will have no formal say in any governance of the company. Still, this means that the U.S. government will be Intel's single largest shareholder, and will have, of course, significant soft power to align the company with the government's priorities. In exchange, the government has agreed to release the remaining $8.9 billion in Chipsack funding. Combined with the $2.2 billion already distributed, the administration's logic is that

Starting point is 00:14:30 the deal is paid in full using the previously committed funding. Most people involved in financial markets didn't see it that way. Writes Bloomberg, by the way, not in their opinion piece, but just in their general story, the U.S. taking partial ownership marks a stunning level of intervention in an American company, cutting against the principles of free market capitalism that investors and policymakers have long considered sacrosanct, except in the most extraordinary situations such as war or a systemic economic crisis. Commentators on X variously referred to the deal as fascism, communism, or just straight-up extortion. California Governor Gavin Newsom shared a meme of Chinese chairman Trump

Starting point is 00:15:05 and noted, The Socialist Republic of America enters a bold new era of government-run businesses. Meanwhile, Democratic Socialist Senator Bernie Sanders saw no problem with the deal, stating, if microchip companies make a profit from the generous grants they received from the federal government, the taxpayers of America have a right to a reasonable return on that investment. St. Quieger from the Young Turks says, Old school conservatives are saying Trump's plan to take a 10% stake in Intel for American taxpayers in exchange for our financial help is socialism.

Starting point is 00:15:30 Truth is exactly the opposite. In capitalism, if you invest in a company, you get equity. This is one of the best things Trump is doing. Both parties have given endless subsidies to their corporate buddies, out of our pockets, and only gotten campaign contributions back. That's why sellouts in D.C. are panicking about their beloved donors. They expect our money for nothing. No, we want shares like any investor. Now, this was a little tongue-in-cheek, but not totally. To refine the argument a little bit from picking your favorite ism and labeling this, that, the deal was explicitly done to accelerate the grant timelines in hopes of Intel completing their new fab in Ohio. The company has struggled to get private funding off the ground, in part

Starting point is 00:16:06 due to leadership squabbles around fundraising at the board level. Chipsack funds were previously tied to progress milestones, so pulling it all forward is a significant gratuity. Still, it's of course understandable why there's so much unease around requiring an equity stake in exchange for government funding. There's been a bit of variable discussion around whether the administration would seek a similar deal with other Chipsack beneficiaries like TSM or Micron. Compounding these concerns earlier in the year, Commerce Secretary Lutnik pushed to establish a sovereign wealth fund by taking equity stakes in exchange for government contracts. While this deal is a pretty mild version of that concept, it suggests that this is a broader government strategy rather than a one-off emergency measure. Steping back from the ideological

Starting point is 00:16:44 argument, analysts also noted that Intel doesn't just need capital, they need customers. Dan Morgan, a senior portfolio manager at Synivist Trust, said, Trump kind of becomes your salesperson. Bernstein analyst Stacey Ragson wrote in a note, funding a buildout with no customers probably won't end well for shareholders of whom the U.S. government would be the largest under the situation. Now, at the end of the day, this is, of course, not just the U.S. government taking a stake in some random tech company. The big question here is whether the U.S. needs domestic chipmaking is a national security

Starting point is 00:17:12 imperative or not. Political reporter Cigar and Jetty wrote, Taking a stake in Intel is much better than the pay-for-play structure for Nvidia and AMD. Intel's managerial decline is a major reason we're so vulnerable on chip manufacturing. If left to the fake free market, we will continue to get beaten by subsidized TSMC, Samsung, and SIMC. The point is that for some observers, where this gets blurry is the national security consideration of domestic chip manufacturing capacity, which takes this out of the realm of just generic debate and into its own very specific situation. Now, it's obviously way outside the scope of this show to get into those debates in general.

Starting point is 00:17:47 For our purposes, what's important to note is that AI finds itself once again at the epicenter of an important shift in the political tides that could have big ramifications in the years to come. Now, speaking of that NVIDIA deal, their roller coaster ride in the Chinese market continues as they halt production of H20 chips. The information reports that NVIDIA has instructed suppliers to stop production related to their China-specific chips. The chips have been, to put it mildly, a political football in both Washington and Beijing all year. The U.S. government had banned H20 exports until this month when the president struck a deal with

Starting point is 00:18:20 NVIDIA and AMD. The arrangement was that export licenses would be granted in exchange for a 15% cut of sales. Shortly after that, however, China opened an investigation into Nvidia, accusing them of including backdoors and the chips. Beijing later went farther, warning local firms not to use invidia chips and to reconsider their orders. That saves to have had an effect, with sources saying that the entire H20 supply chain has been shut down as a result. Those sources added that Nvidia and their Chinese customers are hoping to get approval to sell an updated chip based on the new Blackwell architecture. The Trump administration is flagged that they would be open to a deal, provided the new chips have 30 to 50% less performance than U.S. market chips.

Starting point is 00:18:58 Trump himself set those parameters after calling the Blackwell chips, quote, super duper advanced. Now, we don't have a good sense of how NVIDIA could possibly assure Beijing about the safety of the chips or whether the prohibition is actually about protecting Huawei from competition. Some outlets are even suggesting that the ban was pure politics, with Chinese officials calling U.S. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnik's comments that Chinese developers were addicted to Nvidia chips, insulting. Jimmy Goodrich's senior advisor to think tank RAND said, China wants to have the best chips but also wants to have domestic chips at the same time. Those two goals are in conflict with one another.

Starting point is 00:19:31 If the U.S. government were to approve a powerful Blackwell chip for China even at 30 to 50% performance reduction, my guess is we'd miraculously see China forget about security concerns. In an official statement, Nvidia appeared sympathetic to concerns from Beijing. They said, China won't rely on American chips for government operations, just like the U.S. government would not rely on chips from China. However, allowing U.S. chips for beneficial commercial business use is good for everyone. A spokesperson noted that Nvidia has several hundred thousand units in a stockpile ready to be shipped, and that they, quote, constantly manage our supply chain to address market conditions,

Starting point is 00:20:04 that's still a notable turnaround from earlier this month when Nvidia seemed to be gearing up up to produce H20s as fast as possible. During a visit to Taiwan on Friday, CEO Jensen Huang gave a status update, commenting, it's up to, of course, the United States government. We're in dialogue with them, but it's still too soon to know. Speaking to Beijing's concerns, he added, we're surprised by that. They requested and urged us to secure licenses for the H20s for some time. And this is really the other dimension of the political story when it comes.

Starting point is 00:20:31 comes to chips. The U.S. is thinking not only about its domestic production capabilities, but also export controls, which in and of itself is a complex set of considerations. Do you focus on denying China access to the most advanced chips, or do you try to expand access, and think about model access and chip access as a form of soft power? A recent Reddit post quoted A16Z partner Martin Casado, who said that when startups apply to A16Z for funding, there's a, quote, 80% chance they're using a Chinese open source model. Lastly, bringing the political consideration back home. Earlier this week, a group of Silicon Valley investors and builders announced a new AI PAC in advance of next year's midterm elections. The Wall Street Journal writes,

Starting point is 00:21:09 Silicon Valley is putting more than $100 million into a network of political action committees and organizations to advocate against strict AI regulations, a signal that tech executives will be active in next year's midterm elections. The big new pack being announced is called leading the future. They wrote on Twitter, AI is already transforming the global economy, and America should lead in advancing a policy governing AI expansion that drives in a and broad economic growth for working people across the country. Leading the future and its affiliated organizations will promote policies that unlock the transformative and economic benefits of AI.

Starting point is 00:21:40 LTF and its affiliated organizations will oppose policies that stifle innovation, enable China to gain global AI superiority, or make it harder to bring AI's benefits into the world, and those who support that agenda. In their announcement press release, LTF got a little bit more detailed about how they plan to operate. They write, LTF will operate through a structured ecosystem of federal and state super PACs and 501C4 issue advocacy organizations, giving it maximum flexibility to engage in the 2026 election cycle and beyond. The federal and state super PACs will focus on independent expenditures to support

Starting point is 00:22:11 candidates aligned with the pro-AI agenda and ensure America leads the world in AI innovation and oppose those that do not. These efforts will span both primary and general elections, aiming to reshape the political environment around innovation policy. The C4 organizations will lead proactive policy development, legislative scorecard production, grassroots engagement, and rapid response campaigns to counter misinformation and anti-innovation narratives. They plan to begin their operations in New York, California, Illinois, and Ohio, and will expand into a national footprint throughout next year. Leading the future is led by Zach Moffat, previously founder and CEO of Targeted Victory,

Starting point is 00:22:43 which has raised over $2 billion and served over a thousand campaigns since 2009, as well as Josh Flasto, who was previously press secretary to U.S. Senator Chuck Schumer and chief of staff to New York Governor Andrew Cuomo. Some of the backers are common names at the intersection of Silicon Valley in Washington, Ron Conway wrote, I'm excited to be part of leading the future. AI is so important it transcends Democrats and Republicans, it is in America's interest to lead.

Starting point is 00:23:06 The only thing that stands in America's way are bad policies that will cause America to lose its lead to China. We have to play to win. Imagine if we're not all on the page when it came to the race to the moon. We would have never even made it to the launch pad. A newer participant in this political game is OpenAI president and co-founder Greg Brockman. He writes,

Starting point is 00:23:23 My wife Anna and I are supporting leading the future because we believe that AI can massively improve quality of life for every person and every animal. We believe the goal of AI policy should be to unlock this outcome. That means taking a balanced view, which we think of as optimistic realism, towards achieving AI's benefits. We're excited about the future. Now, so far, leading the future hasn't gotten specific around any particular issues or positions that it's going to be focused on, but I would expect this to be the very first of a lot

Starting point is 00:23:48 of AI-related political activity heading into next year's midterms. One of the things that was really interesting about the presidential election last year was how little ultimately AI factored in. There were grand concerns around disinformation and deepfakes, none of which really came to bear. Also, as much as people were theoretically interested in the issues of AI, they were still pretty firmly in the realm of the future last time. What will be interesting to see this time around during these midterms is how much those issues actually come home to roost in the here and now.

Starting point is 00:24:19 Will AI-related job loss be something that people actually actually do? actually care about in Congress and Senate races in the heartland of America? Will competition with China be something that politicians actually talk about? Too early to know, but it's very clear that the AI industry is going to have a seat at that table. For now, though, that is going to do it for today's AI Daily Brief. Appreciate you listening or watching, as always, and until next time, peace.

The AI Daily Brief: Artificial Intelligence News and Analysis - The New Politics of AI

There aren't comments yet for this episode. Click on any sentence in the transcript to leave a comment.