The Daily Show: Ears Edition - Jon Stewart On The False Promises of AI | Lina Khan

Episode Date: April 2, 2024

Jon Stewart tackles the AI revolution and how its creators are promising a better future while building technology to make human workers obsolete. Plus, Federal Trade Commission Chair Lina Khan joins Jon Stewart to discuss her work with the “small but mighty” government agency in protecting Americans against unfair business practices. They discuss the agency’s antitrust lawsuit against Amazon, successes within the healthcare industry, and if there’s an arms race between tech companies to wield control over artificial intelligence.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Survivor 47 is here, which means we're bringing you a brand new season of the only official survivor podcast on fire. And this season we are joined by fan favorite and Survivor 46 runner-up, Charlie, Charlie, I'm excited to do this together. Thanks, Jeff. So excited to be here, and I can't wait to bring you inside the mind of a survivor player for season 47. Listen to On Fire the official Survivor podcast starting September 18th wherever you get your podcast. You're listening to Comedy Central. From the most trusted journalists at Comedy Center. It's America's only source for news. This is the Daily Show with your host, John Stewart. We got one for for tonight. Unbelievable.

I'll be speaking to the head of the FTC, Lena Kahn. It's going to be unbelievable. But first, as many if you are aware, the news has been pretty bleak recently. It passed two, three, hundred years. Listen, It passed two, three, hundred years. Listen! But this weekend, there was one story that was so disturbing, so dark. Even the news couldn't handle it. In our editorial discussions this morning, we were asked not to show the image from this video

because of its violent and disturbing nature. Video, which we are intentionally choosing not to show you. We're not going to show because of how disturbing it is. I was extremely disturbed to see this. Horrible, horrible, violent imagery. Violent and dehumanizing imagery. We're only going to show you a clip of this briefly. All right, that's enough.

Let's take it down. I didn't get to see it at all. There's got to be devastating. News channels show images from Ukraine, from Gaza, from natural disasters. They get through them dispassionately. I can't imagine how devastating this footage must be. Former President Donald Trump shared a video, this one, on his truth social account featuring an image of President Joe Biden, hogtied on the back of a pickup truck. That's what was so disturbing and dehumanizing you wouldn't show it on television and an airbrushed

Biden decal on the back of a trunk. Aren't you the same networks that show reruns of 9-11 every year? I mean I don't think it's great that Trump is boasting things like this, but it's not like people really think Joe Biden was tied up in the back of the truck. It's a doctored image, but it's plastered on the tailgate of the pickup truck. So if you're driving behind it, it would appear as if Joe Biden were actually restrained on the vehicle's flat bed. If you think that's really Joe Biden, tie it up on the back of the pickup truck, I don't know that you have the mental acuity to be operating a motor vehicle. But if you do think that I should also probably explain to you that trucks also don't actually have testicles. It's

just novelty item. And now, it's not as though when an F-150 and a Silverado love each other very much. They f-f-a'-fix-get one of these. It's not... It's not... What is going on? Now, there is technology out there in the world that really does blur the line between reality and tailgate art. But those are mostly AI generated. Your fake Joe Biden robo-call that tells New Hampshire voters not to vote. Your Chicago mayoral candidate glorifying police brutality.

You're Donald Trump dropping by the neighborhood for a stupang. Look look how comfortable he seems. And as AI gets better and better it's only going to make it more difficult to separate fact from fiction which could be terrifying. Luckily the people in charge of AI have told us that just like with the internet and social media, it's actually going to make everything much, much better. This has the potential to make life much better. I think it's honestly a layup. I hate to sound like utopic tech bro here, but the increase in quality of life that

AI can deliver is extraordinary. AI is the most profound technology humanity is working on. More profound than fire or electricity. Yeah! Sucking, fi-fire! Sucking, fire! That's right, you heard me. You heard me fire.

Oh, I'm sorry. Do I need to turn that up? Suck a mother-feecking f-fired. And oh, whoa. What are you giggling at electricity? I mean, listen, I'm sure AI is good, but like, fire good? How so? They can help us solve very hard scientific problems that humans are not capable of solving themselves.

Addressing climate change will not be particularly difficult for a system like that. The potential for AI to help scientists cure, prevent, and manage all diseases in this century. I completely trust you. And your enormously wide eyes and very human cadence. But benefit of the doubt, this can cure diseases and solve climate change? the benefit of the doubt, this can cure diseases and solve climate change? What are we using it for now? Jarvis knows when to make me breakfast. Your toast is ready.

All right. Are you out of your f-mine mind? See here's the thing. Toast I can make. I can make toast. It might be the only technology we have that works pretty much every time. I'll tell you what, why don't you get to work on curing the diseases and the climate change and we'll hold down the fort on toast. Of course, now we have as a society, we have been through technological advances before and they all have promised a utopian life without

drudgery and the reality is they come for our jobs. So I want your assurance that AI isn't removing the human from the loop. This is not about replacing the human in the loop. In fact it's about em't removing the human from the loop. This is not about replacing the human in the loop. In fact, it's about empowering the human. It's an assistant. It's an assistant. What?

We're all getting assistants? It's an assistant. AI works for you night and day tirelessly, and all you had to do was remember their fucking birthdayirelessly and all you had to do was remember their fucking birthday. That's all you had to do. But I get it. It's an assistant. It's about productivity and that's good for all of us, yes? Although they do let the real truth slip out every now and again. There will be overall displacement in the labor market.

You can get the same work done with fewer people. That's just the nature of productivity. That doesn't sound good. Same work done with fewer people. Not a math guy, but I think fewer means less. Yes? So AI can cure diseases and solve climate change. But that's not exactly what companies are

going to be using it for, are they? So this is like productivity without the tax of more people. Without the tax of more people? The people tax. Formally referred to as employees. But you know, the promise of AI versus the reality of AI, it's not quite crystal clear in my mind yet how that's going to work out for workers. Do you have anyone who wants to lay this out more bluntly,

perhaps while auditioning to be a bond villain from his mountaintop lair. Left completely to the market and to their own devices, these are fundamentally labor and to their own devices. These are fundamentally labor replacing tools. Did that guy just call us tools? But he's actually warning us. Is there anyone who might say the same thing as this fellow but but looks at losing employees as a feature of AI and not a bug? The CEO of the company laid off 90% of its customer support staff, after arguing that AI is kind of the reason. Why did you do this?

It seemed a little brutal. It's smart, I think. Like, it's brutal if you think, like, as a human. AI. It's brutal if you think like, as a human. It's not the catchest ad slogan I've ever heard. So, while we were. It's brutal, if you think like as a human. It's not the cachiest ad slogan I've ever heard.

So while we wait for this thing to cure our diseases and self-climate change, it's replacing us in the workforce, not in the future, but now. So what exactly are we supposed to be doing for work? I think we'll need new types of jobs to help us embed AI and maintain AI in the workplace. Prompt engineers, they're basically people who learn how to use AI systems and in effect how to program them. Who would have thought that there will be a prompt engineer, right? Right. Prompt engineer. I think you mean types question guy. And by the way, if there's any job thi thain the thi the thi thi thi thi thi thi thi thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, and thi, and th and th and thi, thi, thi, and th and their, and their, and their, and their, and their, and their, and their, and their, and the the the the the the the the the the thi, and thi, and thi, and thi, and thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, are thi, are thi, are thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi a toomoomoomorrow, ta wa' a thau-a' a thi a thi a thi, thi, types question guy. And by the way, if there's any job that can be easily replaced by AI, it's types question guy. This is some

shit you got going here. AI models have hoovered up the entire sum of the human experience that we've accomplished over thousands of years. And now we just hand it off to be the entire sum of the human experience that we've accomplished over thousands of years. And now we just hand it off to be their prompt engineers. And by the way, you're not fooling anybody by adding the word engineer. You're not the types of question guy. You're the vice doctor of mopping. Like, this whole AI thing is a bait and switch. You're acting like you're helping us. Oh, AI. It's supposed to be my assistant. But now I'm making AI fucking toast. I'm Jarvis.

But guess what? Guess what? Guess, no, you listen to me! I got news for you, AI. I'm not Siri, you're Siri. Siri. Siri, while I have your tooky. Siri, while I have your attention,

Let me ask you a question. Sure, John, but first could you run and fetch me some lithium-catmium? Yeah, sure, that's not a problem. Mother-f-f-fixer! I didn't want to have to do this AI, but it's pretty clear with the technology this powerful, like nuclear power and atomic weapons. I'm going to have to place a little call to my good pals with the technology this powerful, like nuclear power and atomic weapons. I'm going to have to place a little call to my good pals in the United States government, perhaps even the House of Representatives are the Senate, and they're about to open up a can of what's AI now. Do you understand what AI does?

I have a military understanding. I've got a lot to know about what's going on. Very frankly, it's new terrain and uncarted territory. Do we have the knowledge set here to do it? No. The short answer is no. The long answer is no. The long answer is the no. And the longest answer is H to the E to the L to the L to the no. Hell I don't even know how to use an answer in my statement. Do-doo-doo-doo.

Do-doo. Do-doo. Do-doo. Look, I'm not against progress. But let's look to our history to see how we've dealt with previous economic disruptions. We can retrain workers from one generation and create jobs for the next. Retrain workers who do lose their jobs for even better jobs in the future.

Retrain in order to be productive workers. Upskill America to help workers of all ages. Train and retrain workers for new jobs. Give me a break. Anybody who can throw coal into a furnace can learn how to program for God's sake. And I'll fight every one of you jackholes who says different. But that's the game, whether it's globalization or industrialization or now artificial intelligence, the way of life that you are accustomed to is no match for the promise of more profits and new markets, which sounds brutal if you're a human.

But at least those other disruptions took place over a century or decades. AI is going to be ready to take over by Thursday. And once that happens, what the f-feeh, is there left for the rest of us to do? Time is not a terrible thing. AI, freeing us up to to think about things at a higher level is going to, it's going to, it's to, you to help, you to, you to, you to help to, you to, you to, you to, you to, you to, you to, you to, you to, you to, you to, you to, you to, you to, you to, you to, you to, you to, you to, you to, you're to, you to, you to, you's to, you's to, you's to, you's toe, you toe, you toe, you toe, you toe, you to, you to, you, you, you, you to, you, you to, you, you to, you to, you to, you to, you to, you to, you to, you to, you to, you to, you to, you to, you to, you to, you know, you know, you know, you know, to, to me toeconomic, you know, toeconomic, you know, toeconomic, you know, toeconomic, you know, toeconomic, toeconomic, you know, you know, toeconomic, you're to do. Time is not a terrible thing. AI, freeing us up to think about things at a higher level is going to help. It's going to give us our time back. We'll be able to express ourselves in new creative ways. You know, he's right.

I've been thinking about this all wrong. It's not joblesness. It's live the artist's life. It'll give me more time to explore my passions. You know, I'm an aging, suburban dad. I'll learn to play the drums. You know, music... ta, ta, titi ta. Music is what makes us human. And we come back. Lena Kahn will be together. And we come back. Lena Khan will be joining us on the show. Don't go away. The future of America is in your hands.

This is not a movie trailer and it's not a political ad, but it is a call to action. I'm Milo Atmos and I'm passionate about the power of everyday citizens. This is not a political ad, but it is a call to action. I'm Milatmos and I'm passionate about unlocking the power of everyday citizens. and it's not a political ad, but it is a call to action. I'm Mila Atmos and I'm passionate about unlocking the power of everyday citizens. On our podcast, Future Hindsight, we take big ideas about civic life and democracy and turn them into action items for you and me. Every Thursday, we talk to bold activists and civic innovators to help you understand your power and your power to change the status quo. Find us at Future Hindside.com or wherever you listen the you you you you you you you you th you th you th you listen you listen you listen you listen you listen you listen th you listen the th you listen th you listen to listen to listen to listen to listen to listen to listen to to to to to to to to to to to to to the pocala the power to the power to to the power the power the power the power the power the power the power the power the power the power the power the power the power thoffic the power thoffic thoffic the power the power the power the power the power the power the power the power the power the power the po the po the po the po the po the po the po th. thii. thi. thi. thi. thi. thi. thi. thi. thoo' thooooooooooo' to to to to to to thoooooooo' thoo' tho' tho' th your power to change the status quo.

Find us at Future Hindsight.com or wherever you listen to podcasts. Hey, look at the show. My guest tonight runs one of the main government agencies responsible for enforcing antitrust and protecting consumers in America. Please welcome to the program, Federal Trade Commission Chair Lena Kahn. Hello. Hello. Hello.

It's lovely to see you. You run the federal trade. Hello. Hello. It's lovely to see you. You run the Federal Trade Commission. That's right. The whole shabang. And you are in charge of it's protecting Americans from monopolistic company practices, but also dealing with pricing and things like that, protecting consumers. That's right. I mean, the short of it is we want to make sure that the American public is not getting bullied or coerced in the marketplace or tricked. And so we enforce the nation's

antitrust and consumer protection laws. And how is that? Well, please. Now, I just want to make it clear, that way, right. You were not bullied or tricked into applauding, no? I don't want to be accused of monopolistic. How much pressure do these companies exert on the Federal Trade Commission? In other words, how much do they fight whatever regulation you're trying to put into place to keep them from becoming monopolies or from these types of business practices?

Well, look, monopolies are not fans of enforcing the anti-monopoly laws, and so that type of pushback is baked in. But we have a fantastic team. We're a small agency, but we're mighty, and we play to our strengths. Being entrepreneurial, being strategic, and getting real wins for the American people. What are the companies? So these are separate things. Monopoles, the the way I always viewed it was, oh, that's only one company. But don't we have oligopolis in this country?

Aren't their industries, consolidation has made it. For the entertainment industry is controlled by thiiii. thi. the industries, consolidation has made it. For instance, the entertainment industry is controlled by like six companies. Is that considered not a monopoly, but a problem? Yeah, look, we've really focused on how are companies behaving. Are they behaving in ways that suggest they can harm their customers, harm their suppliers, harm their workers, and get away with it? And that type of too big to care type approach is really what ends up signaling that a a a a that a that a that a that a that a that a that a thiiiiiiiiiii thi..a their their their their their their their their workers and get away with it. And that type of too big to care type approach is really what ends up signaling that a company has monopoly power because they can start mistreating you but they know you're stuck.

And what would be the metrics of that? Like how would you how would you judge that because I know you've sued Amazon. That's right. And that's for those practices. And that's for those practices. So Anna Walsh does allege that Amazon is a monopoly, that they've maintained that monopoly through illegal practices. And look, there are a variety of ways that you can show a company is a monopoly and has monopoly power. One is you can try to figure out what's the exact boundary of the market, what's the

market share. But again, the most direct way is to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to look to look to look to look to look to look to look to look to look to look to look to look the to look the the company the company the company the company to look the company the company is the company is the company is to look the company is the company is the company is the company is the company the company the company is the company is the company the company the company the company the company the company the company the company is the company is the company is the company is the company is the company is the company is the company is the company is the company is the company is the company is the company is the company is the company is to the company is to look is to look is to look the the to look to look to look to look to look.. the to look. the to look. the the to the thoo.. the tho. the the the the the the company is the company is exact boundary of the market, what's the market share, but again the most direct way is to look at how is the company behaving. And as we lay out in our complaint, Amazon is now able to get away with harming its customers. So just to give you a few examples. Over the last few years, they've littered their search results page with junk ads. ads that internally executives realize are irrelevant thenen, theeeeeeeuuuiliiiiiiiiiiiiiiii. their th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. thi, th. thi. thi. their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their. their. their, their. their, their, their, th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. the. the. the. the. teate. teate. thea. thea. thea. their, the most, the most, the most, the most, the most, their search results page with junk ads. Ads that internally executives realize are irrelevant and unhelpful to consumers, but they can just do it and it milks them billions of dollars and money. They've also been steadily hiking the fees that small businesses have to pay to sell through Amazon. And so now some small businesses have to pay one out of every two dollars to Amazon.

It's basically a 50% monopoly tax. And so those are just some of the behaviors that we point to to note that this company has monopoly power. Is there anything in the company's leader that also suggests that? For instance, if you were to go from being like sort of a nerdy dude who sold books out of a garage into let's say a jacked Lex Luther type, does that also suggest either monopolistic practices or some type of injections? You know we haven't tried to make those arguments in court, but it would be interesting to see

how a judge would respond. I think quite favorable. How many lawyers do you, like for instance, so what are you up against? So you've got government lawyers, I'm assuming you've got a pretty good cadre, but like let's say you're going after Amazon, how many lawyers are they have? Like, let's say you're going after Amazon, how many lawyers are they at? I mean, you know, if they have monopoly money, they can buy as many lawyers as they want. I mean, the FTC is around 1,200 employees. But when we're going up against some of these monopolistic companies, they can outmatch,

they can outmatch us, sometimes one to 10 to 10 10 to 1. Sometimes they can. Yeah, I mean we have lawsuits against a whole bunch of big companies and just in terms of sheer resources that they can pour into the litigation, we're pretty outguns but not outmatched, right? And this is where it comes to playing to your strengths, being entrepreneurial. So this isn't about just getting a fine. This isn't about going after Amazon and saying, so, because this is what the SEC does. The SEC, I think, is overmatched as a government agency. You don't have to comment out that, but just nod your head.

Utterly overmatched. So they go after groups, and then they can't really prove it in court. So they're like, how about this? you give us a cut of your profit and we'll all be done here. How do you handle that with Amazon? It's not just about a fine. That's right, I think we've seen, look, over the last couple of decades, we've seen how businesses can treat fines just as a cost of doing business. Right. And we need to make sure that we're actually deterring illegal behavior. And so that can mean naming individual executives. We in our some of our lawsuits... Oh snap, you just did not go there. I like that. So have you had success with this? We have had

success with this. I mean, we had a lawsuit against Martin Screlli a couple of years ago. Uh, uh, uh, uh, oh, the suddenly it turned into a pro wrestling match here. What's going on? And he went to jail. He went to jail. Do you have to refer things to the DOJ, or do you have an enforcement harm? So you're right.

We don't have criminal authority. But the remedy we were able to get against Martin Screlli was to effectively ban him from doing business in the pharmaceutical industry. Right. Now, I imagine that the practice that he did in the pharmaceutical industry, which was taking a life-saving drug and like jacking the price up by, I don't know how many thousands of percent. I mean, he did something crazy, right? How do you keep that as a normal practice in the pharmaceutical industry? I mean, are they colluding as a group to keep prices high?

Why are we having so much trouble with them and prescription drug prices? I mean, look, there are a whole set of reasons why, for too many Americans, drugs are unaffordable, right? I mean, I hear weekly, monthly, about American families who are having to ration life-saving drugs. Absolutely, and shortages of those drugs. Shortages of those drugs and there can be all sort of tricks and monopolistic behavior that is leading to that. Just to give you one example, inhalers. They've been around for decades, but they still cost hundreds of dollars. So our staff took a close look and we've realized that some of the patents that had been listed for these inhalers were improper. They were bogus.

And so we sent hundreds of warning letters around these patents. And in the last few weeks, we've seen companies delist these patents. And three out of the four major manufacturers have now said, within a couple of months, they're going to cap how much Americans pay to to to to to to to to to to to to to the the the the their their their their their their their their their their their their their their their their their their their their out of the four major manufacturers have now said, within a couple of months, they're going to cap how much Americans pay to just $35. So is it, is there game, like, so you being entrepreneurial, is their game, we're going to see how far we can push this and get away with it and do these different things in the hopes that we don't run up against an entrepreneurial or crafty FTC. Are they waiting you out? Look, it's possible, but that's why you

need to think about tactics that are going to be around deterrence. And so one big area of focus for us is understanding what is the root cause of these problems, right? Let's understand who is the mafia boss here rather than just going after the foot soldiers. Right. And I think you'd probably, there's probably a biblical sin in there that's probably the root cause of the whole thing. But I want to talk about the tech companies because they are the new oligarchs, it would seem. They are the companies that, and you, and you, and you, and you, and you, and you, and you, and you, and you, and the companies that and you see this especially

in Europe where they are fined considerable amounts of money for monopolistic practices or Apple just had to pay an enormous fine. Microsoft has always been you know found guilty of certain monopolistic practices when it comes along. How do you handle enforcement for these new, incredibly consolidated and enormous oligarchies? So we have a lawsuit against Amazon. We have another one against Facebook. What is the one against Facebook?

So that one was filed before I arrived at the agency, but basically it alleges that Facebook, when it was watching the transition from desktop to mobile, it realized it really couldn't survive in mobile. And so it ended up and buying out Instagram and WhatsApp, and the lawsuit alleges that those acquisitions were anti-competitive, that they violated the antitrust laws. That instead of competing organically, Facebook instead bought its way to maintaining its monopoly. Now why is that considered a model? Wouldn't they say, well, that's a sign of our success? We're so successful, we have extra money, and with that extra money, we make bets on certain companies, and we turn those into successes.

So look, one key tenet of the anti-monopoly laws is that you can't go out and buy one of your biggest competitors. Oh, you're not allowed to do to do to do to do to do to do to the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the their tho. tho. thi. tho. tho. tho. that. that. that. that. that. that. that. that. that's th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. thi. thi. thin. thin. thin. the. the. the the that's the that's that's that's that's s that's s that's s the that's s the thi. thi. thi. th... Oh, you're not allowed to do that. You're not allowed to do that, in fact. Can I tell you something crazy? So I had put in an offer for last week tonight. I had come out. Now, it wasn't... And I'm going to tell you something. And because it's Oliver, I offered to him in Dubloons. Is that what British people use?

Obviously I didn't take it. But you have to make the decision then of whether or not they are cornering the market. They used to call it cornering the market. But couldn't you say like Apple, Microsoft? They are kind of working together to corner markets, no? So look, we are investigating to understand whether some of the investments and partnerships that they're entering into right now in the AI space may in fact be giving them undue influence or giving them special privileges.

If we get any hint that there is actual collusion happening in the marketplace, we take that extraordinarily seriously and won't hesitate to take action. One trend that we're especially concerned about is the way that algorithms may be facilitating price fixing. And so if you have a whole bunch of competitors in a market, be at hotels, be at casinos, and they all decide they're going to outsource their pricing decision to the same algorithm, they may in effect be fixing their prices even if they're not getting in the back room and making secret deals.

If that would be like, if a hotel says, oh, you can get us on Expedia, or you can get us on, but all of those companies are using the same algorithm? Would that mean that it flattens those prices and you are not getting the competitive advantage that you might get from those 10 to 15 apps that are searching for the cheapest hotel rooms? Is that the idea? That's right. You may collectively see inflated prices because all of these companies are using the same algorithm. They're inputting the same algorithm, they're inputting the same data and that algorithm is an effect allowing them to collectively raise their prices so Americans are having to pay more.

And it's not just paying more. I mean, you could look at a company like Walmart where you would say, okay, they came in to areas and they dominated all the competition. They didn't buy up the mom and pop shops, but because they had accesseacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacaced their their their their their their their their their. their. their. their. their. their. their. their. their. their. their. their. their. their. their. their. their. their. their. their. their. their. their. their. their. their. their. their. their. their. their. their. their. their. And, their. And, their. And, their. And, their. And, their. And, their. their. their. their. their. their. their. their. their. their. their. t. t. t. t. t........................ And... And, the. And. And. And. And. And. And. And. And. And. the competition. They didn't buy up the mom and pop shops, but because they had access to cheap labor and overseas goods and those types of things, they could undersell them and put them all out of business. And even at that moment, they might not raise their prices, but boy could they, and boy could they exert their influence on supply chains, and boy could they depress wages and make sure that people, even if they're working work their theto have social assistance. Is that something that you could go after? Look, monopolies harm Americans in a whole bunch of ways. You're absolutely right that it's not just higher prices. Yes. It can be lower wages. It can be suppliers getting

muscled out of the market or seeing their own payments drop. It can also be shortages. I mean we've seen over their own payments drop, it can also be shortages. I mean we've seen over the last few years, baby formula, IV bags, Adderall. Adderall, basic forms. I see the audience has no use for baby formula, but has an interesting predilection. What do you do in that instance? So look, we want to understand, are there dominant players here that are using their muscle to coerce in ways that's contributing to shortages? We've also seen historically, when you concentrate production, that concentrates risk and so a single

disaster, a single contamination, a single shock can lead the entire supply to be wiped out. I mean the short of it is don't put all your eggs in one basket. And then you guys are the ones that have to separate the eggs. It's curious to me that the government wouldn't have other methods of working with these corporations to ask them to curb their excesses in exchange for what they get, which is the stability of the American system. So look we have a whole bunch of policies and laws in place that are actually designed to ensure our markets are more competitive and not

as subject to these massive shocks. Exactly. Right. That's the balance. But 40 years ago under President Reagan we've radically veered off course and undertook a much more hands-off approach and now we're living with the consequences of those decisions. Is industry more consolidated today? I mean my gut would tell me it is more consolidated. You have larger companies that swallow up in the pursuit of growth, swallow up and consolidate. It feels that way to me. Do you have the metrics that suggest that that's actually the case?

On the whole, yes. I mean, you always want to do a market-by-market analysis, but if you look at airlines, air air air air air air air air, you look at meat packers, if you look at, you know, huge parts of our economy, across the board you've seen huge waves of mergers. Less competitive. So you go from dozens of companies just to a very small number. And again, that hurts Americans and American communities in all sorts of ways and even leads to, for example, planes falling apart in the sky. Wait, what?

I was thought that was just, I always thought that was all just DEI. Are you telling me? This gets us to our final point. So now they're saying this new algorithm, this new kind of machine learning model called AI, that's going to transform every aspect of American life and the American economies. It's already being consolidated.

Apple has bought 30 AI models. Microsoft has probably bought Google has bought. They models, Microsoft has probably bought, Google has bought, they all buy AI startups and put them behind their paywall, and they're already having an arms race to see who will be either the monopoly or this will be in oligobly. I got to tell you, I wanted to have you on a podcast. And Apple asked us not to do it, to have you. They literally said, please don't talk to her.

Having nothing to do with what you do for a living, I think they just. I didn't think they cared for you is what happened. They wouldn't let us do even that dumb thing we just did in the first act on AI. Like, what is that sensitivity? Why are they so afraid to even have these conversations out in the public sphere? I think it just shows one of the dangers of what happens when you concentrate so much

power and so much decision making in a small number of companies. I mean, going back all the way to the founding, there was a recognition that in the same way that you need the Constitution to create checks and balances in our political sphere, you also needed the antitrust and anti-monopoly laws to safeguard against concentration of economic power because you don't want an autocrat of trade in the same way that you don't want a monarch.

But then it took them, I mean, it wasn't until the Sherman Act and what, 1890 something? I mean, when did they first decide? Was it the beginning of industrialization? When they finally decided like, oh, we it was absolutely a response to the Industrial Revolution and a lot of the power that that had concentrated. Can we just hold on for one second? Can you take the camera real quick? I want to take a single real quick if I can. I don't know which one. Let me take this one. I nailed that Sherman thing, didn't I? I'm out. Come on.

I came out of nowhere. I think I might have learned that in like ninth grade. Stuck. Has that been updated since 1890? So we had some follow-on laws in 1914, another follow-on in the 1950s, and then since then it's been a bit more sparse. So for the most part our lawsuits are still based on those laws going back a century. What would you posit, what would you put forth to control this new AI technology that is looming.

And I'm not talking about censorship. I'm not talking about government deciding, you can't say that or you can't print that. I'm talking about in terms of business practices, these few companies controlling the entire mechanism. Look, the first thing we need to do is be clear-eyed, that there's no AI exemption from the laws on the books. We see sometimes businesses try to dazzle enforcers by saying oh these technologies are so new they're so different

let's just take a hands-off approach and that's basically what ended up happening with Web 2.0 and now we're reeling from the consequences and so we need to make sure all of the... What was the good? Web 2.0 is? You know the rise of social media and you know in the early early to to to to to to thil. the the thiioll. the the th. the th. th. th. the thiol-a the thiol-s. thiol-s. thiol-s. toe. toe. toe. toe. toe. the the too. too. too. the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the thiol-s. th. thiol-s. thiol-s. the the the the the the the the. the. the. the. the. te. te. te.e.e.e.e.e.e.e.e.e.e.e.e.e.e.e.e.e.e.e.e.e.e.e. technology. the. the. the? Web 2.0 is? You know, the rise of social media. And, you know, in the early 2000s, the initial set of companies that ended up innovating, but ultimately becoming monopolistic, ultimately adopting business models that are premised on endlessly surveilling people. And so... And hoovering up data and creating algorithms that are clearly harmful, not just to children, but to political discourse. And it's pretty wild how they're able to do that. And every now and again, they get called in front of Congress.

And Mark Zuckerberg, you know, Doe-eyed goes like, like and subscribe. You know, I don't know. But it, are you, are you optimistic that we will be able to catch up to this in time before something truly catastrophic happens through AI? Well, look, there's no inevitable outcome here. We are the decision makers. And so we need to use the policy tools and levers that we have to make sure that

these technologies are proceeding on a tra and levers that we have to make sure that these technologies are proceeding on a trajectory that benefit Americans and were not subjected to all of the risks and harms. Right. Boy, would you stay forever? Because it's incredibly impressive what you're doing. Thank you so much. FTC Chair Lena Pond.

We're going to come to break. We'll be right back after this. The future of America. is in your hands. This is not a movie trailer and it's not a political ad, but it is a call to action. I'm Mila Atmos and I'm passionate about unlocking the power of everyday citizens. On our podcast, future hindsight, we take big ideas about civic life and democracy and turn them into action items for you and me. Every Thursday we talk to bold activists and civic innovators to help you understand your power and your power to change the status quo. Find us at Future Hindsight.com or wherever

you listen to check in with your host for the rest of this week, Desi Lydic. Dizzy! It's going to be good thing. Desi, what are you excited about this? Well, I don't mean to brag, but I've got a perfect NCAA bracket, women's and men's. Perfect. Perfect. Perfect. That's incredible. How's that even possible? Yeah, well, here's the key strategy that I've honed over many seasons.

See, I fill out the bracket after the games are played. That way I know who wins. And what will you be doing on the show this week? Well, John, I mean, that's impossible to say until after the shows have happened.. Perfect. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. Perfect. that. that. that. that. that. that. That. That. That's, that's, that's, that's, perfect. That's, perfect. That's, that's, that's, perfect. That's, that's that's that's, perfect. That's, perfect. That's, that's, perfect. That's, perfect. That's, that's, that's, perfect. That's, that's, that's, that's, perfect. That's, that's, perfect. That's, that's, that's. That's, that's. That's that's that's that's that's th. That's th. That's th. That's th. That's th. It th. It's th. It's th. It's th. It's th. It's th. It's th. It's th. It's that's th. It's that's that's thi. It's that's that's that's that's that's that's that John, I mean that's impossible to say until after the shows have happened. See, it's a strategy that works across the board. I can't wait to watch. Desilightic, everybody. Here it is the moment again. Boom! God bless you all. Enjoy the day.

And I'm coming down to do that Easter egg roll just a minute. Thank you all so very, very much. th. th. th. th. tha. tha. tha. tha. tha. tha. tha. tha. thi. thi. thi. thi. thi. thi. thi. thi. th. th. tho. th. tho. thi. thi. tho. tho. tho. tho. tho. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. tho. tho. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. to. to. to. to. to. to. to. to. to. to. to. to. to. to. to. And, to. to. to. to. to. to. to. to. to. to. to. to. to. that Easter egg roll just a minute. Thank you all very, very much. Thanks everybody. And by the way, say hello to Orister Bunnies. Come on up bunnies. Get up here as I can see it. Come on, get in there. Pretty big bunny, huh? Explore more shows from the Daily Show from the Daily Show. Wherever you get your podcasts. Watch the Daily Show Podcast Universe by searching the Daily Show, wherever you get your podcasts. Watch the Daily Show weeknights at 11, 10 Central on Comedy Central and stream full episodes anytime on Fairmount Plus. This has been a Comedy Central podcast. Survivor 47 is here, which means we're bringing you a brand new season of the only official

survivor podcast on fire and this season we are joined by fan favorite and survivor 46 runner-up Charlie Davis to bring you even further inside the action Charlie I'm excited to do this together. Thanks Jeff so excited to be here and I can't wait to bring you inside the mind of a survivor player for season 47. Listen to On Fire, the official Survivor podcast starting September 18th, wherever you get your podcast.