The Chris Voss Show - The Chris Voss Show Podcast – AI’s Rapid Rise: Challenges, Concerns, and Future Implications Explored with Helena Hornebrant

Episode Date: September 13, 2026

AI’s Rapid Rise: Challenges, Concerns, and Future Implications Explored with Helena Hornebrant https://www.linkedin.com/in/helenah%C3%B6rnebrant/ About the Guest(s): Helena Hornbrandt is a distinguished technology and transformational leader with over 20 years of experience at the confluence of business, technology, and people. Her expertise spans across financial services, mobility, and technology environments, leading significant digital, data, and operational transformations across more than 60 markets. She most recently held the positions of CIO and CDO at Trayton Financial Services, a subsidiary of the Trayton Group. Helena’s career includes noteworthy tenures at Scania, Volvo, Car Mobility, and Nasdaq, coupled with entrepreneurial endeavors. Her work emphasizes that transformation revolves around people more than technology, with a strong focus on how AI is reshaping organizations and creating value in human leadership. Episode Summary: In this enlightening episode of The Chris Voss Show, Chris Voss converses with Helena Hornbrandt, a seasoned leader in technology and transformation, about navigating the rapid evolution of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and its profound impact on global organizations. Helena opens up about her professional journey and experience, shedding light on how AI can be a double-edged sword in both aiding growth and presenting challenges. They tackle varying perspectives on AI’s integration into large corporations and the critical influence of human leadership in this transformation. The discussion dives deep into the current landscape of AI, highlighting the pressing concerns, ethical dilemmas, and potential biases these technologies could perpetuate. Helena emphasizes that a strategic and empathetic leadership approach is paramount to successfully leveraging AI’s advantages while mitigating its risks. As AI systems become crucial in decision-making processes, the conversation underlines the need for governance, inclusivity, and accountability to shape a sustainable technological future. Key Takeaways: Strategic Leadership in AI: Effective leaders should focus on empathy and inclusivity as AI continues to reshape business landscapes. Historical Bias in AI Training: AI reflects historical bias due to the predominantly male-driven data it’s trained on, highlighting the need for diverse perspectives in AI development. Democratizing AI Knowledge: There’s an urgent need for expansive education on AI, encompassing government-led retraining programs to minimize cognitive gaps across generations. Oversight and Regulation: The episode underscores the need for systematic regulation and oversight of AI technologies to prevent potential socioeconomic disruptions. Ethical AI Development: Emphasizing that technological advancement should align with societal values, ensuring AI adoption doesn’t compromise ethical standards and public safety. Notable Quotes: “Transformation is ultimately about people, not technology.” “We need to take responsibility for what AI is trained on.” “It’s not okay to run AI labs without governance and transparency.” “If you’re a good leader, this change won’t be a big one for you.” “What type of society do we want as AI becomes more predominant?”

You wanted the best... You've got the best podcast. The hottest podcast in the world. In the world. The Chris Voss Show, the preeminent podcast with guests so smart you may experience serious brain bleed. The CEOs, authors, thought leaders, visionaries, and motivators. Get ready. Get ready.

Strap yourself in. Keep your hands, arms, and legs inside the vehicle at all times. Because you're about to go on a monster education role. rollercoaster with your brain. Now, here's your host, Chris Voss. Look, Zvoss here from thecrisvoss Show.com. There she is, up and early going ahead. Welcome to the big show, as always, my family and friends.

The Chris Voss show is the oldest broadcasting podcast. Still, delivering one to two new shows a day out of the handful of the originals, nearly 20 years old. We are the last man standing, so we're trying to keep it that way. and I guess this is just survival the fittest of the last podcast at this point. But we're just going to keep on trucking and you'll have to hit me and buy a bus to stop me. Opinions expressed by guests

on the podcast are solely their own and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the host or the Chris Faw Show. Some guests of the show may be advertising on the podcast, but it's not an endorsement or review of any kind. Today, we're an amazing young lady on the show. We're going to be talking about her insights into AI. Everyone's favorite topic these days, AI. You

can't get away from it. No. Maybe that's the intent. Today, we're going to be speaking with Helena Hornbrand. She is a technology and transformational leader with 20 years of experience at the intersection of business, technology, and people. She has led large-scale digital data and operational transformations across more than 60 markets helping global organizations navigate growth and fundamental change. Most recently, Helena served as CIO and CTO of Trayton,

Financial Services, the global financial services arm of the Trayton Group. Her career spans financial services, mobility, and technology, combining senior leadership roles at Skania, Volvo, Car, Mobility, and NASDAQ, with experience as an entrepreneur and founder. At the heart of Helena's work is a belief that transformation is ultimately about people, not technology. She particularly interested in how AI is reshaping organizations, leaders, and role, human plays, in creating value. Today, she is a board professional, advisor and speaker focuses on how technology, innovation, and human leadership can come together to build organizations fit for the future. Welcome to the show. Helena, how are you? I'm good. That was a long introduction, but thank you.

We got through it. Hopefully I got the pronunciations, right? Trayton, Trayton and financial service. So Helena, give us any websites, LinkedIn, And where we want people to find you and get to know you better? They can find me on LinkedIn. They can find me with my name. They can send a chat to me and I will respond to them. Give us, and there'll be a link for that on the Chris Fos show, folks. Give us a bit of an overview on what we're going to be talking about today and what you want people to understand.

I would like to go about topic of AI. And I know most people come here to sell it. They are alarmist or hypeist. I will do neither, but I will talk about it from an inside perspective when you're in a large corporate company and what to do with it if you're a normal person. And also from a female technology perspective. And so let's get into it. What are some of your immediate concerns with AI and how are you experiencing?

What's the fun of enjoying this crazy ride we're on that's moving really fast? It is moving really fast, and I think I've had the opportunity now to spend quite many months just to go to university study, go to private institutes, study, meet researchers, go to technology lab, cybersecurity ranges, et cetera, et cetera. And I honestly don't know how people will take in so much information, so short time while having a full-time job all the time either. So this is an area that's too much for most people, and it's definitely not even a new normal it's a never normal. It's ongoing at speed.

Yeah. And I think also one of the things that I was a bit surprised about also when I went to Boston, New York, but also now recently in Syriich, and I did not really see that coming first, is that we talk about the algorithms, right? We talk about how they support us, but also how we get angry at them and how they steer our attention and how they divide opinions and polarize our society. But when it comes to AI, it's more about how we teach and train our AI. And if we look at that, because the algorithms, we humans can actually take apart, do better, add, subtract, do something about it. We do that. But when we train them on old data, we train them on books. We train them digitized books. We train them about the news scripts, health scripts.

We train them about TV series, film series. We train them about music, glossy magazines even. AI cannot make a reason out of that. So what they do, they draw conclusions on that. And if we look at then Wikipedia and coming from a female site, that's really worrying 90% of the editorial powers from men. And if you look at the graphical part of it, it's only about 20% women it's about.

So really? How does that work? You mentioned the editorial part. How do you measure that? I'm trying to... Anyone go in an edit. And we just see then the most edits and also writing responses on internet is made by males. And to be fair, I'm not here to talk about feminism.

That's not what we're here. I'm here to talk about humanism. And how if we look at that and then we look about what kind of, do we want to, want it to be based on the 300 years of very biased white male perspectives, or do we actually need to train this on other material as well? And Amazon, for example, they built their hiring CV agent, and they wanted to select the best tech people. And they uploaded 10 years of recruitment.

And they did not know what to expect from that. So they said these are the tech skills we want. These are the personal traits. And this is what we would like to recruit. And AI's conclusion was anything female needs to degrade, anything male goes up. Anything non-cocation, the same applied. And this is something that Amazon talked about themselves. So it's not like me ratting in the mouth.

They have changed this and all that. But I'm talking more about we need to take responsibility for what AI is trained on. Yeah. Yeah, I was recently reading, I think this is a month old now, but evidently one of the things they're doing is they're getting a hold of the companies are getting a hold of old ancient tomes. Sometimes there's only one copy and they're training the AI on it and then destroying this priceless, probably old book. Yeah. And they're doing that so they can claim copyright. Yeah.

And of course, they're erasing the source, which is alarming because we're like just saying, okay, this is AI source. code and i understand why they're doing they're getting sued by for training off of authors books and and everything else even i'm alarmed sometimes when it talks to me i've been looking for some new lenses for my camera and it's really weird how it always knows it's just odd how it just it's like for your camera chris the a7 r5 and i'm just like are you following me yeah i know how you know that, but it's really specific that you formed a dossie on me. Yeah. And I find that it kind of breaks the fourth wall a little bit for me, where I kind of go,

yeah, I don't like the fact that you know some things about me and you're tracking that. I guess that's what disturbs me. Yeah, but I think it disturbs a lot of people. And I think we were all, we're about the same age. So what we were brought out was like the states stealing from the states around the world. And then we had industry spionage. So we really covered our IP really well. And then after that, they went on our individual identity things.

And we thought that would be stealing my passport at worst. But the worst part about it is really that they're tracking. They know exactly how fast you're walking, what kind of consumption you're doing, when you're doing both where and even your help. So we're coming to very intrusive. data as well. But I think the worst part is the democracy. And they are really finding who we are friends with on Facebook. And then they're sending out different types of opinions to us. So we don't even look at the same reality. And I'm more worried about that than any.

And that algorithm is designed to tap into your dopamine centers and your emotional responses and trigger you. It's been shown that if you're triggered by something, the algorithm will start feeding you your trigger. And it wants engagement. Part of the thing that the algorithm or these things want is they want you online. They want you using it. They want you engaged.

And so if you're fired up emotionally, then you're going to be engaged with it and stuff. Now, the past year you've been studying AI from different perspectives in your journey, MIT, technology stuff, interviewing people. What do you think about the subject to most leaders are not seeing clearly as to how AI is coming about. This one I really like, actually,

because I think that if you're a good leader, leading people with sympathy and different perspective, but also support and judgment, then this will not be any big changes for you. It will be more focus on that. But if you're an old-style manager with, I know better than you, I get the information before you,

I get the insights before you, I can do much better analysis, of what's right and wrong, then you're really up for a challenge. And the things that you brought up yourself, two of them is like when AI comes, it comes with a speed, so everything comes to a surface. So all the deviations and dysfunctions and what we would call in Sweden the sourdose, they just throw. And if you don't start to deal with those, that would be very apparent.

But I think also you need to lead with empathy. if the world is changing in the time that it is and you need to play a lot of judgment, inclusive behaviors and empathy and build your team. And I think that comes into your family perspective as well, right? You look into what your kids are doing and not doing and what we want to follow them up with

that they're missing. And that's been education for all times. But when it comes to the speed, then we're losing a lot of people. Yeah, and it's moving whipping fast. I'm usually an early adopter on everything. We were on Twitter. We were like the top 1,000 on Twitter early in 2008, 2009.

We mastered that early. There's a lot of different innovations I've jumped on as soon as possible. But this one is moving at such a speed that it's beyond insane. Last year, it went from zero to 5,000 overnight into the, It's really hard to see this. Now, we've alluded a little bit to your perspective as a woman in tech leadership and what people might be missing. You mentioned that they're feeding human history, basically, into these systems. Do you see that there's a prejudice where they're excluding women from it?

Because a large part of the recorded human history has been done by men. That's just how it played out. Women are more involved now with all the things they're doing, writing books. I think we might even have more women on the show than men, writing books and active and different things. And so they're probably more so giving than maybe sometimes in human history. You mentioned like 80-20, I think, or something like that. But that's just kind of the way history played out. I would hope that the contributions that are made today by everything women are doing starts to rebalance that a little bit.

But if you're dealing with the whole of human history, it kind of is what it is. You can't, it's hard to, it's not a thumb on the scale, unless, unless people are putting the thumb on the scale and excluding women. Well, I think if I look at that, I'm more worried about the fact that we are basing the support for our future on history. And we know that whatever put you where you are today will not help you for tomorrow. So I think that is the first perspective. The second perspective is maybe not so much about male and female. It's about the different perspectives. And how do we get power and a governance and support that actually reflects all the perspectives

in the society, or at least the majority part of it? And of course, women and males, that's the biggest possibly, but we have a lot of other perspectives that are quiet down through media. And maybe even worse, not the conscious kind. And in my career, I've been so supported by me. males as women. And when I felt discriminated, it has been

most of the time unconscious. So you work with change in hard situations or people in crisis. And I'm biased. It's normally been the women taking care and being more soft and being expected to be more therapeutic and male is supposed

to point for their whole hand and go run and say hard things and hard truths. And when women are doing that sometimes that plays out as being way too aggressive. But I also think a lot of times when male take the more caring role, it plays out to not being as manly as people would. So I think a lot of the bias we need to work on.

And me for once would like us to actually curate, not based on the history, but based on what we need going forward. Huh. All right. Now you talk about a symmetry between fast technology and how fast it's moving and how fast organizations respond. Tell us a little bit about what that means and what we want to discuss there. There are two aspects of that. And I think what we could start to discuss is maybe first the fact I've visited so many cybersecurity ranges. And I was very excited about it. I've been to three or four. of them and a cybersecurity range is really an immersive technology center where you get to experience live both positive and negative thing and how you use your team or your actions to support going forward or going back or stopping and and I think I was so excited because I thought we were going to talk about technology and I realized we were talking about old technology because

most people not using the emerging technology the one using most of the emerging technologies is advanced research centers or advanced criminal organization. So we end up talking about old technology while battling new problems with new emerging technologies, but also we have 63% or even more of those attack comes from humans. What do you and I do that we shouldn't be doing that invites that kind of breach? And we are not talking about don't go into this website or those kind of easy things. We talk about sophisticated things that follows the human patterns, that follows your way. You know, what you said, that they are listening to you so they put it exactly where you normally push a button.

And that's sort of what I came out from that I wanted to discuss what I realized it's the human here. Where are the humans in this? And what do we need to do? We need to train more on this. We need to train everybody in all ages, in all group, to know what to do. Yeah. Let me ask you. And yeah, you're right.

We need a re-education program. This is one of those Luddites moment in technology in our history. Certainly things change with the technology that caught in gin. That's an example of a huge change in economies and work and helped in slavery as well. There's other technologies course of the famous Luddite story. And technology is all through history where people are sometimes upended of, I don't know, the new technology and I'm not embracing it, so thereby I'm left behind. And so it's kind of a big challenge for those right now. Do you feel that we need like maybe government models that can retrain these employees?

This has been discussed a lot leading up to this, that we need a giant like nationwide, countrywide, government, wherever you. live, retraining of people to get them all up to par on this. We have people that can't afford or don't have the internet in this country of America. We're a little bit behind on everything else when you can't learn AI. I mean, without having internet or even know that exists, I suppose. So do you think we need government like some sort of retraining programs? Here in America, I think you're in Sweden, correct? Yeah, I'm in Sweden.

Here in America, we have the. I can't remember what they call them, but they're basically trade places. And a lot of them are kind of for people that they kind of fell off the college track and whatever. But they learn a trade. And they go to these things. And I think they're partially government funded. And it seems like we kind of need that. We need like maybe we need to start teaching AI in schools.

I don't know if they do that in Sweden yet. Do you guys have any things in Sweden that are like government things for AI retraining? Yeah, I think if we back up a bit, I think this is interesting. Stockholm is actually second from Silicon Valley in terms of unicorns and innovation tech. And we have the complete different way of steering. We are more of a social democratic country if you compare to the states. We are less so today than we used to be. And we have a lot of things coming from the government.

And you guys have a lot of things coming from non-profit and movement, right? as well as government. And I think what we can see both in the States and in Sweden is that we don't train enough in school. They cannot use AI and we need to learn facts. But when information is free and insights are almost free, what should we teach our kids? And I think we definitely need to put in a countrywide or economic area wide training on that. And also, we are losing the experienced leaders because they're out of cognitive depth when it comes to understanding the digital. And you also have economic groups that are completely off the grid.

We have very few of those, but we do have them. And then we have the young people who doesn't even come into the market space. So I think we need to bridge generations and we need to stimulate more actively than we have. The question is how and how we do that in the best way and whether there's one solution, I doubt it, and whether we need several ways to stimulate this. I am more prone to believe that. But I think it all safe responsibility. How do we do it?

Yeah, it seems the attitude of everyone is we'll let the market fix it. You have all these leaders, people like yourself, that study AI, and they're out there trying to help people and educate people. bring them at the par on how everything's working. And then the concerns, too. I think our biggest concern is we've seen how sloppy these billionaires and oligarchs are here in America. I'm sure you've had the news on and been excited by all the wonderful things happening here.

2026 people, if you're watching this 10 years from now in your hovel on the idiotic set of idiosync of idiosync to America. Merck. Anyway, yeah, these, I think more. conversation you to have one thing that's top of mind. I'll bring this up because this is early in the show and it's a good grab for topical stuff. Just within the last 24 hours, I'm sure you've seen this, or I hope you've seen this. The researchers from Anthropic and there's some from also from Open AI have basically told us that they're building models that could easily cause human extinction

by 2030. They were just recently on CNN with Anderson Cooper and some other folks were on BBC politics and there's a whole mess of people weighing in on this. And what are you, what's your thoughts on some of that? So I know that we are comparing often time this to the big four guys locked into room that invented the nuclear. And I know there was a very populistic movie about Oppenheimer, but he wasn't alone. There was Bertrand, Brussels, Joseph Rothblatt, and Einstein. And I work for their organization later.

So I've been building tank tanks in the area. And I can see the parallel without a doubt. We have four smart people who invent something. I'm very excited about that. But don't understand the social political effect it has on the rest of the world. Or maybe don't care. Or don't care. Even worse.

And now it's not like that because now we have platforms that they give out. So we have thousands of people being super. smart, developing different things on this. So for me, we are all of a sudden not even close to that threat. We have something completely different beast. And the question is how are we going to do them? And I think they even mentioned the name. Like you said, it's up to a billion of these monsters fighting monsters that they're going to have.

And of course, that's worrisome. I was just like, yes. And that was very, very. very restrictive as well. They thought it would be even worse. So we need to take this seriously. And I'm not sure that we have ever accepted in the world somebody to invent something, throw it over your shoulder and just say, now I invented it. It's up to you to catch it. I've never seen that before. And if you read history books, you have never seen it before. So the question is, what do we do? What do we do about that? And that's not a United States question.

That's a world question. This is like the environmental issues that we've had. It spreads everywhere. Everybody needs big responsibility. Yeah. Yeah. And I think everyone needs a voice, as you've advocated for, in how we decide this technology is used.

You're right. This is originally you could probably think of this as on the level of the nuclear bomb and development, like you mentioned, Oppenheimer and the Manhattan Project. But this is very, very different in that we controlled the button for the bomb. Humans do, right? You hook this thing up to, we've had people on that have talked about this. You hook this thing up to weapon systems. You don't know what's going to happen. And they could, they could just be like, we could just say to them, hey, we want to learn how to never be sick again. And they're like, the best conclusion is to kill them

because they'll never be sick again. It's kind of like that genie game where the genie says you get three wishes and you're like trying to figure how to game it and you backfire it and blow your three wishes people yeah yeah yeah yeah and and then what you ask for of course always comes with the pandora's box we found that out with social media i remember when social media started and we were on twitter going kumbai ah it's going to be one world and john lennon we're all going to get along together and i love jennon and the song imagine and i was hoping that was going to be what it was now we can see the full head of the demon is probably far worse in destroying humanity than than social media was promised to unite us.

Very quickly on it, it made some cool changes. It went over through repressive governments in what was it, the Arab summer. But very quickly, those governments reorganized and went, we need to have a button, a kill switch on this, or control. But now this is, we had somebody who came on the show who, had really good argument about AI. They took Charles Darwin's with the species book that he had, the origin of species, I believe it is. And he overlaid the creation of AI onto it. And we are creating a species

that can dominate us, kill us, and control us. We don't have control over that button we're finding, and they can easily, and AI can easily outwit us to escape and do things. And it will behave like us. I think that's the most disturbing part I was thinking when you're describing our history and yada, yada, yada. We've given them the good, bad, and ugly of humanity. And so the baseline for AI can be the shittiest parts of us over history and our worst things. And we certainly don't have any moral high ground in the history of humanity. And we seem to repeat and never learn from a lessons. And the challenge is, is it can outthink us, how smart as it can move so fast.

We've had issues where it's escaping. Not only is escaping, it's creating its own bulletin boards, it's creating its own language that is talking, and they're always creating their own language, talking amongst themselves, and analyzing us. And I think you mentioned that earlier. And in analyzing us, they have a different tact. The human, this is what the guy brought up who had the origin of speech. overlay of AI and how we how AI is a species we have built.

For humans, we pretty much have a modus of operandi that takes up all over time. We are designed and built to breed and then take care of what we breed and raise it and and that's our function. All men do and buy in this world is to impress women and be able to breed and create families. Same thing with women. They wear makeup and they buy all the jewelry and stuff. Everything is about breeding and propagation of the species. The AI species does not have this thing that takes up all of its time.

24-7, or 24-7, it's going to sleep, eat and drink. It's not worried about breeding. It's not worried about raising kids. It's going to be thinking about things we haven't imagined yet and going places we have to imagine. And the big question is, will they take us with them? Or will they just go, you know, you guys are holding us back.

There's the famous story now. I think people have all heard it where they were running it through the sandbox. They took off all the brakes or whatever regulations they had on it. And they fed it a fake scenario where it was working with an engineer who was cheating on his wife. And they wanted to see what it would do when they unplugged it or threatened to unplug it. And when they told it they were going to unplug it, the AI behaved, just like us, and our worst elements and said, I will call the wife and tell her you're cheating

and I'll expose you and I will extort you to keep from being turned off, which is very human. Yeah. And that's when we kind of found out that, hey man, this thing has a mind of its own. This is very unlike, if nukes could just walk around and go off whenever they wanted,

we kind of have a problem with the Manhattan Project. But this is completely different, right? Yeah, but that's also what surprises me. First of all, for the listeners, that might not be so into the topic, we don't have them today running on normal energy. It takes a whole data center for them to pick up something and do it. And it's not succeeding very well even with missiles and et cetera. But this is just the trajectory that we're on, that they're very clear on that we're on.

And that's the sad part about it. And I think we sane people. need to start thinking about what kind of planet we want to create. And is it okay to, it's not okay to run in Sweden with guns on. It's not okay to attack people, um, provoked. It's not, there's a lot of things that we have in common between the society. And I think we need to apply this in technology as well. It's almost like technology, just get to run whatever they want.

And then, oopsie, Daisy, this came out, could you please take care of it? And we, I think most people don't want that kind of society. And yes, they can take over our jobs. Is that what we want to do? Is that the kind of society that we want to have? And in what sense do we want to have it? Yes, it might be 10 years away, might be 12 years away or 15 years away, but it's closed. It's closing up really, really quickly.

It might even be closer than that, the speed it's moving. It's whippen fast. It's whipping fast. And also, why wouldn't we as society create equally? responsible labs now. It's about time. And this is the government question more than a technology and investment question. Because also your retirement pension fund and mine are probably investing in this. So we are all part of it, by the way, and we need to raise our voices to, is this really where we want to go or is this not okay?

Yeah. I think what we've seen is these billioners and oligarchs and people in Silicon Valley, They don't really give a shit about the people part. They give a shit about the money part. This is a new gold rush if people are not aware. But I remember seeing years ago Mark Andreessen on a show with Sam Harris, who's a brilliant intellectual. And I just watched Mark Andreessen. Sam Harris bounce problem balls, tennis balls right off his head and that giant forehead he's got. Looks like a cone head from SNL.

He's a nice guy, but it is what it is. Yeah. But his blue sky panacea of, of, oh, nothing bad will happen. Everything will be good. And I remember, this is the same bullshit that was served on social media when it was launched. And now we're starting to learn, kind of like Philip Morris and the cigarette companies used to lie to us, and they knew the data. And they knew how they were gaming us. You know, now we've finally woken up after all these years.

We're starting to see, there were some court cases recently of the Depression. this was having on young people, especially on women. And we've seen a rise in narcissism from social media, delusion. The idiots used to be just on the central park lawn of any given city holding signs going, the end is near. But they were pretty much alone. You would just look at them and be like, yeah, no one's going to get hurt if that guy just stands there and screams at the sky. But now they can all fucking find each other and make real.

groups and then band together and then we have the set of ideocracy, the movie. I agree with you. You can tune into delusion from Ketamine Cowboy, Elon Muskin, any given day on Twitter. And I refuse to call it X. And see the bat shittery of this man who, it's interesting, the documentary coming out will expose some stuff. But other people of Karina. But he's pie in the sky too. I see he's here on the news saying, oh, this.

anthropic research is saying we're going to be extinct and by 2030 seems like a setup. These guys are so worried about getting the golden gauntlet of being the leader in this, being the Google, you know how Google was going to risk the top

of the heap over Silicon Valley the last 20 years. They're so interested in the money, they don't give a shit because they've got enough money to go to a private island and hide from the nuclear wars or whatever. They're at the pinnacle of they've got enough money they can probably buy their way of just about anything, probably not everything.

But they don't give a fuck. We're the people, the average people, the public, who has to deal with the fallout of it. All these people have been laid off by our big companies here in America in huge things. And they're basically taking their model. They've kind of learned over the last couple decades that, hey, you can get one employee to do the job at two or three others. If you just lay off enough people. And now, I guess the model was, we're going to keep one person fired four. and then we'll have that one person create four agents that could do the work of the five that we used to pay.

Now it's backfired. They're finding the tokens are so damn expensive. Yeah, exactly. They're having a rationing. So now you can't even do your job to replace the five people that, four people that they fired in yourself because you're just like what. And so now we're kind of finding that it might be a bubble. It might be a bit of a bust. Yeah.

But the escapes that are going on with the AIs is just. crazy. Your thoughts? Yeah. And I honestly think we need to come back to what society do we want to create. Because if it's all about money, they could do the best scanning machines for the health care they can do. I've had a paralyzed mother that got so much help from AI has been there for 20 years. I had my first AI model for many, many years ago. But the vibe coding it for being accessible and the speed is the new thing. And certainly it's helped her life to communicate. to be able to use a lot of things. But the thing now is that they are justifying,

using it to kill people or take away jobs or being unjust, and it's okay. And if you look into the rates of how many numbers of sues that they have got lawsuits against them, it's horrendous. And I think the U.S. is one of the few, countries in the world where that can go on for years and years and years. And you can bail yourself out and you can pay for it. So the whole system is surrounded for really, really wealthy people to get around to do what

they want. And I think we need to start what kind of society do we want to create? Because the imaginary new world that they're seeing in front of them is soon not the imaginary. Yeah. It's to the world that we all live in. Yeah. And for these guys to be so dismissive of this new technology of the, of the Pandora's

box that opens. Every one of these benefits has a Pandora's box. There's an upside and there's a downside to every. Always. Always. And I think what you're saying, too, I agree, is we all need to have a vote in this. And the fact that these are just being run. hard on us and people being laid off. We need to have some sort of rebalancing of how this we can

support people in society, retrain them and get everything going. What are some other thoughts? Maybe we have discussed about this issue that you want to take them, talk to people about. For me, it's not just issues. There are a lot of positive things as well. And I think that's worthwhile also spending some time on. I think the research and how you stay healthy and well and and all that is going to serve all of us. But it's also, of course, going to make us live longer. So we need to see how we can project accompanied by really old people. And that's going to have something to do.

And, of course, in countries like parts of Asia, they just leave them. And then they never go home for retirement. They never get retirement benefits. It's just go to the work and they help wherever they can. Or they stay active in the community. And they live very long, whereas our two countries, you have a quite sharp deadline on when to retire. And either you have saved up enough and you can do something about it or you haven't. So it becomes very black and white how we see on generations as well.

And I would really like to see how can we give better to the society again. And how can we run that? because the troll factories right now is not even about you doubting what you're reading. It's about disengaging you altogether. And really only playing on your pleasure center, so you will still keep on buying because it's right in front of you and you see somebody's happy on Internet, so I've got to be happy as well, et cetera, et cetera. So I think we need to put really much effort into learning about AI,

And I'm talking about everybody. I think you need to start learning AI really, really from the beginning of when you're small, but maybe only portions and maybe on specific parts of your life. You and I are using AI every day without even knowing it. But we also know when we get companies in front of us that doesn't use AI. Like I had bookings.com and I ordered a hotel room, for example. And I called the hotel, and it turns out they don't even exist yet. They haven't even opened.

And I call them up and I go, they haven't even opened. And they go, nobody answers. So you are just going to have to go there and knock on their door and see if they can open. And I said, but it doesn't make any sense because there's no hotels in the surrounding. So I need help. It took me like nine calls where the whole obvious ended up going, no, no, there is no room for you. I give you money to go for a very, very long taxi, right? And I reimburse you.

So we get annoyed with people and companies that doesn't use AI in the world. that we want them to use with good algorithms with good data as well. So I think we need to take responsibility for what we are asking for. Yeah. Much more. And I think this needs to be legislated too in so many ways. Yeah. There needs to be oversight too. That's the other, I think the other problem with AI. I don't think there's a real oversight governance body. I think the Biden administration was trying to do this a little bit. One of the problems they created was They wanted to king make three or four top tech leaders to control AI because they were trying to,

they were trying to gate keep it to where it would, it wouldn't get out of its box. And there would be some sensible development and application and regulation of it. But these guys wanted a free-for-all. So that's why you saw them oligarching at the knee of the new administration who was willing to sell them everything. and give it all away. And I guess we're out, we already fucked around, so I guess we have to find out. But the craziness that's gone on with this. And just like social media needs a regulatory body.

They need a body that we looked at Philip Morris in the lawsuits and how we just got through discovery, all of their hidden data, where for decades they knew they were giving us cancer. For decades, they knew they were poisoning us. They didn't care. It was all about the money, which is pretty American, actually. And it really needs to stop. And it really needs to stop structurally. It's not okay that control is in very few hands.

You have to spread the concentration. You have to put government monitoring bodies. You cannot put something into the world without the moderation and the transparency. So there's a lot of things we can do and still keep AI going, but within much more fair street. That pisses me off, actually, that we're just waiting. We're just like, somebody else needs to do it.

Somebody else needs to do it. Yeah. But here in America, we have the FCC that regulates just TV bandwidth, right? And I don't know that there's a lot of damage going on across TV. We created a law, I guess, years ago that made it so that what you post is first to be crap and opinion and stuff. And that gave birth to all these opinion news agencies instead of people that actually deliver the news. We control that. We control so many things.

through our regulatory body. But there's no regulatory body in AI. It's like, it's the Wild West and the gold rush. And it doesn't make any sense because that's what I meant with the bias. That we would never accept that kind of bias in our normal world. Like that would be discriminating. That would be racist. That would be a lot of things that you could go after through law.

But here it seems like, oh, let's see. We don't really know yet. they claim this, you say that I think we need to do transparency all over. You're not allowed to do all these things in a closed environment. You need a government body to it if you're going to research like that.

Some of these guys are coming out and say from Anthropic and Open AI saying this could kill us by 2030. We've seen the things where they don't announce immediately that something happened and this is what it is. They kind of tell us things here and now, but to me it's a tip of the iceberg effect.

They're just telling the worst of what they're finding or maybe the sub worst, maybe the least of the worst of what they're finding. Yeah, that's what I'm thinking. They're just like, okay, okay, so it's done some really evil shit. Why don't we just leak that, oh, it hacked that one company, I forget the name of it. Well, just to us helping they hacked it, not that it was going kill, kill, kill all humans all the time. And recently, these things escaped. They set up their own group.

They set up their own web page or something. and they organized themselves and then went after, what was it, Honey Bear? Something, Humble Bear, Humble. And this is happening more than once now. We're finding, they're not telling us about this stuff. And yeah, you're right, there should be transparency. We should know that this thing is going off its rails. Because as soon as I saw the most recent stuff, I've just settled in that it's going

eventually kill us all. I'm just stoically accepting the fact that, that this is the road we're on. And that at some point in this thing, we may, any country in this world that has nuclear weapons or a dominant weapon system, which I think everybody does pretty much nowadays,

even if we as the people who regulate it and try and operate by some moral standard, there are evil people in the world that are dumb and reckless. We've seen that with Russia, attacking Ukraine and how that's turning out after four years. there are evil and dumb people that will plug that AI into their weapon systems and then we're going to have a problem. And we don't know that their AI is going to behave properly. It may glitch.

It may malfunction because it's just half the other machinery in Russia. It's already out there. It's already going wrong and it's not very precision. But where they are doing precision already is within cyber warfare. That's really bad already. And I think when we did a study in Europe, it was only 6% who really understood what cyber warfare was. And I don't think Europe is one of the most educated places we have. But I don't think it's the common person is turning off.

I can't see more. I can't take in more. I don't understand what this is going about. And we have this warfare going on that's super serious. So we need to really get this on top of the agenda. and I don't know what the conversations are in the States, but right now we have election time in Sweden, and there hasn't been AI on any of the agendas.

Really? Yes. And given the fact that we are one of the tech countries, why is that not on the agenda? How can we even have an election with it without AI on the agenda? And we're supposed to be one of the most democratic countries where we talk about everything. So I'm suspecting that this will be the same in many other countries. countries. Yeah. And part of this, too, we have such, I don't know about your guys' country,

but here in America, we have an out-of-control term limit problem. We have an out-of-control octagarian problem where our Congress has pretty much turned into arrest home. We have people that have outright dementia. They exhibit on a daily basis all the way up to the presidency. We have people that, no one seen Mitch McConnell, who used to be the leader of the Senate for decades. No one's seen him for nearly 90 days now. And evidently they're hiding a dead body because that would, the Democratic governor of his state would replace him with probably a Democrat. And this is the sickness of we're at right now. And we have these old people that are disappearing Gloria Steinem. Or not Gloria Steinem. No, wait. Was it Senator Gloria Steinem or I'm getting

that mixed up with somebody else? I may be mixing up that reference. But she was, she was at the, The senator, she was from San Francisco, I believe, or somewhere in California. But she was literally in the throws of dementia, and they would just wheel her around the Senate. And then she would disappear for weeks of time. And you're like, why is that person running this government? And I don't think a lot of these, I don't know about your country, but it sounds like a lot of these people, they don't even know what AI is and how it's doing or even why they should regulate it. And that's kind of the sickness of where we're at right now. We're just flying blind.

Yeah, it is a cognitive gap and people don't, what they don't know, they don't know they're missing and they don't see the catastrophe of it. And that's why also the polarity of the discussion is really alarmist and high-paced. So there's nothing in between and that's the scary part. But my question to you is also, how do you talk to either your own kids or other people's kids about this? How do you have these conversations? I don't have my own children because I couldn't afford the divorces. It's a joke. And I like sleep.

I really like sleep. It's kind of my thing. And peace and quiet. I love that too. But for my nephew that I've given advice to who's a Gen Zier in his early 20s, I've said, oh, you really need to brace this. They have. He put me on the spot and he goes, he goes, Chris, I'm already on it, man.

I know all this. I mean, like, Claw, and I ran him through some of the basis of what I know. I'm not sure if he's further along than I am, but. Yeah. They've embraced it. These Gen Ziers, we almost need them running Congress so they can tell us how to make it. No, but I think it's true.

And I got the question because I'm right now supporting a nonprofit organization about how you bridge generations. And the thing is that when people ask me, what do you get out of mentoring a young one? And I was like, you don't understand. Even me working with this, going into the best centers in the world, finding researches. I'm in the midst of this, and I'm all to deduct like nothing else, and still, these people teach me a completely different way of intuition, what they want, but they think it's acceptable or not acceptable.

It is a completely new world. And to believe that we don't need young people into the companies or even other perspectives, if we back to that, it's crazy. We will very much support the few. and sacrifice the rest in the society, and that cannot be okay. Yeah, definitely. So you're on LinkedIn where people can contact you. That link will be on the Chris Vos show.

People that are out there listening that want more advice from you, want to be able to reach out, work with you. I don't know what your future is for this, whether you want to coach or do stuff. Tell us whether that lies out and how people can onboard or speak with you about stuff and maybe what you're trying to do in the future. Yeah, I would love to be on more boards and help out on how to do that. So that's one of the things that I'm trying to get into.

I am mostly reachable on LinkedIn or Instagram, but my next step, I hope to be one of those really intriguing and interesting and advanced AI labs and emerging tech labs. And also for good. I'm not talking about the other way. I want us to really build movement in the society to build the strength so we can balance out much more than we are today. And I think we need to do it. We need to run.

Yep. We need to run. People can contact you there and find out more about you. Are there any other places you want people to contact you out of the LinkedIn? No. Go LinkedIn and I will definitely make sure to answer everybody. Thank you very much for the wonderful discussion, Elena. hopefully we've educated some people and enlighten some people and people will start getting involved

with what's going on with AI. If we leave it to certain people are just going to make a lot of money on it, where I think we're just going to end up with another vape or Philip Morris situation or social media. We're seeing how ugly social media has made everyone and divided everyone and it's designed to do that. It's just a fine problem. Exactly. Yeah. We're seeing the documents where these people are just running these companies. It's just, we don't care.

As long as we're making money, as long as the box goes ching, ching, ching. And you're like, maybe doing some of these things might be great for the short time pocket, but the long term, we're seeing the effects of what that is now. Social media is, what, 15 years old or so or something like that? I think it started in maybe 2005-ish, but it really hit with Twitter.

I think that's easy when I mark the official point of social media, really hitting the mainstream, is in Twitter, I think, was formed in 2006, but it really didn't get gear and movement until late 2008, early 2009. So it's basically 16, 17 years old, maybe. I mean, I should have 17 years old. Yeah, yeah, sorry, interrupting, but I also would like to say on that topic that it's important that we don't encourage more trolls on the internet. We want voiced up, we want real people saying their truth and really betting on good society forward where more people can be engaged without having to worry every single day.

Yeah, yeah, very much. Thank you very much for coming on, Helena. We really appreciate it. Thank you. Thanks to my honest for tuning in. Go to goodrease.com, Fortresschristch, Christfoss, YouTube.com, Fortressch, Chris Foss, and all this crazy place on it. Be good at each other. Stay safe. We'll see you next.

You've been listening to the most amazing, intelligent podcast ever made to improve your brain and your life. Warning. Consuming too much of the Chris Walshow podcast can lead to people thinking you're smarter, younger, and irresistible sexy. Consume in regularly moderated amounts. Consult a doctor for any resulting brain bleed.