The Vergecast - OpenAI has a Studio Ghibli problem

Episode Date: March 28, 2025

In this episode, we do a Studio Ghibli-like rendition of The Vergecast. First, Nilay and David discuss some big news in the gadget world, from the mysteriously viral midrange Canon camera to the upgrades we're expecting out of Apple in the next few months. Plus, is it over for Amazon's Echo brand? After all that, The Verge's Kylie Robison joins the show to discuss everything happening at OpenAI: the company launched a new image generator inside of ChatGPT, and it immediately became both a huge hit and a big mess. (Par for the course with OpenAI, really.) Kylie also explains why Perplexity is probably not buying TikTok, no matter how much it might want to. Finally, in the lightning round, it's time for everyone's favorite segment, Brendan Carr Is a Dummy, followed by the latest on the Signal attack-planning chaos in the government, some news about Elon Musk pressuring Reddit CEO Steve Huffmann, and what's next for the car industry with huge tariffs looming. Oh, and a little bit of exciting e-bike news Further reading: From Meta: Bringing the Magic of Friends Back to Facebook Apple’s AirPods Max with USB-C will soon support lossless audio The Apple Watch may get cameras and Apple Intelligence Apple’s WWDC 2025 event starts June 9th Don’t expect an overhauled Messages app in iOS 19. Amazon tests renaming Echo smart speakers and smart displays to just ‘Alexa’  OpenAI reshuffles leadership as Sam Altman pivots to technical focus OpenAI upgrades image generation and rolls it out in ChatGPT and Sora ChatGPT’s new image generator is delayed for free users ChatGPT is turning everything into Studio Ghibli art  OpenAI says ‘our GPUs are melting’ as it limits ChatGPT image generation requests OpenAI expects to earn $12.7 billion in revenue this year. Nvidia Infinite Creative Microsoft adds ‘deep reasoning’ Copilot AI for research and data analysis Google says its new ‘reasoning’ Gemini AI models are the best ones yet Google is rolling out Gemini’s real-time AI video features Perplexity’s bid for TikTok continues Trump's FCC says it will start investigating Disney, too From Status: Sounding the Carr Alarm Trump officials leaked a military strike in a Signal group chat The Atlantic releases strike group chat messages And the Most Tortured Signal-Gate Backronym Award goes to… | The Verge Elon Musk pressured Reddit’s CEO on content moderation | The Verge Trump’s plans to save TikTok may fail to keep it online, Democrats warn Rivian spins out secret e-bike lab into a new company called Also BYD beats Tesla. Trump says he will impose a 25 percent tariff on imported vehicles Email us at [e-mail] or call us at 866-VERGE11, we love hearing from you. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Support for the show comes from Retool. Too many companies run critical operations on duct taped spreadsheets, Slack workflows, and whatever else they could cobble together. Not because they want to, but because building internal tools means weeks of waiting on someone else's backlog. That's where Retool comes in. Build custom internal tools just by describing what you need. Prompts something like,

Build Me a Revenue Dashboard on our Salesforce data. And Retool actually builds it on your company's data, in your cloud with enterprise security built in. Go to retool.com slash Verchcast. We all need to retool how we build software. What's up, y'all. I'm Skyler Diggins, seven-time WMBA All-Star, Olympic gold medalist, and mom. And I'm Cassidy Hubbard, host and reporter for nearly 20 years covering the biggest names and stories in sports and mom. And this is Am Mom, a community for athletes, game changers, and moms of all kinds.

dropping May 14th. Tap in with us. Do you ever wonder what's in your lotion? If you look at the back of the bottle, it could contain more than a dozen ingredients. And they may not all be regulated. The threshold is so high that only 11 cosmetic ingredients have been restricted by the FDA since 1938.

This week on Explain It to Me, the chemicals lurking in your cosmetics. New episodes, Sundays, wherever you get your podcasts. Hello and welcome to the Britschast, the flagship podcast, the viral cameras from five years ago. This is all made me feel really good because I have a, the only camera I have is from like 2012. It's a, it's a Sony A6,000 and it sucks. And I'm like, give it 18 more months and this is going to be the camera everybody wants. I'm your friend, Eli, David Pierce is here.

First of all, I want to point out that everyone thought I was going to make a joke about Signal, right? You all thought it. I said the flagship podcast of and you all thought of something, right, adding someone who, to do a group chat. You all thought it. And I went another way. And I just want to take the credit for that. We're going to talk about Signal later in the show. Do you have any good I've been added to a group chat? Stories? I have a good. I didn't know how deleting a message worked. So like I, this is a long time ago. Actually, this is a really good story. Okay. A long time ago, the night before Uber fired Travis Kalanick from this from being the CEO. Do you remember this? There's like a big. deal. Everyone heard about it. I can't. I got a message from, let's just say, a dancer. And the dancer said, there's a VC crying in my lap right now because they're going to fire Travis Kalanick. Whoa. And I had, what am I going to do with this? Like, right? I'm like, this is weird. I don't know. Can you take a picture? Like, this is a true story. A hundred percent true story. And so I went to Slack or transportation under Andy Hawkins being like, I think.

dudes, I think it's going to happen. Like, here's, we, all this noise is happening. And I just got this insane message. And in the middle of that, I accidentally texted her what I meant to text Andy. And I went to delete it. And it doesn't, it didn't delete. Right? Because it deletes, like, locally so you can hide your cheating from, like, your wife.

But the person who got the message to last. I thought I was being so smart. I was like, oh, I deleted it. And later, like, the person was like, did you, please don't, please don't, please don't my name in this way. It's like, I don't have the story. It's all years later. We did not have the story. At a single source, the next morning it turned out to be true. But, you know, we have standards here. We need multiple sources to run a story of that nature. So I knew it in the next morning. I was like, God damn it. Does our ethics policy cover how many dancers have to corroborate

the VC crying in their lap before it's for portable journalism? This was also, this was happening, like, it's 7 p.m. East Coast time. Right? So it was like I had to, I had to call. Like, everyone was home. So like, I need you to walk away from your children. I need to tell you a story about a text again. He was like, what are you talking?

So he chased it for a while. And then the next morning he happened. And I was like, I should have done something that I couldn't forget what to do. That's my, that's my texting fail story. What's yours? I like that. I don't really have a good one, to be honest.

I have, I've had a lot of very near misses. most of mine are actually more dangerous in Slack than in messages where in Slack everything looks the same and I have sent I have almost sent like truly alarming things to the person I was talking shit about and I don't think I have ever actually done it and it's a real like there but for the grace of God kind of situation watching all of this unfold like is it is it out of the realm of possibility that I have accidentally invited the editor-in-chief of the Atlantic to a group chat, it's not. But luckily, I never have this. The thing that gets me the most often is clipboard fails, where I hit, I paste and I hit return, like, before I verify that I paste is the thing I want to paste. And that happens to me all the time. Like, just random sentences from old documents or show up and stuff. For me, it's always, it's always a, it's always a link I didn't mean to post. Like, I copied the wrong tab out of Chrome instead of the right one. And so I'm like, hey, here's a cool thing we should do.

And then it's just like a weird, like, cheat code for a video game that I should not be thinking about at work. It's good times. This happens to me all the time with TikTok, which is my segue. Ooh. Okay. Right. Because I'm always like, I want to share TikTok, but I always have to double check. It's not a totally bananas TikTok.

Right. There's a real, like, you have to watch the whole thing through just in case. Yeah. Is this creator secretly like a milkshake duck situation? It's like a real thing. So here's the mystery I want to start with, which explains the joke at the top of the show. Yeah. My TikTok feed for the past three days has just been people talking with the Canon G7X Mark 3. And this, to me, this is a gadget mystery. So the Canon G7X Mark 3 is a camera from 2019.

It's just old. It is an old camera. Oh, I remember this camera. Yeah. It's just, it's a G7. Like it, you know, there's the RX 100, which I talk about on the show all the time because I have one. And its competitors, sort of the G7X, but like they're different. It's got a pop-up-up flash. It's fun, yeah. This thing is apparently mega-popular with influencers and people want to take better pictures. They are all taking flash photos with it, which is bonkers, but that's what they're doing. And it is selling out every day.

Like, I have gotten TikTok videos from people who are like, here's how to get a G7X Mark 3 or even a Mark 2, which is even older. And the answer is like, wait up until 5 a.m. until Target. It restockes its online story, like a PS5 drop. Wow. So we've assigned this story. The Virgin team, I think it's Allison Johnson's like working on what, what's happening here. Like, why is the G7X Mark 3?

A camera, again, from 2019, why is it going viral and why isn't Canon making enough of them? The second question, I think, is super fascinating. The macro mystery of this is pretty straightforward, right? This, like, resurgence in digital cameras and point-and-shoots in particular is a thing, right? We're in this very, like, turn of the century nostalgia moment

in so much of culture and, like, crappy pre-instagram photos are, like, the thing everybody wants, which is very funny because they're bad, but that is, like,

there's something in that look that a lot of people are after. And so we've talked about this before with, like, there was a run on, like, the Nikon Cool Picks from 2004 for a long time. But it's very weird

that it's this particular camera. Yeah. The Nikon Coolpix is like very cheap. This is an $800 camera normally. And right now the secondary market or the demand for it is so high that on Amazon it's like over $1,000. Well, that's the thing. It's weird that it's like this would actually make more sense to me if this camera was from 2009 than from 2019. Do you know what I mean?

Like it's it doesn't satisfy the this is a sort of pre-internet digital camera and that's fun to play with with my high school friends. it's also too expensive. And like for $1,500, you can buy a way better camera than the G7X. Like, do not let TikTok lie to you. You can do much, much better than a G7X Mark 3. So it is, it's very strange to me that it is this camera in particular that people are obsessed with. It is a phenomenon. Yeah.

Oh, it really is. We looked at an unboxing TikTok that has almost a million likes of a five-year-old camera. And this unboxing was just recently posted. So I don't know what's going on. If you know what's going on, this is a gadget mystery. So we're reporting on it. We're going to talk to people who are using it and figure out if Target is actually restocking like six G7X mark 3s at 5am every morning, which would be just deeply hilarious. So we're poking at it.

If you know anything or you have one or you're, you know, just like foaming at the mouth trying to get a five-year-old camera, like let us know. Hit up the hotline. Send us an email. Like I'm sort of very curious about it because you're right. Sometimes old gadgets come back. and certainly cameras go through these waves, right? Like X-100's, this is a thing. Like, it's hard to get them.

But those are kind of bleeding edge. They're hard to manufacture. This is a five-year-old camera that can't just be able to fart out at will. And if memory serves, this was not like a set the world on fire kind of camera. Like the X-100 makes sense to me, right? That is like an unusual camera with a particular style

that people really gravitate to. Like that I fully understand. Even like the RX-100 was like, like the first of this kind of thing. And so it got a lot of shine for it. And they've had, God, what, seven or eight revs of that thing since? Like, I honestly think I think one of the answers why the Canon is succeeding right now is it's impossible to understand which RX100 to buy.

They sell all of them at once. And then the ZV ones also exist right next to them, which are the same camera in a shittier case for cheaper with better video features. And none of that makes sense to anyone. And the only differences between like the four and the five and the six and the seven is like focal lengths of lenses. And so, like, any normal person just, like, looks at the available set of RX-100s. And I was like, nope.

And then someone's like, have you thought about the G7XMarch? And it's like, right there. You're like, thank God I'll have it. Yeah. This is way simpler than whatever Sony's doing. Anyway, it's a mystery. It, I will, I drove our team crazy with this mystery this week because I was like, why is this camera going viral?

And everybody had all these reactions. But we're going to do it. We're going to figure out the story. Let us know. It's like a culture story. It's not a text story. So there is, I should just say, before we move on, that like, there's a sort of truism and journalism that, like, news is whatever

your editor cares about that day. There's a real thing that happens in our Slack in particular where Neli will just parachute in after hanging out on TikTok for an hour and be like, the kids are into this. What's that about? And it brings up some of my very favorite stories that we do. As you can imagine, my TikTok for you algorithm is ludicrous. It's like trucks jumping over stuff. We're doing a story on like AI image enhancers. So now it's just weird AI porn that makes me feel bad about myself. Like, literally, like, we've done searches for some of these tools that are available, and I'm just sending some of the worst shit in the world to the song.

So that's really bad. And then it's, like, like, five-year-old cameras that have gone viral. I need to reset. Maybe they're going to ban it in time for me to regain some semblist of identity. Yeah, what you need is for it to go dark, new algorithm, new Neli, just start it all over. I want to be a different person. I'd like to get back to Trump's jumping over stuff, please. That feels good.

It's gone. All right, there's actual gadget news this week, not just five-year-old mysteries. What's sort with Facebook, which is also in an identity crisis? Have I told you my deepest theory of meta as a company right now? No. Which is Mark Zuckerberg just desperately wants to be Elon Musk. Oh, interesting. Right?

Like, Elon has everything Mark wants. Like, he's got the president. He gets to say stuff whatever he wants and people are scared of him. He's got fans, like actual fans. He's the Rockets and Cars guy, whether you like the Rockets and Cars or not. Like, some people perceive him to be deeply evil and some people perceive him to be ruling the world. And Mark Zuckerberg just has, like, a gold chain and mostly people yelling at him. And I don't think he has the other set of things.

That's interesting. And he is, I mean, it's a funny segue into Facebook because, like, Going all the way back to the beginning of Facebook, Mark Zuckerberg has always been, like, big and powerful, but never cool. Like, even when Facebook ruled the world, Twitter was cooler. It was, like, culturally central in a way that Facebook never was. Twitter was cooler. Instagram was cool, but Instagram had distance. Yeah.

And I, weirdly, I don't think people associate Mark with Instagram the same way. Like, do you remember, this was years ago at this point, so I'm sure it's different now, but there was a pretty strong subset of people. in a study that they did that had no idea that Facebook owned Instagram. Oh, yeah, we did that. We did that. That was us. Oh, that was us. There you go. Cool. Ages ago. It's a good study. Love that. But that is like, I don't think, I don't think he got the shine from Instagram in the way that he would have wanted to. And so, and there was a minute where he was like, he thought threads was going to make him

really shiny. And then he was like, I'm going to be a personality. And then Elon Musk just ate all of that airspace completely out away from him. That's a good theory. I feel like if I mark, I want that less and less every single day. But I don't know. The baggage of that is enormous, right? Yeah. But you kind of look at a bunch of these moves. We'll talk about what they're doing with Facebook, the blue app proper.

But you're like, oh, man, a lot of this is like positioning him as an inventor or like the product person, not the guy who just steals all the ideas from Snapchat. All right. What are they doing with Facebook? So it was, was it last? fall or earlier this year that Mark first was like, we want to get back to OG Facebook. We want to bring back the thing that makes Facebook great, which is people hanging out with their friends. That was a long time ago. I'm not sure that was ever actually what made Facebook great. But that was like, that is the perception of old Facebook. And they're making the first

turn of that now, which is essentially they've added a tab to Facebook. So far, at least for me, it's just in the mobile app, not on the website. that is just your friends. And it gets rid of all of the other, you know, publications and AI slap and all of the, like, recommended crap that is all over everybody's feeds now and is designed to just be, it's literally called a Friends tab.

And it is designed to just be the people you are friends with on Facebook. Which for me is a very funny experience because none of my friends on Facebook are still using Facebook except the people who need it for, like, branding reasons. Yeah. Like, it's, if you want to, like, be an influencer on Facebook, you keep posting to Facebook. So I have a few friends who are like outing themselves

with like many, you know, large albums of photos of them and their family at Disney World. But other than that, my friend's tab is totally dead. But this is like, this is the first turn in, I think, trying to make Facebook in particular the thing it was a long time ago. And I'm just not convinced A, that's going to work. And B, that's even possible.

Like it just feels like we've left that idea of like I'm hanging out with my friends on a social network. We left that behind a long time ago, didn't we? I think we did. But this is, by the way, I'm going to relate this to Elon. Elon made X into whatever cesspool it is, but it is very influential in its tiny sphere. I actually believe that X is less influential outside of its sphere. Like, it used to be influential in culture.

It used to be influential in sports media. Used to be influential in tech. Now it's kind of influential in mega politics. and that's it. But it is very influential in that world. It is. It is expanded its influence in one way and reduced it in another way and that's a trade. And you can have a lot of feelings by that trade. And I certainly do. But it is a trade. You can just look at it and evaluate it however you want. But people are posting to it. Right. Like that's still a thing that's happening. Yeah. Like people are posting to it. They're sharing stuff. It is not a creator platform.

And like it has creator platform dynamics. It doesn't have any revenue. So it's like it hasn't been gamed quite in that way. Facebook is turned into a creator platform. This is what you're saying about people acting like influencers on it. Like it's all pages. Most of the individual activity happens in groups.

Like every school, every parent's group at every school is on Facebook in groups. And no one's just like posting the regular stuff. And so this turned back to, I just want people to share with their friends is like it's a product decision. But it's also a where do you post decision?

Like where should this stuff live and I I I you get the sense that like if Facebook turns into Yahoo email lists that's the end of that you know like yeah if it's just where people go to complain about their car like I'm in a lot of car groups on Facebook and it's just people being like the tires fell off my car right does have anyone else and that's the thing Facebook I think is is desperately trying to rectify here right like groups is still hugely successful marketplace by all accounts is hugely successful but the like core Facebook thing is just kind of gone. And I feel like for me,

I think I'm me plus like plus or minus four years, I would say. So like sort of our age range and a little younger was like that was the Facebook generation. Right. Like there are albums that I posted that are just like 125 pictures of me drunk because I took every picture on my camera and put it on Facebook and tagged all my friends. And that was like peak Facebook. that's gone. Like, we learned the hard way that that is a terrible way to interact online with our friends and that there are all kinds of problems that come with that.

And that, like, the whole idea of sort of harmless low stakes hanging out with your friends on Facebook is just wrong. Younger generations never learned that in the first place, right? Like, they gravitated to Snapchat because stuff disappears because it doesn't stick around because it is this, like, ephemeral thing. Group chat to become really important. Like, to me, the very idea. of like posting what I'm doing that day on Facebook so my friends can see it just feels weird now. Like I don't, that muscle is gone and I don't think it's ever coming back for people. And that's why you remember by just like turning this product knob, like wanting to be influential in this specific way.

You can see that it's getting away from. Like threads is not that platform. They lost to blue sky in a very little while. They have a much bigger number more people are using it because it's juiced against their entire graph. But like, blue sky is where a whole conversation is happening. X is where a whole conversation is happening. Instagram is a creator platform. I know lots of regular people who just do stories or whatever,

but the vast majority of the content is creators doing stuff that gets shared into a group chat or a DM, and then that's the action there. So you just see like, oh, these platforms are really big, but they're losing influence in a very specific way. And I'm telling you, there's jealousy there that I think is, you can just see it. He really needs the metaverse to work.

Yeah. No, I buy it. And I think what's weird about Facebook is, it seemed like Facebook's fate was to be sort of the overall repository for everything, right? Like you make a reel on Instagram and it accrues back to Facebook and becomes a thing. But you didn't make it for Facebook. Yeah. Threads posts show up on Instagram and Facebook. So it was like Facebook became this thing with a huge kind of unengaged user base that is doing other stuff on the platform and then you just show them a bunch of content.

And that, it's not an exciting product, but as a product strategy actually kind of makes sense to me. And so the only reason I can think that this friend's thing is so important is because it's important to Mark for exactly the reasons you're describing. It's like it is the thing people like about Facebook. Yeah. Not the thing that people tolerate in order to get to marketplace. And like, especially as they continue to promote AI stuff all over the feed, they continue to juice engagement and publish our stuff like. that they have to have something that people like about being on Facebook, or it's just going to keep getting worse.

And it really does feel like this is Mark in particular saying, this is what I want back. It's like that he is nostalgic for this thing, so he can build it into Facebook. I can't wait to start posting AISLop to all my friends. I'm just going to AI generate some new children. Here they are. First day of school for my AI generated baby.

That would do numbers. Huge engagement. Did I mention this last week? Last week, there was the Nvidia conference we talked about a little bit, And there was one segment in it that I think will form the basis of yet more editor-in-chief assigning stories in Slack because you saw it. Oh, goody. But Nvidia is part of their conference, demoed this thing that I've been calling Infinite Creative. I think they actually titled it Infinite Creative.

So, ad agencies make Creative, right? That's what Mad Men does. They're like, here's an ad. Like, here's the creative of an ad. And the creative of mad is, like, made of components. It's made of photos of the product. It's made of tagline and copy. and then there's targeting, right?

So like you send it, you open Facebook ads manager, and you're like 18 to 35 year old men who like shampoo, get them, right? Like it shows people those ads. Nvidia demoed infinite creative. So they AI generate the shampoo bottle, then they AI generate the copy, the AI generate the tagline, the AI generate the photo shoot of the shampoo bottle,

and then they, when you say target these people, it starts remixing all of the elements in an infinite way until it starts converting. So everyone gets their own ad. And if you thought AI slop on Facebook was bad now, wait until there's real money behind it. And it's already here. This is why these big companies, like Google and meta in particular, are chasing AI video generation so hard. Right. Because that's the promise is as you're scrolling, an AI generated video ad will pop up that's perfectly targeted to you.

and then you will buy the shampoo. I wonder a lot about whether that actually becomes the thing that sort of viscerally turns everybody against ad targeting. Because until now it's been like, you know, we're going to serve you better ads. And I think until now it's been, are you listening to me? Well, fair. But like the promise of ad targeting is we will send you an ad for something you want instead of something you don't, right? Which is fine. I don't think people actually want that,

but like if you're going to serve me an ad, serve me a good one, sure. But the idea of like an ad coming up in my feed that's like, hey, David, do you want these shoes? That's, it's coming. Frightening. And like that, that makes a thing plain to people in a way that I think has not been clear. Like, that is all the data about me that you have being spoken aloud to me. And that feels really different from, oh, this ad is a thing I like. Yeah.

Do you know what I mean? It connects different neurons somehow. in a way that I think might backfire. I would just argue that it already has. Ad targeting either works so well that you think Mark Zuckerberg is listening to you, or it works so poorly that it shows you an ad for something you've already bought. There's no middle grad. That's everyone's experience with advertising today, right?

And most people think Mark Zuckerberg is listening to you. And it's like, well, not really, because you bought those shoes, and he was like, show him more shoes. I don't think he's listening to you closely enough. But sure, like, he's listening to you. This is going to turn the he's listening knob all the way. Yeah, that's fair. All the way up to not only is you listening to me, he's talking back to me. Right. Mark Zuckerberg is in my house.

Yeah. And maybe, you know, and you make all the arguments for why they're not listening. Like, Apple would never allow it. It's actually easier to do the data fusion about what Wi-Fi network you were on at what time and what location. because you're not as special as you think, which is really the core argument to they're not listening to you is you're not as special as you think you are.

Like every other 18-year-old in this city Googled these shoes at this time. We just guessed that you probably did too. And that's the heart of the argument is it's simpler to guess and be right some of the time. This is going to be something else entirely. Yeah.

All the cost curves have, but Nvidia did demo Infinite Creative. TikTok has demoed variations on Infinite Creative. creative. It's coming. And I think some of this push to do friends again is very much we need more surface area for these experiments that is out of the creators in. They need people to look at their feeds again. And if I'm in, if I'm in marketplace and groups, I'm not looking at my feeds. That's like it's a real thing. It's coming. It's, uh, I think we're going to do a lot of stories in this stuff over the coming year, but you, well, I'll, I'll put a link to this TikTok in the show notes. How's that? Just like, everyone.

else can experience the absolute insanity of my TikTok feed, we'll do it in the show notes. By 2027, we're going to have a version of this podcast that is individualized to every single person who listens to it. That is the dream. Sick. That's our final subscription to you.

For $5 million a year, David will just call you. Does it make you a podcast? All right, there's actual gadget news, some little stuff, a bunch of Apple stuff, really. AirPods Macs with USBC, they're updating it to support losses. audio, which is way overdue, like way, way overdue, and they're going to cut some latency down. I have no idea why this took so long.

It is a strange one. And the AirPods Macs, for me, kind of goes in the category of products that Apple seems to forget about for years at a time. It's like the Mac Pro, the AirPods Max, the iPad Mini. It's just like every 18 months the company forgets it exists. And it's like, oh, crap, we should do something with that. And here we are. But yeah, this one, they put back wired.

playback through USBC. When they switched to the connector, they dropped wired playback, which I had forgotten about and was so weird at the time. You just couldn't play audio over a wire. Like, just weird stuff. But now that's back, so that's good. And like you said, super low latency stuff. And when we were hearing rumblings about there maybe being an announcement along

these lines, I was like, oh, my God, are we going to get new AirPods Macs? I want them, and that's very exciting. And what's interesting about this is this suggests to me that, Apple is pretty happy with the hardware of the AirPods Macs. And it's like this, this is very much like a meaningful software update on top of a piece of hardware. They have no intention of updating imminently. So I want to be clear, the lossless audio is only if you use the cable. Oh, yeah, that's true.

And so you get 24-bit, 48 kilohertz, lossless audio. You get personalized spatial audio. Musicians can now mix in it using these headphones. But you have to use the cable. Which is wild because Apple owns their Bluetooth stack. They own the chips on both sides of this. These headphones cost $550. What are we doing?

Yeah. What are we doing? Did you also see, the real reason I wanted to talk about it is I wanted to see if you had seen the new USBC to 3.5 millimeter cable that Apple is selling? It's very nice. It's $40. Yep. So for $40, you can approximate having a headphone jack again. Congratulations to you.

And it is, it is 1.2 meters, which is what, like four feet? You can just have a four foot long adapter cable. I think this is just for airplanes, right? Isn't that this is just for plugging into the seat back thing? No, this is the thing you need for everything, for all these new features. So you're going to plug this on your Mac and do lossless, personalized spatial audio mixing. Okay. I'm calling this right now.

iPhone 17, headphone jack is back. Yeah. There was an entire like blue sky kerfuffle about the headphone jack being in shittification. I was like, like, I wrote about this to the iPhone 7. Like, this has always been what's coming. They've compressed the audio and now pendulum swing back and people are like, what if my music sounded good? And the answer is Dongletown. That's just the way it goes. And it's weird. And the bad thing happened. I made a prediction when I wrote that piece, taking the headphone jack off of phones as you draw on stupid, which Apple. Apple. hate it at the time. I want to be very clear about this. One of your better headlines. It was. It was very direct. But my prediction was that we get DRM audio where only approved headphones would work with certain streaming services. That did not happen. What did happen is arguably weirder and worse, which is that every phone works best with the headphones from the same company. Right. So pixel buds work best with the pixel. Galaxy buds work best with your

Samsung phone. AirPods work best with your Apple phone. And then they all have weird proprietary extensions like special audio head tracking. And that is arguably worse than here are some headphones that have the DRM trip for Spotify. And we're all, maybe it's not. Maybe it maybe it's all jeeply bad. But that I got my prediction wrong in that way. But the thing happened where a headphone market contracted.

Yeah. And now everyone's kind of has ecosystem locking on headphones. Yeah. It is just purely platform based now, which is a weird outcome in a lot of ways. Speaking of ecosystem lock-in, there's some Apple Watch rumors, what's going on here?

So we've been talking a lot about AI gadgets in general, and a thing that Allison Johnson keeps floating to me is that actually the AI gadget that should exist is the Apple Watch. Like, that's the one. Forget the humane pin, forget the Rabbit, just make a smart watch that does AI things. And it turns out Apple appears to agree with that.

I think it was over the weekend, Mark Kerman at Bloomberg reported, that Apple is trying to put visual intelligence and thus cameras inside of the Apple Watch in the next two years. And I think I actually need you to help me visualize this because the way he reported it is on the regular models, the camera is going to be inside of the display, which I would assume means it's pointing kind of up off your wrist. But then on the ultra, it's going to be on the side between, I guess, the crown and the action button, which would indicate that it's pointing out the side of the watch.

So I've been spending all week trying to figure out, like, what is this thing going to be looking at and how are you going to use it? But I'm, like, there's a real, uh, energy within Apple, it appears to figure out how to put cameras both in your watch and in your AirPods as a, as a like visual intelligence AI input system. The AirPods one kind of makes sense to me, right? Like you just, you just put a camera here. It faces this way.

Like you have the sort of Rayban meta. visual and that makes sense. This one I can't quite wrap my mind around. Like I get the idea. I just don't get how you do it in the product. Or like truly where it goes. Like fundamentally. Yeah.

What is it looking at? If you're wearing a watch, be like you're going to. Yeah. It really is like an old school like Dick Tracy kind of thing where you're just, you're going to hold it up and like shoot lasers at the side of your watch. And then if you do the face, you're always kind of a. This is, yeah. Looking at stuff.

And then where is the shutter button near it? you've got a weird problem there. Can you just imagine like we're two years away from just walking around to just like shoving our wrist in people's faces being like, look at this. I don't even use, I know a lot of people who do use Apple Wallet on their watches and they're just like beep. And I find that to be awkward and I use my phone all the time. I get it. Like if you've got a big wearable and you've got your own proprietary Bluetooth link back to a phone with a big battery or a bigger battery, more processing power. It makes sense to have this thing be the thing.

I don't know. I don't know why you would put a camera on it. I think it would. Unless you want it to be totally separate from the phone, which runs directly into a classic of the David Pierce genre, which is when you profiled that Apple Watch were wired, and you said its goal was to get away from the phone. Yeah.

And Apple basically yelled and said that wasn't true. Mm-hmm. Yeah. They told me on the record it was true. And then told me off on the record it wasn't true. But like this has been the problem with the watch forever. Like can it be independent of the phone? And maybe AI is the thing that makes it independent of the phone.

Maybe. But I also think I think one of the other stories of the Apple Watch is another thing that I reported in that story that Apple hated, which is that they decided to build a watch way before they decided why to build a watch. And I think you still see that in the watch. Like they figured out one thing. This is a health device. But that has a ceiling for both what they can like literally do scientifically and the number of people who are going to be interested in it. So you need another thing if you want this thing to sort of continue to grow and become a huge business, which it obviously already is.

Now the bet obviously is that it's an AI thing. And you you either need a ton more processing inside of it, which is very hard to do in a watch. Or you need some new input thing that it can do. And I think that's how you get to, oh, the way we do this. is to make it a camera somehow. Or you give it AI voice Siri, you know, the thing that's going really well for Apple. Yeah, the thing that's currently confusing

this entire industry. Honestly, if Siri were good, it would have solved an enormous number of problems like this for Apple. Because the watch would have been much closer to the thing that Apple originally wanted it to be if Siri was good, because you would have been able to do stuff on your watch and thus not do it on your phone, which was the goal. Yeah, you run into that serious problem.

Also, you probably have to wear headphones all the time. Right. It's like the combo platter of AirPods and an Apple Watch replaces your phone. Is a dream, I think they've hinted at, right? You get some AR glasses in the mix there. That's a lot of stuff. It is a lot of stuff. You know, on the chart of wearable bullshit.

That's a lot of gizmos to care for that does not necessarily deliver more value than having a giant phone. Right. In case you're wondering, Neelai's theory of wearable bullshit is that you have a Y axis that's fiddly. and an x-axis that's like value, like utility,

I change the axes every time we talk about this. And you have a huge penalty for a face on fiddliness. And so regular glasses are like a perfect device. You don't have to care for them a lot, a little bit, you have to care for them. But they're so valuable, they overcome the it's on your face penalty.

And then the Apple Watch had to curve up. It wasn't useful enough at the beginning. And now it's, pretty useful. You don't have to care for a lot because it's battery lasts a long time. And the Vision Pro is all the way at the bottom where it's really fiddly, has an external battery pack, it doesn't have enough apps, it's on your face, and it doesn't do a lot. It is the most penalty. Yeah. And like, many people have sent us variations on this chart. Please, by all means, send us where you think the combo platter of Apple Watch plus AirPods plus glasses lives compared to phone.

Because you just see that math does a map. Yeah. So I just reviewed the light phone three this week. And we shouldn't talk about it. I'm going to talk about it a bunch with Allison next week. But one of the things that kept striking me in the course of doing this is like, intellectually, I would like to use my phone less.

But then every time I am given a thing that would maybe make me use my phone less, I'm like, you know what he kicks ass is my phone? Like, my phone is so good at so many things. It's a real problem for this whole industry. Yeah. And, like, would I like to do some of those things less? Yeah. But I still want to do it.

I still want to look at Reddit sometimes. Yeah. The screen is really big in this internet connection is pretty fast. Yeah. It's a real problem. The camera is pretty good. Speaking of Apple, WWC was announced. It starts June 9th.

We're expecting a big overhauled iOS. There's some notion that, I don't know, instead of squares, will have circles for icons. Yeah. Speaking of the Vision Pro. Arrowglass will finally come to iOS. I will say two old head internet references that we've made in the last couple of weeks. One was Aero Glass on Windows.

We got like an email or two from people who are like, oh, I remember that. And then just offhandedly a drinking out of cups references. And we got an absolute outpouring of support from people who were like, that you are my people drinking out of cups. It was amazing. Many people in YouTube comments, Rick, I'd love to get this joke. What?

And I, the video doesn't hold up. It was funny to watch again, but if you've never seen it, it won't be funny. Yeah. Like, it's an old video. You can Google it. It's an animated. I'm not even going to explain it. Whatever.

It's just, if you were drunk with your friends at a particular moment in inner history, this was the funniest thing you'd ever seen in your life. 100%. And that DNA, I think, is shared with a great many Vergecast listeners. Yes. Johnny Hammersticks over here. But on the WWDC front, it seems like

there's been a bunch of hype about a huge redesigned iOS 19 and I would say every little bit we learn about it makes it seem like a less and less huge redesign all the time. It's just going to be slightly glassier and that'll be it.

Well, I mean, this is what, three months away? Right? Yeah. Not even. Two months away? Think about all the things that aren't going to get paid off at this WBC. Apple Intelligence with Smart Siri, not going to get paid off at this WBC. Like, we already know. They've announced it.

Next generation car play, 50 years after they announced it. Yep. Not going to get paid. Last year, they were insistent. Like, this is happening. Like, big car companies were meant to, like, didn't happen. Porsche, which actually did announce it, not hasn't shipped a car yet, with the next generation car play.

Still not paid off. What are they going to say? In two months is will there will they be an auto industry in America? Who knows? But it's not there. Then iOS is conceptually, if you're reorienting it around Apple Intelligence, what are you going to pay off? Right. Even marketing these phones is having Appleintosh.

Like, I think there's a lot of pressure. And then you've got just angry developers in general, right? Like, this has been the story forever. So I'm curious to see what they say actually, WBC. Yeah. It's very funny because last year, right about now, there was this sense of, okay, Apple has not talked enough about AI. AI is the thing.

It's all anybody wants to talk about. But we know WWDC is coming and it's going to be the time Apple takes its big swing and sort of announces the perfect productization of AI. And Apple, like, attempted to do that. And here we are. And I think this time Apple is coming into it on its back foot in a way that it is not accustomed to, that Apple is going to have to explain itself. in a way that it is not used to having to explain itself.

And it's not going to because that's just not what Apple does. Apple is better than any company on Earth at just pretending everything is fine and posting through it. But that is where it is right now. Like this, at some point, it is going to have to look people in the face and be like, hey, remember that Siri thing we told you about? That one's on us.

Yeah, sign up for App Intense, where we commoditize your app for product doesn't work. Well, see. Speaking of AI and agents, we're kind of waiting on next generation Alexa to hit. It's like any minute now. And then there's a rumor that Amazon will rename the entire echo line to just Alexa. What do you think of this? I've been thinking about this for like two days now since Gen 2, we first saw this and I think got a tip about it and wrote a story.

And some people on our team were seeing Alexa. Like when you go to the Amazon listing, we're seeing Alexa show. other people are seeing Echo Show. What do you think of that switch? They just go full-on Alexa, everything. I think they should go full-on Alexa everything. I kind of think so, too. It's the name of the platform.

The argument was always that Alexa's Windows, and then you have this ecosystem of products that run Alexa, and Amazon's products would be called Echo. Even just explaining it, that sounds stupid. Right. It was not the right idea. And no one knows the difference. No one's like, I better buy an Echo and not a Lenovo.

voice operated Alexa bot. Well, I think the other part of it is that stuff never really materialized. Like, there isn't a giant third-party universe of Alexa speakers. Like, they just are echoes. Because Alexa is not useful enough. Right. Just to be to, to hammer that home that never took off because Alexa itself was never useful enough.

Like, uh, when carmakers are like, there's Alexa integration in the dash. It's like, why? To do what? Uh, set a timer in my car. Like, I'm not doing that. Maybe play music. but you don't need Alexa to do all that. Like the promise of this brand name hasn't meant anything.

Now it means something or it's supposed to mean something, which is all this agentic AI, actual assistant stuff. And I think you need to reclaim that. Because I don't think they're going to run this new Alexa on third-party devices the way they were in the past. I think they want you to buy a screen. Like Panos has said, I want you to buy an Alexa show.

And then there's going to be new hardware. And I think you got to, that's the brand. Yeah. No, I think that's right. And it actually, it makes a lot of sense to me, too, because I think I would bet most people who own an echo device don't know that it's called an echo device. It's just, it's the Alexa. That's how almost everyone I know who has one of these refers to it as it's the Alexa. You don't talk to your Dell, XPS 500 Alexa bot?

What was the Harmon Cardin one that had that was good stuff? I mean, we'll see. The new Alexa is going to start hitting. if you have access to us, let us know. We're everyone on our team is sort of like, are you useful now? Like, we'll find out. But this is a make or break.

If this stuff doesn't work, if it's not more useful than the current Alexa, I think we're going to learn a lot about how useful any of these will be. Yeah, agreed. Just down the line, including Siri. But if Amazon can't pull it off on this turn, I think we'll learn a lot about what the industry is able to do as a whole and on what timeline.

Yeah. If anyone can pull it off right now, at least based on what we understand about the way these companies are approaching it, it seems like it ought to be Amazon. Like, Amazon is doing these things the way that seems most likely to produce success. So if it's gone wrong, it's kind of like maybe it just doesn't work. Yeah. And there's 50-50 shot, as David in particular has reminded me over and over again. Every bit of evidence we've heard says this thing sucks. I hope we're, it's like, it's, I, we have, I like to remind people occasionally that it's more fun when things are good.

Yeah. Especially with all of these new gadgets, it's so much more fun when they're good. And like, I really hope the new Alexa is awesome, both as like a person who uses it and a person who gets to talk about it. But boy, have we been burned a bunch of times in a row by this stuff. All right. That's a good time to take a break. We're going to come back with Kylie Robison, so we can talk about Open AI. See, it's a good segue.

We'll be right back. Support for this show comes from Shopify. Starting something new isn't just hard. It can be really scary, too. So much work goes into this thing that you're not entirely sure will even work. But here's a better thought. What if it did all work? What if your instincts were actually right all along?

Shopify wants to help you get there. They're the commerce platform behind millions of businesses worldwide and nearly 10% of all e-commerce in the U.S. from established brands like Allbirds and Hines to companies just getting started. Their design tools make it simple to create the exact online presence you're envisioning with hundreds of ready-to-use templates available. And with built-in marketing tools,

you can launch full email and social campaigns in just a few clicks. So you can connect with customers wherever they are. It's time to turn those what-ifs into with Shopify today. You can sign up for your $1 per month trial today at Shopify.com slash vergecast. You can go to Shopify.com slash vergecast.

That's Shopify.com slash vergecast. Support for the show comes from LinkedIn. If you're a small business owner, you know that every hire counts, but time and resources are limited. Finding, connecting with, and screening the right candidates takes up valuable time

you could be giving to your customers. That's where LinkedIn Hiring Pro comes in. It's built to be your hiring partner, helping you find the right candidates faster. That way you can hire with confidence without turning it into another full-time job. Hiring Pro streamlines the entire process from drafting your job to shortlisting candidates and conducting AI-powered interviews for initial screenings. Its updated conversational interface lets you describe what you need in plain language. Nearly 60% of hirers find a candidate to interview within a week.

With Hiring Pro, you spend less time searching and more time connecting with the right talent. And instead of getting buried in resumes, you get a focus shortlist that actually moves your hiring forward. Join the 2.7 million small businesses using LinkedIn to hire. Get started by posting your job for free at LinkedIn.com slash track. Terms and conditions apply. Support for this show comes from What Not. Whether you're selling online or out of a storefront, you already know the challenge.

You're simply hoping for people to find your listing or waiting for them to walk in. But What Not flips that. They say they're the live shopping marketplace where you can shop, sell, and connect around the things you love. On What Not, you go live and sell directly to people in real time. They see what you've got, ask questions, and buy.

And they keep coming back. Whether it's beauty, collectibles, electronics, luxury fashion, and yes, even cookies. Sellers are building real thriving businesses. And for a limited time, What Not says they'll match your first $150 sold in the first month. You can visit Whatnot.com slash sell to start selling. That's W-H-A-T-N-O-T dot com slash sell. Whatnot.com slash sell.

We're back. Kylie Robinson's here. Hey, Kylie. Hello. Big week of AI news. Big week of AI feelings. Yes. Mostly center on Open AI,

I would say the most emotional of the AI companies. Right. That's really true, isn't it? I never really thought about it like that, but that is true. There are a lot of feelings inside that company. Just big feelings all over the place.

Big feelings. Like Microsoft as a company is not like a big feelings company, you know? No. Anthropic, you know, they're sort of like dead ahead. They're like, here's some stuff. It writes code. And then open eyes, like, I'm feeling all of them.

Yeah. We're creating God. Please save us. It's just like a lot. Like, it's like, I tell my daughter, like, you have to feel all of your feelings so you can get over them. You know, I was like, I'm feeling all of them. I feel like there's like two things we need to talk about here. But before we get way into the inevitable studio Ghibli weeds, which I would very

much like to do. There was some like business leadership stuff that happened at OpenAI. And speaking of companies that are unusual, nobody does a C-suite quite like Open AI does a C-suite. Right. What do you make of this whole like shift? What, what happened this weekend? Do we need to actually care about it? No, I don't think people need to care about it. But for their information, the CEO, oh, Brad Lightcap, he is expanding his role. He's taking over day-to-day operations. basically becoming a CEO and Sam Altman, who is the CEO, is going to shift some more product research focus, which to me, my reading is he wants to focus more on Stargate. He wants to more, like, focus more on shaking hands and making these deals. And he can't exactly do all that

and be the leader opening eye knees right now is my take. But it's like an ever-shifting thing. They're going to become a for-profit soon. Brad seems like a nice person to put at the top and be like this is the guy running things right now and Sam is just tinkering with robots and AGI. Are they going to become a for-profit soon? Yes. Great question. Great question.

I think they would like to. But I don't know how this lawsuit with Elon and all of that will, you know, totally change the trajectory, if at all. That remains to be seen. I think they have to get through that first. How far are we into the two-year window that they had to do it? we're not at a year yet, right? No, no, I don't think so. Please fact check me.

But I think off the top of my head, it was supposed to happen like mid, midway through this year around the summer. Okay. It does seem like the boring part of changing the corporate structure is what they want Brad to do.

Like, do this paperwork so Sam can say he's building God? Is that all that is? I've had a lot of people ask me about this. And I think, you know, you know how Elon was, like, I'm leading Twitter and now he just put someone as CEO so he doesn't have to fucking deal with it. That's sort of like he's been running this company long enough.

Clearly he wants to do other things and he's like, can somebody else deal with the logistics is my read. I also wonder if, Neely, we were talking about Mark Zuckerberg in the last segment and one of the pivots that Mark made pretty aggressively was, I don't want to be the person required to apologize for this stuff anymore. And so he made like Nick Clegg the person who had to go apologize for Facebook all the time. And he just got to go, like, announce new products. And I keep thinking about, and this is where we should get to the images and chat GPT stuff. But there was a, there was a Sam tweet this week where he was basically like, you know, be me, build in silence for a long time. Nobody cares. And then it was like, and then we do images and now everybody's being weird.

And it's like, oh, you? You just didn't want to say the word that he said. What did he say? I honestly don't remember that one. Let me tell you. I know the exact sequence. Hit me. So, you know, for a few years, is building in silence, then for two and a half, everybody hates me. And then wake up today and everyone's saying, ha ha, I made you into twink studio Ghibli. That's exactly what he said. To be clear, Sam is a gay man. I think he's allowed to use that word in a way that David and I are not. But I mean, this is the thing. He's the product person now. He's the face of the product. He's still the CEO. Famously, he was not the CEO for about 20 minutes last year. So I don't think he's allowed to step down as CEO again after that fight. He's.

He has to stay the CEO, but to, like, operate the company, be the corporate person. Okay, we're shift to answer on else. I will not be the face of the product and the fundraising and the hype. And then that face, quite literally this week, is image generation. Right. Not to take away from Studio Ghibli, but I think the strangest thing is that they don't have a CTO. And they've said they have no plans to replace Miramaradi anytime soon, which would probably help Sam in his product research mode to have a CTO. And Sam, notably, does not have a reputation as like a great product person.

Like he has an incredible reputation as a fundraiser and a guy who can build hype and talk with the story of the product. And, you know, he used to run White Combinator. Like, he's a great spotter of things. But like, are you the great product visionary? I think there's a reason that Johnny Ive is building whatever he's building for them. Right. Like he hires that talent.

So he doesn't have the CTO building that now. That said, the image generator. come out in Foro this week has led to a wide variety of reactions. Yes. There's no other way to say that. A wide variety of reactions. What's going on there? Is this where I bait Nelai into talking about fair use?

Because I was really hoping I could. Let's do that in a minute. First, what I would like to do is describe every single interaction that you personally have had with images in chat, GPT. Perfect. The first thing I tried to do is to break it and make pictures of CEOs. and that worked pretty well, actually. I described this isn't the piece about Ghibli.

I described the social media executive that everybody knows, and he went in front of Congress, and there's this fictional movie about him. He wears gold chains now. And they're like, oh, that's interesting. Okay, let me generate that. And it's literally Mark Zuckerberg. So it's not super hard to get around the whole, like, make a famous person thing.

And then I put him in a verge brand hoodie, and things started to get weird. It started to amalgamate into average tech CEO across. whatever its data is. And then the Ghibli trend kicked off, and I did not expect that. When I got the embargo and I talked to the team, I thought, okay, this is a cool upgrade. And I really think the auto-regressive approach instead of the diffusion approach. So it goes from left to right, top, to bottom instead of generating it all at once. I think that has made like the craziest difference in the fidelity and the accuracy, which was wild to see and people glossed.

onto that really fast. What you mean it generates the pixels of the image left and right, top to bottom, instead of, okay. Instead of just like the whole thing at once. So I think that probably helps with hallucinations. The lead for the project, he said, I am speculating that that's the case, which is funny because it's like that unknown to them as well. So I think people gloved onto that pretty quickly. And one person was like, I've made a Ghibli version of my wife and my family. And then the internet said, oh my God, I can make 9-11 with us. And then it got crazy. I do love A, that those are the two steps, and that B, that is precisely, of course, how it was going to happen. So I will say my impression, and I have not personally played with this at all, so all I've seen is what other people have made from it.

It is remarkably better than basically any other image generation tool that I've seen. It does text really well. It seems like you have to pretty carefully describe the text that you want, where if you're just like, just put a love It'll do some of the sort of insane gibberish that we've seen. But if you're like, no, replace that with Marlboro. It'll do it. Yeah. But the stuff is more accurate.

It's more realistic. It is more like true to whatever style you ask for than basically anything I have seen. Certainly that is like available to people at any kind of scale. And some of the stuff people are making is wild. And it does feel like we're going to get into all the fair use of this all in a minute because it is the most straightforward. You just say like make a record. And it just makes a Rick and Morty that now it looks like Rick and Morty. And it's nuts. But like, Kylie, I know you made a bunch of stuff. And like, was it, was it different to make stuff with this than you've had experience with image generators before? Like, you used a bunch of selfies to make images of yourself.

Yes. Because I don't want to feed it pictures of my family. Actually, it's inevitable. But I just don't want to start there. Yeah, I uploaded this mirror selfie. I took in a bar bathroom in Sanford. and was totally shocked by how it got the depth and the lighting correct. And then it got, it didn't get the small text of the graffiti correct. It said like lost lover instead of like dirty hairy or something. So, but like the vibe was right. Like it felt like the, it was that bathroom that you were in. It got the style of my shirt correct. It knows that it opened on one side. And I was, I was totally. I was totally surprised. And then I asked it to combine some, photos I took in Amsterdam and add Totoro. I add a Totoro like character to see if it would work.

And then sure enough, I got Totoro. And we put that in the article as the lead image. I was like, are we going to get sued over this? I can't tell. And that's the fair use of it all. My first question is, where the fuck did you get all of this data is my first question? What are these people going to do when they see Homer Simpson doing 9-11? Like, Like, what happens? I don't know. I actually was, this might dismay some listeners and maybe even N Eli, but I wanted to argue with Chad Shpiti this morning through voice mode about fair use in this context. And it did not have really great responses. It was like, oh, yeah, this does seem bad. I'm like, oh, okay. No, that's the right answer. I just want to be clear. It seems bad. Yes. Like the fatal flaw at the heart of this entire overhyped industry is the amount of copyright infringement that is occurring.

Like obvious, not subtle, right out in the open. Did you copy a bunch of Studio Ghibli stuff so that you can generate Studio Ghibli art? You sure did. It's obvious. Like, it's not a question mark. And then you have Open AI and Google going to the United States Congress and the White House being like, can you write us an exception to the copyright law, so this isn't a problem that destroys your business, because that's how bad it is. Copyright law is stupid. I say this on the show all the time. It's not some sophisticated legal

doctrine. It's, did you make a copy? Did you have permission to make a copy? If you didn't have the permission, does it fall into one of these narrow categories where we say, we know you made a copy without permission, but that's okay because of X? And those categories are like scholarship, right? Like commentary, parody. Like, it's not make more of it, make more copies of it. And I don't know, like, I truly do not know how any judge looks at all of this and says, oh, this is fine. I can shoehorn this into that legal doctrine. Well, and this is why it becomes so important for all these companies to obfuscate where the data is coming from, right?

Because if you boil it all the way down to, did you make a copy of this? They're trying very hard to convince everybody that the answer is like, we don't know. Right. The internet is a mysterious place. Can I just underline, again, how stupid copy. right law is as a legal doctrine. I'm glad we've gotten here. It's not smart.

It's not like sophisticated. We had to litigate as a society moving images across the internet and making all of the copies on the RAM of all of the routers is okay. Those are called ephemeral copies. That's lawsuits. We had to litigate. This is a real lawsuit. Kylie, you asked for this.

I just want you to know, Kylie. You asked for this. I did. I did. M-AI versus Peek. this nation had to litigate and decide that loading software from a hard drive onto the RAM of the computer was fair use if you didn't have permission to do it. Because it is a copy. Because it's just a copy.

That's how dumb copyright law is as a doctrine. It is so blunt as an instrument. It is used for all kinds of purposes because it's so blunt and so stupid. It is the only speech regulation that exists in this country for real because you don't have the moral. component of speech. You're just like, did you make a copy? Jail. And like, that's the end of that. Like, you don't have to do all the work. But, like, that's how dumb copyright law is. And so with all of this, like, maybe you can get all that at fair use. But you start with, did you make a copy? And like, yeah, you sure did. Like, without question, they did. I was reading this anthropic

lawsuit sent to me by Shoutout Cranz. And I was reading through it. And the judge seemingly throughout the case and their one thing was like, okay, you have to create guardrails to prevent it from spitting out actual copies of copyrighted work. But otherwise, it seemed fine. And I thought, okay, I'm not a legal expert. But in this case, I can get Rick and Morty's face on just about anything. So that seems like a problem. Open AI has surprisingly lax guidelines. I was waiting for them to respond with comment and they gave me a ton of of very interesting guidelines. I thought it would be more like, we do not depict, you know, copyrighted material. We do not depict Totoro or Donald Trump. But they say it's fine for artistic endeavors, the long and short, just don't shrink. Because you can upload a photo and be like,

do this in Studio Ghibli. Don't upload photos that you don't own the copyright to, which is basically what everyone is doing. But otherwise, they say you own whatever it generates. And I, I feel like this is going to end up being a nightmare, that's the only answer. Yeah. And there's some amount of this that I think you depend on the volume, just overcoming the objection. Right. There's so much infringement that it can't be stopped.

Right. You will be perceived of as the bad guys. Music industry, you're going to shut down Napster. Lars Ulrich is the bad guy now. And that's basically how that playbook worked. That's how the playbook works against Google. We scanned all the books and made Google Book Search and the evil authors guild does not want you to have it. And the judges were like, but these goofballs have slides in their office.

Like, YouTube is okay, even though you copied all of South Park on the YouTube. And the utility was so high and the industry was so new and young and cute that like they kind of, like, Google in particular wrote a lot of the fair use law here. Like, they just litigated their way through a lot of fair use law. And you can see that reflected, like Eric Schmidt, like gives talks at Stanford, which you try to get taken down. We wrote about it. And you got trying to take it down, but it's still up on YouTube. You can go find it. He's like, here's what I would do.

I would start an AI company. I would fire out products until one hit. And then when the lawsuits came, I would just pay off the lawsuits. And it's like, oh, that's good. You would do Google. That's what Google did. And I just don't think these companies are positioned the same way as Google in the early 2000s. Right?

Like, this is here's anime 9-11 is just not the same product as YouTube at first impression. And I don't know. I don't know what's going to happen here. I will, like, agree with David, the amount of usage is off the charts. Like, people love this shit. They love it. And there's something to that that we talk about all the time. You're in it.

You're reporting on the companies. The gap between how much the audience says they hate the tools and then how much people are using the tools seems to get bigger every day. Yes. Yes. The commenters on my Ghibli post are so fun because they are arguing so intensely about My favorite comment is someone talking about fascism and then another person who's like, I just think it's pretty. That's perfect.

That's perfect. It's like the perfect verge audience comment section. But I think that, yeah, it does get wider. And, you know, this is a very silly thing. But I was just at a doctor's appointment. And all my doctors now use this AI scribe. So it takes notes and they ask for permission. And it just feels like this has become truly like.

permeated into our society. There's no way to stop it. That's sort of the argument with the Ghibli thing. Like, artists can't stop this. This is here. This is now. We just have to adapt. I'm not sure that's a fair argument. I would love Nelai's legal take. I was going to ask, what do you think happens? But you already said you don't know. Well, I think two things happen. I have this theory. Every time AI art comes up this way and people use it and they go crazy for it. Like open eye, their line is like the GPUs are melting. You know, like they have all this usage. First of all, They're not making a dollar on this usage, right? Like, they're just giving this away at 20 bucks a month.

Like, they're losing money on this, especially now that they're melting the GPUs. Like, they're already losing money. Now we're using even more compute. We're losing more money. So I don't know what happens there. Like, on its own, I don't know what's happening. I do have this, like, broader, like, verdure thesis that all of this technology is meant for us to make art with. And, like, the most human possible instinct is to somehow,

communicate art and try to get people to feel things. Yeah. Like, Becky has like live, laugh, love ants, you know, like you go in the Midwest. And I always think about those. It's like, oh, they, this is a command. Like, they just want me to go in their kitchen and they're like, laugh. And like, that's how they want me to feel. Yeah.

Right? And I have a lot of empathy. I'm like, it's kind of blunt force, like, love. Do it. And they have a sign that says eat over the dining room table. Eat! These are just instructions. I'm like what to feel and ever sleepy, you know, like, that's all it is.

Like, it's, it's so human to try to communicate what you want other people to feel. And it's pretty hard to do that. Like, I don't know, I was a six-year-old and like mostly what she wants me to feel is pain, I guess. Like, I don't know. There's something there. She's very sweet. She kicks hard. That's all I'm saying.

But, like, you see people get access to these tools. and they're able to communicate that emotional thing so much easier, and then they're into it. Yeah. And to me, that's the point. That's like, you watch the original Steve Jobs demo of Garage Band. That's the argument he's making about all this stuff. Right.

And some people have cameras on our phones. And so, like, there's something very important there. But then there's also, you shouldn't steal it from the people who figured out to do it well. Right. And that is by far the tension that I see. Yeah, I think make it easy for people to make things is a very different argument from make Rick and Morty do 9-11. Right. I think the AI companies.

It did make you feel feelings, David. I think, sure. But I think I think the AI companies would like you to believe that those are the same thing, right? And I think this is, and I think this really comes also back to a lot of open AI, like running away from guardrails. Like all of these companies are basically like all we make is. is sort of underlying technology. And what you do with is good and bad is up to you. And that is a thing they have to put on society

so that they don't have to put it on themselves. That like the results of this black box are not our fault. All we built is the box. What you do with it is up to you. And that's very clearly what Open AI is doing here. Like they've tried to set up guardrails. They've tried to do the right thing. They write long documents.

And then people make Rick and Morty do 9-11. And now Open AI is like, that's your problem. You typed in the words, what comes out is not our responsibility. I saw someone say that the larger story isn't that you can make Ghibli now. The larger story is that they've just dropped their guardrails. And they're walking away from those guardrails very publicly. And like, where does that line stop?

Because clearly it hasn't, you know, we were just talking about GROC not that long ago making Kamala Harris with a gun. And that was a bad thing. And I just saw like a depiction of Korean Americans in the 80s holding guns on rooftops during the L.A. riots. Like, I mean, like, where is the line? It seems to blur more and more as they think that maybe this will make them more money and get them more

users. I'm not, I'm not sure. I mean, this is the same thing as meta walking away from content moderation, right? Like, it's just easier to say this isn't our problem than to take any kind of responsibility for it. Right. And this is where I will remind you, once again, the only functional speech regulation in this country

is copyright law. It's the only thing that regulates the internet Because when Disney shows up and says, you stole the Avengers, the court system is like, yep, jail. And it works every time. Like, without question, what is the most effective regulation on YouTube that has built its own culture is copyright strikes? Disney. Yeah. It's copyright strikes.

It's using the music wrong. It's why is TikTok full of weird, sped up movies with that line down the center to avoid the copyright filters that everyone agrees should exist? there's no moral outrage about that filter, but if you do actual content moderation, then there is moral outrage. And so you just, here's this problem, right, where Open AI isn't going to make these choices.

This government is certainly not going to make these choices. Or if they do, it will be in the worst possible way and you'll be abducted to El Salvador in the dead of night. That's weird. That's a thing that we're comfortable doing, but, like, content moderation is not. So the thing that will step in

will be these copyright fights. and they are existential, and everyone kind of glosses over them. I had never thought about this until you said YouTube copyright strikes, but I almost wonder if what these AI companies are going to want is a version of the same thing for these AI tools. That doesn't say OpenAI is guilty of copyright problems. I am when I upload the, when I ask for a Studio Ghibli style image. Right. I think Open AI would really like that to be my problem.

And that Studio Ghibli or Disney or whoever can come after me. and not Open AI. You can go to a copyright page at OpenAI and report copyright. And infringers, like people who have done it multiple times, they will ban their account. That's what it says. So, I mean, that is already in motion. I was just about to say that's one of the things that has been really successful on YouTube is the, like, chilling effect that the possibility of copyright strikes has. Every creator worries about this all the time.

Even like even the possibility of an incorrect copyright strike can be a huge problem. because it takes a long time to litigate. These things can be overzealous sometimes like it. And it's a huge problem. If you get copyright strikes, you get demonetized, you get kicked off the platform. Like you lose your living in a lot of ways. And a system like that for AI content, boy, does that benefit the AI companies at the cost of everybody else. But that's all rooted in the Digital Millennium Copyright Act.

Like literally it's called the safe harbor in the DMCA, where by having, notice and take down and copyright strikes and all this system, YouTube doesn't have the liability for the infringement. Right. The law says, if you can build this mechanism or things get taken down, you will avoid the liability for the copyright infringement on your platform. That doesn't make the same sense for Open AI because they don't distribute it, right? Like, it's weird to be like, I will report this Mickey Mouse to open AI, like, why?

You're going to distribute it on some other platform, right? So, like, they're using the law in a way or a way. It doesn't make any sense. And none of that has anything to do with how much data have they trained on? How much did they ingest to do the training, which is a real problem? With meta is getting in trouble every day because in their court cases it's coming out, they torrented books to put into the, into Lama's training. And like, that's just copyright.

Did you make a copy? Yes. Did you have permission? Definitely not. And the researchers are scared of it in the lawsuit. The researchers are like, we shouldn't be doing this, especially on company laptops. It's like, yeah, I'm just, again, it's a copy. I was a stupid flowchart.

Did you make a copy? Yeah. Did you have permission? Well, you knew you didn't. Does it fit into one of these exceptions in fair use? The judge has to decide. And you're not exactly like a friendly, cuddly little kid anymore, Mark Zuckerberg. You're Mark Zuckerberg.

Like, good luck. So the move is like break the law until it changes for us. Is that sort of the vibe? The move, and I think I, I, uh, I think this is just a law of the Vergecast. If you're young and cute, you should break the law as much as you can. And then later on in life, you should stop. Incredible.

Both as a person and a company. I have some felonies I can pick up. Yeah, exactly. You got time. If you're under 30, go nuts. You know, like, have a good time. And then later on in life, you know, settle down. I think that's the rule.

You buy a suit and you testify in front of Congress. That's why whenever people get caught now, they're like, he was young. He's 45 years old. I don't know what you're talking about. That is a grown man. Yeah. Like, that's just an adult. Like, it's a house and two kids and a mortgage.

Like, that's an adult. I don't know what's going to happen. I think the economic pressure on Open AI is high. Like, they have to be losing more money than they were yesterday because of this tool, right? Are we sure that's true? Kylie, I actually want to know what you think about this, Kylie, because one of the other things that happened this week was Open AI said it expects to earn, was it 12.7 billion dollars in revenue. Yeah. That's a big number. I'm sure it comes underneath a much bigger cost number because that's a number.

That's what Open AI is doing. But this company seems to essentially be able to raise as much money as it needs whenever it needs for any purposes whatsoever. And I'm sort of at a point now where I'm like, maybe this company can just capitalize itself forever. And all these numbers are fake and none of it really matters. Where is your head with this stuff? I agree. Because I'm more of an AI expert than I am a finance expert. So when I see those numbers, I'm like, how is this company not totally crumbling?

Some of these AI leaders will point to Amazon. They never turned a profit. But, I mean, they were doing something more useful, I think, honestly. Amazon took all of the money that it made and put it back in the company. They didn't lose money on every single thing that they shipped you. That was not the Amazon way. Right. And I genuinely do think that Open AI is okay with losing this amount of money.

Maybe their new CFO isn't, but it seems like Sam Altman is totally fine with it. And I don't know where that stops and what happens to a company. I've never seen a company like this. Their new valuation would be $300 billion, and they're not even close to profitable. They're losing billions and billions every year. And they only want to keep losing more money for Studio Ghibli renderings. That doesn't make a ton of sense to me. And it does make me nervous, especially what we saw with the Deep Seek moment and what that did

to the markets and VVIDIA, I worry that the open AI bubble will be really destructive, but I don't want to scare anybody. I'm not sure. Well, it's funny. I don't like, you know, the new image generation features, they're not the promise, right? The promise is in the reasoning models and the agentic stuff and that replace all of your employees with with this system. And image generation might be some component of that. But you see, it's not, like the interest in it and the hype around it, it has nothing to do with what might ultimately justify the valuation. Right. And that seems like as big of a disconnect as anything. Like, oh, this costs more money than it did yesterday. It doesn't meaningfully bring us closer to earning

all that money back. Right. You still need users, though, and they don't, the average person does not care about AGI. They want to make their daughter into a studio ghibli character. Like, they've got to get somebody to subscribe and care. And I feel that way about, you know, opening eye for a while. It's like no one cares about, you know, a very small sect of people in Silicon Valley care about it being the best coder and getting a PhD in mathematics. And I think these are important endeavors. But, you know, Google is baking it into every product. Meta is baking it into every product. Whether that's a good thing or not, I'm not sure. But it seems more real than AGI. So make something people want to use right now seems to be Studio Ghibli. It's also,

like, sneakily a really mainstable. stream use case. Like it's, we've talked a lot about like none of these products are things regular people are actually going to want to do all the time. But you're right. Like I can take my family portrait and make it into any style I want and it is like compelling. That's interesting to everybody. I don't think many people will pay 20 bucks a month for that for the rest of their lives. But that is like that is a genuinely mainstream use case for AI in a way that even like help me write my emails isn't. Also you can see it. Right. It's like we're and the pixels left to right up to down

is like a meaningful visual improvement over regular diffusion. I would just compare that to this other headline which says Google says its new reasoning Gemini A.m models are the best one yet. It's like most people can't evaluate slightly better reasoning. Yeah.

They can say that it looks different. Like Microsoft is adding reasoning to co-pilot AI for research and data. Like great. Is it better than it was yesterday? Right. This is one of the things Kylie and I always enjoy talking about.

Is this like endless race where every 15 minutes somebody makes the best model that has ever been made in history. Yes. And it is, it wins all, it is at the top of every leaderboard for somewhere between an hour and a week. And then it is not anymore. And I think this, this week was, there were like three of them that they were like, this is the best model we've ever made. Right. And Google, is it Google and Open AI that are obsessively trying to like front run each other's announcements with an app?

It's so fun. It is so fun. When I saw, you know, I got the Open. AI announcement and then the Google announcement came in, I thought, oh my God, they're back at it again. It's the most pointless thing. And what's even funnier is I have all these people's tweet notifications turned on. And I was watching Demis do some retweets that were like sub-tweeting Open AI and saying like, oh, well, we already had image generation and blah, blah, blah, before they had even properly announced it. And I thought, wow, you guys are petty. And it's like such a useless. The average consumer

does not notice this, does not care, you know. But it is good to know that you can be a billionaire Nobel Prize winner and still be just furiously sub-tweeting your competition on that. Twitter breaks your brain no matter who you are. That is the great lesson of our times is that Twitter will destroy you no matter who or what you are. When we get to AGI, we'll finally take this app off our funds. That's the goal.

I do think there's one trend inside of all of this that I think is really interesting, which is that everybody is getting really comfortable, making slower. products. And we were on this race for a while where everything had to be fast and everybody was obsessed with latency and everybody was like, how do we make, you know, smaller, better, quicker models. Everything should be instant and feedback. And now everybody's like, we're going to build a deep reasoning model that is going to take its time and it's going to think and it's going to show you that it's thinking and it's going to take a while and it's going to happen step by step. But then at the end, it's going to say true things and not lies. And that is, we've just like hard turned into

It's okay if this takes a while because the product is going to be better. And that is like so completely different than the conversations I was having with AI people, even like a year ago, who were like, speed is everything. We have to make this up real time. It has to be fast or else nobody's going to use it. And it is like we've just gone all the way away from that. Right, because lying fast turned out to not be a great product. Right. I think we'll come back to speed once they solve the like, is it good enough.

Right. That might be true. But I think that this is useless. Does not, being useless fast does not get you what anybody needs to keep the promises that they're making. Yeah. I just always enjoy every time somebody talks about deep reasoning, I just hear slow. Yes. When they ask me about the like the new reasoning, powering images, my first question was like, is this slower?

And they said, yes, but I think people are going to enjoy the product and it won't matter was their answer. And it's wild. It turns out it's fine, right? It turns out. And they're learning how to build product. that shows you the slowness, right? Where it shows you the turns in its thinking. And part of that is to help you understand whatever.

But part of that is also to give you something to do while it's slow. And all of the sort of affordances these things are getting so that they can be slow so that they cannot lie to you all the time is just fascinating. The best part, though, is people putting in a prompt that it should not generate and it starts generating. And you see a sliver of the banned content before it stops. And that makes for incredible means, unfortunately. That's very good.

Well, that's happening less and less, apparently. Right. Do you think Open Eye is going to react to this, right? Like, Sam Altman is saying, yeah, this is, I shouldn't be this person. Like, all my life's work has ended with this picture. And then Open Eye, I think, had some reaction saying, we don't want this to happen as much.

There is the looming copyright threat. Do you think they're going to pull back on this a little bit? Right. Someone made the joke about how he's, like, doing the legal backflips he did after the scar. Garjo stuff, Scarlet Johansson stuff. Yeah, I think that they're seeing, you know, Sam made this his profile picture. He made a studio Gibley profile picture and he said, can everyone make me a better one?

So they're not shying away from it. And in the email they sent me, they're like, we encourage and we love to see all these renditions. And something that was really weird in their statement was, you know, we don't allow the recreation of art from living artists. And I'm like, the studio Ghibli co-founder is still alive. Yeah, Miyazaki's live and he hates AI. Yeah, he's been tweeting about how much he hates all this. Yeah.

It's so I do. So putting that aside, uh, I think that they are leaning into this until they get a season desist is my guess. Yeah. I mean, they have to, right? They have to keep saying this is okay. Yes. Because if, if they start apologizing, it all falls apart.

Exactly. Exactly. It's much like what's happening with, uh, signal messages. if we start admitting things. Which we will get to. But there is one more AI thing I want to talk about. And then we should probably take a break because we all need a break before we get into Signal. Is perplexity going to buy TikTok?

Oh, wow. You know, I've gotten not so nice notes saying that I should really believe that they're doing that. No. Can you imagine TikTok taking perplexity seriously? Some analysts think that TikTok, their U.S. operations, will sell between $30 to $50 billion. And ticoters in perplexity is valued at about $18 billion. And also, those are kind of made up numbers when it comes to a startup.

That's a GPT rapper. I'm not trying to be mean, but like realistically, how would they actually buy TikTok? It would be great for them. Much better for perplexity than I think TikTok ultimately. We'll see. That would be the best day on my job on the internet, if that actually. happens. True. I mean, I've definitely seen other companies for like, we're going to put this on the blockchain. Like, you know, everyone's got dreams. Everybody's got dreams. I mean, it is funny,

because in a more normal political moment, it would be much more likely that TikTok would just quickly buy perplexity and then make it like its search products. Be like, we're really leaning into search on TikTok. Just do that. Do you think the perplexity CEO is sitting there searching like how to get TikTok to do reverse buyout or I become CEO of TikTok. If you got the AI product, you might as well just ask the question. That's true. Yeah. It might know.

How to end up CEO of TikTok. I mean, it turns out if you say things out loud enough, sometimes they happen. Make studio glibly picture of me as CEO of TikTok. I too am seeking $40 billion to be this TikTok CEO. I think I'd be a great TikTok CEO, just based on my algorithm alone. All right, we should take a break. Kyle, I think you're on the side of this is not happening for perplexity. No, I don't think so.

But if you have a document that says it is, if you have a document that says J.D. Vance has seriously considered perplexity buying TikTok because apparently he's in charge of the deal. Kylie's email is available. Or just hit up JD on Signal and let us know what he says. We got to take a break. Add me to your group chats. Yeah, please.

All right. We'll be back with lightning around. Support for the show comes from MongoDB. If you're tired of database limitations and architectures that break when you scale, it's time to think outside of rows and columns. Because let's be honest, you didn't get into tech to babysit a broken database. You got into it to actually build something. MongoDB lets you do that.

It's flexible, developer first, asset compliant, enterprise ready, and built for the AI era. Say goodbye to bottlenecks and legacy code. Start innovating with MongoDB. There's a reason it's trusted by so many of the Fortune 500. And that's because it's a platform built by developers for developers. MongoDB, it's a great freaking database. Start building at MongoDB.com slash build. Support for the show comes from LinkedIn.

If you're a small business owner, you know that every hire counts, but time and resources are limited. finding, connecting with, and screening the right candidates takes up valuable time you could be giving to your customers. That's where LinkedIn Hiring Pro comes in. It's built to be your hiring partner, helping you find the right candidates faster. That way you can hire with confidence without turning it into another full-time job. Hiring Pro streamlines the entire process from drafting your job to shortlisting candidates and conducting AI-powered interviews for initial screenings.

It's updated conversational interface lets you describe what you need in plain language. Nearly 60% of hirers find a candidate to interview within a week. With Hiring Pro, you spend less time searching and more time connecting with the right talent. And instead of getting buried in resumes, you get a focus shortlist that actually moves your hiring forward. Join the 2.7 million small businesses using LinkedIn to hire.

Get started by posting your job for free at LinkedIn.com slash track. Terms and conditions apply. Complex and unprecedented, the Spanish authorities are calling it. Before the disembarking, asymptomatikas. Passengers who'd been stuck aboard the Hanta or maybe Hanta virus-stricken Dutch cruise ship disembarked in the Canary Islands this weekend, prompting the highest stakes game of where are they now since maybe COVID.

Some of the evacuees, American and French, have since tested positive for the virus. and yet public health officials seem remarkably calm. We do have one individual who was taken to the biocontainment unit early, early this morning, and we assessed that individual. They are doing well. Possibly because this is not the one to freak out over. Today, Explain drops every weekday afternoon. All right, we're back to the Lightning Round.

Unsponsored for flavor. Thank you to everybody who has sent us T-shirt designs. Some of them have been very good. We will make this t-shirt. I don't know when. I don't know how much it'll cost, but I'm willing to say on the record, we will make this T-shirt.

Yeah, it's a lot. It's just putting the word flavor on a T-shirt just opens you up to all kinds of situations, and we'll just figure it out. I will say I would like to continue reminding people that even when we are sponsored, the whole point of our ethics policies, you can't tell us what to do,

which I would compare to the universe of brand deals that happen elsewhere in the media. where people often get told what's do. And you just can't do that. No amount of money will make me say nice things about you. I'm sorry. Well, that's the important thing about being unsponsored for flavor is that it actually doesn't mean anything. Nothing changes.

Right. I do like that it implies that some people are sponsored for less flavor. Sure. Right? Like, there's an implied comparison there that says, oh, less flavor when you have the brand deals. So maybe our T-shirt comes with stickers that you can, it covers the un and then adds a less when you do get sponsored. I think instead of, you know, those like boring social media badges that are like

may contain advertising. It should just say sponsored with less flavor. Like that might communicate more about what's happening to the media industry. Well, I kind of like the idea that actually we go the other way and everything that's not sponsored has like a blinking red light that says flavor and everything that is sponsored doesn't get to have the cool light that says flavor. Yeah. All right.

Well, speaking of flavor and spiciness, it's time, David. Oh, my God. America's favorite. It's a top two podcast or than a podcast based on the emails that I get from people every single week. It's time for Brendan Carr is a dummy. By the way, people are starting to send us theme music. If you have ideas for Brendan Carr as a dummy theme music, send them in. We'll start running them.

Absolutely. We need some variety. But I'm happy to see that the podcast within a podcast is beginning to take on a life of its fun. And it has real momentum. It does. Real momentum. Brendan Carr is the dummy. So does Brendan in his unconstitutional nonsense that he does every single week.

Brendan Carr, chairman of the FCC. This week, out of nowhere, said he was going to investigate Disney. Everybody wants to investigate Disney. That's what I got for you. He gave an interview to Punch Bowl News. It's on YouTube. It's just like a podcast interview. And he says he's putting the finishing touches on a letter announcing his efforts to investigate Disney.

Disney's DEI practices, which is similar to his efforts against Comcast and Verizon. This is because Disney had a shareholder vote on continuing its DEI practices, and the shareholders voted to continue them. Because it turns out having a wide applicant pool for your open roles at things like Parks is good. Just like I, and again, I will point this out, Comcast investor inbox me, they do not like me. There's your disclosure. They invest in our company. Comcast remaining committed to DEI is because it has a huge physical plant.

Like it has wires in the ground. It hires installers. Like it needs a big net of how it hires and who it puts in the field is customer service because its customers are everyone. Disney's customers, the parks are everyone. Like it makes sense that you would want to keep the applicant pools wide open. At the top of the company, at the bottom of the company, all the way up and down, it makes sense. And so Brendan just wants to chill.

the speech of Disney, which owns ABC News, which already settled a case with Donald Trump about defamation, saying they were going to give $15 million to Trump's presidential library. Was that the George Stephanopoulos case? Yep. Yeah. Which George Stephanopoulos did not want to settle, but Disney caved. So you just see, even when you cave to these bullies, the pressure remains. And that's happening right now with universities and law firms, right?

You see Columbia caved and the pressure is still on. on. You can see that Paul Weiss, the law firm caved, and the pressure is still on. It doesn't work. You got to hit the bully back. And Brendan is nothing, if not a bully. And so just saying gleefully, I'm going to investigate Disney for no reason and saying gleefully, any businesses that are looking for FCC approval, I would encourage them to get busy, ending any sort of their invidious forms of DEI discrimination. So he's already saying, is that a quote? That's like a real thing he said. He said that out loud. What he's saying is, before I even evaluate the legality of your merger or the ideas that you might have about what you might want to do with your companies, if you need my approval, I need you to do some racism. Like straightforwardly. Yeah. And that's power. That's chilling speech.

That is just inappropriate. And then on top of that this week, when I say he's a bully, he's investigating CBS for the 60 minutes at it, which we have talked about before, which is a very straightforward. They did a long interview with Kamala Harris. They edited it one way for one program. They edited it another way for another program. That's normal. And now the whole clip is out. You can see that it didn't actually make any substantive edits.

And you can disagree with me on it. There are a lot of stupid cases in this universe. This is one of the stupidest ones, if you ask me. And, you know, Brandon bullied CBS. They released the full unedited clip. And you can see with your own eyes, you don't have to agree with me. You can see that no substantive change was made in that answer. They just cut it differently for two to do.

They used one part over here and one part over there, which is called editing. That's weird. Like, what if movie trailers were illegal? I assure you that editing occurs, right? If only we edited the show. This week, because that case is open, is a pending investigation at the FCC. A bunch of former FCC commissioners from Republican and Democratic presidential administrations have written a letter.

They put into the docket. This is inappropriate. So Oliver Darcy, who's front of the verge, front of the show. report on this, we'll link to it. But he's got Alfred Sykes. But he notes that in this letter, Alfred Sykes, who's the former Republican chairman of the SEC, Irvin Dugan, who is a Democratic commissioner appointed by George H.W. Bush,

Gloria Tristani, who Bill Clinton appointed, and Tom Wheeler, who I know, who served under Barack Obama, is the chairman. We've all signed in this letter. And they say, it's highly unusual for Carr to take the case up against CBS. He opened the matter without any real explanation for reconsideration, considering his prior decision and said, this sets a chilling precedent. Here's a quote.

By reopening this complaint, the commission is signaling to broadcasters that it will indeed act at the behest of the White House by closely scrutinizing the content of news coverage and threatening the licenses of broadcasters whose outlets produce coverage that does not pass muster in the president's view. That is a big bipartisan spanning time set of former FCC commissioners and chairs saying, you're doing some illegal chilling of speech. you're doing some censorship. Okay, maybe you disagree with him.

Maybe you don't agree with me. But I'm telling you, Brennan Carr is a dummy and a bully, and this is how he responded to Oliver Darcy asking him for comment on this. He sent him a Dr. Evil meme that just says, how about no? Jesus.

Like, Dr. Evil from Austin Powers. It's just a giff that says, how about no? Not a substantive response to former chairs of the FCC, former commissioners of the FCC, saying, about this, the chilling of speech, the precedent you are setting by reopening this case without any explanation, he's sending out Dr. Evil Means, because he is a fundamentally

unsurious piece of shit. Yep. It's such useful proof that all of this stuff is happening in bad faith, right? Like, it's, I am endlessly willing to entertain arguments made in good faith, and this administration has made so abundantly clear that none of this shit is being done in good faith. No one, they're not trying to do the right thing. No one believes any of this. just it's some combination of their idiots and they think it's funny and they want to.

Yeah. And that's it. And there's just this endless search for power and how to use it and how to make other people feel bad. And I, look, we have wrestled with who should do the content moderation. How should you do it? How do you keep kids on the internet safe? Is it even appropriate for the government to have these rules? I have looked Barack Obama in the eye on Decoder.

You can go watch the video and said, aren't you trying to get around the First Amendment and had him try to answer that? question. I don't think he gave a very good answer. We're in it. We've been covering the stuff for years. And to have real concerns about government overreach into speech regulations met with Dr. Evil memes is just wildly inappropriate. It is disrespectful to the American people. It is on the line of you are a traitor to the Constitution. So Brendan, every week, I say this. I know, I know you're listening. I know I know you get the notes. Come on the show. Come on on this show, come on Decoder. You can argue with an AI if you want to. You will lose because

you are wrong. But the door is always open because I think you should be held to account for the decisions you're making and the fundamental unsuriceness with which you are taking the First Amendment. That's when Brendan Carr has done. Hit us up on Signal, Brendan. We'll be here. All right. We're like a hundred years into this podcast and we have not talked about the only thing anyone has been talking about. The joke that we open a show with. Yeah. Should we just talk about briefly. Yeah. I mean, there's a lot to say. There's almost nothing to say. Yeah, that's

where I'm at, too. So just to, like, if I can just very briefly recap what happened here. So Jeffrey Goldberg, the editor and chief of the Atlantic, got added in some way that I am still desperately trying to figure out to a signal group chat that included a bunch of people

very high up in the government, including Secretary of Defense Pete Hegsetth and vice president J.D. Vance and a bunch of other people in which they just planned attacks. And Jeffrey Goldberg writes this story being like, they planned attacks and signal and they added me to it. Everyone in the government denied it was like, this isn't classified.

None of that happened. We didn't do any attack planning and signal. He's a liar. So they just posted the chats. Yeah. By the way, the move here, just editor-in-chief wise, gold. Like gold, right? Oh, spectacular.

You say I didn't publish everything because I know it's classified, sensitive military information. The government says, screw you, nothing sensitive, nothing classified with shared. And you say, here's all of it. And you just know he had that in this back. Yes.

So, which I will give him credit for, because one of the things that a lot of people have been talking about this week is, why did my man leave the group chat? Which I agree with, frankly. I would have stayed in that group chat. I would have just, you just sit quietly and just watch the group chat happen.

But he did take some screenshots before he left the group chat. And I respect the hell out of that. You got to take your screenshots. Yeah. I mean, I think you leave once you think that you have information that would be illegal for your dad. Is it illegal if they add you to the group chat? So this is the complication here.

Right. And, you know, we're all the way down to this story where President Trump is like maybe signal is defective. And he keeps using the word defective, which is like very funny in this context. I will say everything the President Trump says suggests to me that he has no idea what has actually gone on. At one point, he referred to this group chat as a call. He said he got added to the call. And he keeps referring to the signal being bad. And it's like, my guy.

That's not. This is how he keeps putting black people and his secretary of housing and urban development because he says urban in it. This is true. He thinks the signal's bad. And why he keeps mentioning Hannibal Lecter in the context of asylum because he thinks it's the same. It's very good. Trump, notably, in this context, the most like dead ahead, trustworthy person talking. Because he's like, that was bad.

I had nothing to do. Yeah, it's true. He's like, I don't know what they're talking about. That wasn't me. And you're like, yeah, it wasn't you. I don't think you know how to use Signal. But he has claimed that it's defective. There's some amount of, like, was Signal hacked as a deflection?

Elon Musk now is going to investigate how this happened. And the answer is Mike Waltz added Jeffrey Goldberg to the Signal Chat. Yeah, it's right there in the screenshots. Yeah, because it's in the screenshot. Yeah. And maybe he shares in this rules with somebody else. Maybe he got the wrong 202 area code number because everyone's in D. and that's the area.

I don't know how it happened, but he did it. It's not a mystery. Right. Like, that's how Signal works. Maybe Signal's interface could be clear, but he did it. He did the thing.

And then they had that conversation, which was inappropriate to have Insignal. I think that much is clear as well. There are classified systems that are meant for that kind of communication. Potentially illegal to have Insignal, no? Potentially illegal, right, to not use the classified systems

for the kind of conversation they were having. Now there's this very tired semantic argument about the difference between war plans and attack plans. Right. But all of this is like, yeah, it's a tech story because it's a signal. They just did it in a group chat. Well, I'm saying the term that I'm worried about is they're going to be like, signal's not safe. We need to break its encryption. Oh, interesting.

Right. That's the turn that I'm just been on red alert for that makes it like really a verge story. Well, it's tricky though because it is clearly a thing that they are using on purpose because A, it's encrypted and B, it does. disappears, right? Like, they had, they had message retention limits in the group chat on purpose, which is, again, not a thing you're allowed to do as a government official doing official business, but is like clearly what's going on here. And there's another part of this that's, you know, you can make the argument that signal is safer than it used to be because they have to keep making the argument that it was safe because it's encrypted and can't be backdoored

and da-da-da-da-da-da. And now you can't go and attack it. Oh, interesting. So they've kind of painted themselves into a corner. Yeah. So I don't, I don't know, but the thing that I'm always nervous about is how will governments find ways to attack encryption? And here you have this thing. Here's this mess. And then the person with the big hammer, like the FBI with the big hammer that says, we shouldn't have encryption. Well, it could be like, do you have a nail? That looks like a huge nail. It's just always a thing that's on the back of my mind that I should be worried about. Like, will the government try to get rid of encryption because of this? So the argument is like Jeffrey Goldberg hacked his way into Signal. Thus, Signal is not saying.

anyway, thus we should break the encryption. Or the argument is we can't know because signals encrypted, and that's the law enforcement problem we have. We can't possibly arrest Jeffrey Goldberg because there's no evidence because of this encryption. Our buddy, big balls at Doge couldn't figure it out because he couldn't get by the encryption. It's very bad. This whole situation is very bad. And then like the Trump administration like just trying to power through it by saying the things that are obvious are not obvious. Right. It's bad. Like all of that's bad. And it is all.

centered on this app that I hope the Signal Foundation can withstand the pressure. I will say the Signal Foundation so far has responded to this very well, which is like they have mostly been very funny about it. And also it sounds like downloads have spiked. I think in a funny way, one very possible outcome of this is that if the government's going to use it to do attack planning, it's probably pretty safe. Like they're, if they're in here doing the group chats, that's a lot of trust to have

from a lot of very senior people. But then at the same time, this is a fundamentally unsurious group of people. And the other thing, Wired went and found that Mike Waltz's Venmo friend list was public.

And it's like, this is just, this is not a group of people who is smart and thoughtful and doing a good job. No. Can we just run the Marco Rubio audio? Because, you know,

they all had to do press conferences and I think the Atlantic timed this stuff when they knew, knew that Tulsi Gabbard and Mike Walts would be in front of Congress because they had hearings in the Senate in the house. So there was all these moments for people to talk. But it's Marco Rubio who is in the chat, who I think his response is just such a perfect. Yeah, just run the audio. You'll see what I'm saying.

And, you know, so I can speak to myself or my presence on it. I think my role, I was just speaking for my role. I I'm just it that's the just a primal scream of like help I'm in danger

yeah it's good look the story is going to keep playing out the thing that I think we're going to stay focused on it's like encrypted messaging is important encryption is important Elon Musk is going to somehow

investigate this now I do love that they've landed on Elon will fix it is though he's good at computers. That's how they're treating it here. And it's like, I think the military is good at keeping its information. This ends with like Elon telling lies about DMs on X, and suddenly that's where the war planning happens.

That's where this goes. I just want to shout out to our friends at 404 media who wrote a story about all this. And their headline is when your threat model is being a moron. And I think that sums it up all pretty well. Yeah, and that's correct. Speaking of Elon, we got a big Alex Heath scoop that we should mention briefly in the lightning round. We kind of knew this was happening, but Alex nailed it down. Elon is very mad about content moderation on Reddit.

He's mad about two things. One, which is totally justified. He's mad that there are death threats about him on Reddit, and he apparently has been communicating those directly to Steve Hoffman, Reddit, CEO. The other thing he's mad about is many, many subreddits have banned links to X, right? Which Reddit hasn't done anything about yet. But there's a lot of, it's a user drama, moderator drama about what Reddit might be doing, how it might be promoting these subredits, how it might be coming on doing moderation over the top against this perceived pressure. So far, it doesn't seem like they've made any subredits have links to X.

Like, that hasn't been the line they've crossed. But there's a lot of burbling. Yeah. How much pressure is Elon putting on the top and how much is that pressure being reflected on the user experience of Reddit? And that's, as always, that's bad. Yeah, and I would say, A, it's not at all surprising. And B, it is very funny because this is like, like, for a man who styles himself a free speech warrior, like, here it is. Yeah.

It's like, this is so of a piece for me with the thing that Elon Musk has decided it should be illegal not to advertise on X. That it is just like, we're just so deep down all of these rabbit holes where it's like, you can't possibly think what you just said out loud. that it's like every subreddit should be required to link to X. It's like, no, that's not how any of this works. It's just not how any of this works. And yeah, and I think the Reddit side of it is interesting because I think there is a sort of ongoing fundamental mistrust on those three levels. Like the users don't trust the mods and the admins.

The mods don't trust the admins. And the admins don't trust anybody. Yeah. And so it's just like this has always been a group of people. who are all suspicious of each other. So as soon as things like this come up, everybody is looking for like any little thing that happens. And like there was a,

was it white people Twitter that got, that was like briefly banned? Yeah, 72 hour ban. Because of that was a place that a lot of the conversation about Doge employees and the threats were being made. And there's now pretty clearly a link back to Elon Musk from that. This is just, it's both absurd in,

exactly the way you would expect and like a truly terrible look for everyone involved. There's also just some real fear of Elon here. Like if you run a competitor to Twitter, which by all accounts, you know, Reddit is, your answer should we go run your own social network. That's the answer. We're going to run ours our way. You run yours. I mean, I think back to like the first Trump administration when there was so much happening

because people were afraid that if they didn't do it or did do it or whatever, Donald Trump would tweet about it. And I think Elon Musk wields that same thing now, right? Like there's been Trump's like truth social presence. People pay attention to it, but it doesn't carry the weight that his his Twitter account once did. But Elon Musk sure does. He tweets a million times a day, but he is like he is somebody who can direct a lot of attention toward whatever he wants. And that is like it just feels like a behavior he learned by watching Donald Trump in his last campaign.

and administration. But I feel like if Elon was like, Reddit is being mean to me to go attack Reddit, Reddit's users would be capable of waging their own fight. That's true. Of all the communities on the internet, they would be like, no, we're very capable on our own. Like, come at me, bro. Yeah. We're good, actually.

We'll see. You just see that pressure. It's a good scoop from Alex. We'll see how those dynamics keep playing out. Speaking of social networks that have problems, TikTok, still in the news. Baby, do you keep pointing out that April is like tomorrow, basically? It's so soon, man. A lot of things come do in April, including the TikTok ban.

Next Saturday. Yeah. And there is, we were talking with Kylie about the perplexity thing, which is not going to happen. The Oracle thing burbles along. Walmart is going to, you know, come in off the top rope and buy it, according to Neelai. But now that the interesting thing is, and I think one of the questions we have been asked, over and over is essentially who gets to decide what constitutes a deal here, right? Like, who is the one who gets to say that satisfies the brief TikTok gets to remain?

And what happens now is a bunch of members of Congress, basically reminding the Trump administration that actually they do. And I just, I'll just read you the quote here. He says, to the extent that you continue trying to delay this. the divestment deadline through executive orders, any further extensions of the TikTok deadline will require Oracle, Apple, Google, and other companies to continue risking ruinous legal liability, a difficult decision to justify in perpetuity. So they're basically like, figure this out or it's going to happen.

And we are not going to continue to play these shenanigan games with you. Yeah. So the interesting thing here is the actual text of the bill, which we should read, which says, here's what a qualified divestiture is. So the bill said you have to sell it or be banned. Right. And everyone was like, this is a ban because Bight Dance will never sell. And then they didn't sell and they did their little stunt and they shut it down for a minute. And Trump said, you're fine until next Saturday. Which is weird because that's not how law enforcement's supposed to work. But here we are in the Trump administration. And Congress is trying very hard to remind him that that's not how law enforcement works. Yeah, you can't just delay this one to the Supreme Court. This is weird, but constitutional. The government is allowed to ban TikTok in this way.

So what Bytance was supposed to do is enact a qualified divestiture, which is sell TikTok. And so here's how it's defined in the bill. The term qualified divestiture means a divestager or similar transaction that A, the president determines through an interagency process would result in the relevant foreign adversary control an foreign adversary no longer being controlled by a foreign adversary. So that president, Donald Trump, has to go through an interagency process that results in TikTok no longer being controlled by Bitcoin. bite dance. That's a big one. What is this process? Is the Trump administration capable of a process? No. Who are the agencies? But the Trump administration seems very confident than an executive order counts as an interagency process. I guess, right? I mean, they have to, a bunch of agencies, including our national security agencies, have to weigh in. Right. We don't know if that's going to

happen by Saturday. And we don't know if the sort of moves that they have on the table, like, bite dance will reduce its share of this to X amount of dollars and Oracle will increase its share will satisfy this process. And all we've got is like J.D. Vance being like, we'll have the high level structure of a deal by the deadline. I don't know. So my guess would be, and we're going to find out in eight days, but my guess would be they're going to use that because there was a provision that if there was a deal in the works, they could do another 90 day delay. in order to finish that deal. But that's over. That's over.

That was in the original text. There was that. But wasn't the 75-day delay that we just did something else? No, because the deadline passed. This all matters if you believe the rule of law in America still matters.

And what matters is did Donald Trump tell the Attorney General to enforce this law? And the answer right now is she said to her, don't do it. So she's not doing it. Right. And will that matter on Saturday?

Maybe he'll say it again. And like, that's where you have letters from Congress saying, hey, we passed this law. Your job is to enforce it, not to delay it. And we gave you this grace period, basically, because the law went into effect on the first day you were in office. Okay, grace period's up, enforce the law or don't.

Right. And I just don't know if there's going to be a deal. There's this other part that says, like, maybe you can get the algorithms out. The goal of this law is for them to sell it is to get bite dance out of social media. in the United States. And at least as far as I can tell, there is not a lot of indication coming from anywhere other than the Trump administration that a deal is happening.

Because I think everyone is, except for perplexity, which I think tells you a lot about the status of their efforts here. Yeah. There's the, what is it, Frank McCourt's thing, Project Liberty, is that what it's called? Like, that's out there. That's the one where Alexis Hohani and Mr. B is want to put it on the blockchain. Oh, God. Yeah.

Sure. Sure. Why not put TikTok on the blockchain? Like, it's whatever. That's the same as banning it. It'll be fine. Everything's an NFT now. Yeah.

We're going to light the ocean on fire. Some other lightning round items here. This one's real quick. The Google antitrust trial, the remedies phase, where they already determined that Google had a monopoly in search, and now it's what do we do about it? That's set to kick off in April as well. Right. The government, including Trump's administration, wants them to get rid of Chrome. Right.

That was the approach of the DOJ under the Biden administration who won the trial. The Trump DOJ is sticking to it. Yep. We won the case. The DOJ won the case. The United States won the case. You're a monopoly. We also think the remedy is getting rid of all this stuff.

Google has filed an answer. The news here is that Apple moved to intervene in that case. And you can basically be like, don't take our money away. And the court ruled that they were too late. Yeah, which is really interesting. So they're not allowed. So that's 20 billions of Apple's revenue on a calendar error, basically. Apple was like central to that case.

I mean, there was so much Apple in that case. And it's fascinating to see it just totally looped out of the last part of this. Yeah. We'll see. That case is coming up. By the way, the FTC's case against meta in which the government is asking for Instagram and WhatsApp too swel off also come up in April. You're very excited about that case.

I think that is the most legible case to the biggest audience. The government wants Mark Zuckerer to get rid of Instagram. there's not another, I don't have to say more words. Right. Yeah, everyone understands exactly what I mean. Like, I honestly think Google is a monopoly in search, and so the government wants it to get rid of Chrome is totally opaque. Yeah.

Like, you have to explain a bunch of hoops. Well, which is why it's funny. Like, Google pays Apple $20 billion a year to be the search engine in Safari is actually more legible than Google is a monopoly because of Chrome. And even though I think both are sort of equally true. But you're right. Like, is meta a monopoly and thus should it have to get rid of Instagram? Is it just, it's, it is as perfectly simple a monopoly case as I think you'll find.

But they're going to spend seven weeks making it really complicated. Oh, so you can ask every celebrity in the world if Mark Zuckerberg shown Instagram. Like, I think about the local TV news test. You know, like, is this a local TV segment? It's just like, whoever, like, man on the street, should Mark Zuckerberg on Instagram? They're like, no. And like, there you go. Like, that's great TV.

That's coming up as well. It's big April. And then the other thing that's happening is tariffs hit in April. Trump yesterday announced 25% tariffs on cars and car parts. If they're not manufactured United States, this is going to be a huge problem for every car maker. Yep. Most cars are made of parts from all kinds of places. There are some, like, USMCA trade carveouts here.

The whole audio industry is like sort of reorganizing around. this problem. There might be some benefit to Tesla, because Tesla makes so many of its cars in the United States. But it's common, like, tariffs are here. He got held off on them once. He got held off on them again. I don't think he's going to blink this time. It doesn't seem like it.

The tariffs on Chinese products are like 45%. So I think we're just going to see a bunch of consumer electronics prices go up. We're going to see a bunch of car prices go up. I will say that there's a lot of, a lot. of memes of people trading in their Tesla's for Rivians, which is really interesting. I've seen a cyber truck with the Rivian logo on the back. I've now seen a cyber truck with the Toyota logo on the back that's floating around New York City. That has been my favorite meme, the people putting like Honda and BMW logos where the Tesla thing used to be. It's

very funny. I've also seen a picture of a cyber truck where they just have put like huge fender flares on it to make it look like a different car. I was just going to say the cyber truck famously easy to make look like other cars. I was like, no, that's a cyber truck, bro. And I know, one big wiper really sells it every time. And then, you know, there's just the general angst around Tesla. B.D, the Chinese company, is outselling Tesla right now. I did BYD to $107 billion in revenue for 2024, which is way over Tesla's $97.7 billion. B.D ships more than double the vehicles of Tesla if you can at it's hybrids.

And then they're investing in charging tech. Their new BID's new charging tech is twice as fast as Tesla's. you can get 250 miles range in like five minutes. Yeah. And we talked about like the the ongoing boom in, like, excitement about Chinese EVs coming to the U.S. Like the cars are not, but the like TikTokers and YouTubers are reviewing them.

A lot of UID stuff starting to show up. Yeah. Andy Hawkins is working on a story now. We should have him on when he does that story. Oh, there you go. Yeah. And the like supposed biggest day of Tesla takedown is this weekend. And so I think we're going to,

We'll have Andy on next week, maybe. We'll talk through a lot of this stuff. Yeah. I know people get, there's whatever noise about Tesla take down where it's all just like domestic terrorism. First of all, domestic terrorism, very fuzzy concept in American law. It's just true. It has been for a long time. It's not illegal on its own.

Like, the things you do are illegal. And there are some definitions. But there's not like a law. So like the government keeps saying this thing. And it's like cheat codes to get surveillance warrants. it's very it's very weird and like a lot of the trump administration is invoking powers that are reserved for special circumstances like we're at war with canada say you just like say these words to to justify even like tariffs are they're being justified under emergency powers right so there's

some weird stuff with the Tesla protests that we will cover but yeah there's big protests coming Tesla's under a lot of pressure these tariffs might benefit Tesla so there's some back and forth there. And then last little one, which I think we should end on a high note. But cars, Rivian had a secret e-bike company that it spun out called Also, which is pretty cool. I'm pumped about this. The idea of Rivian taking its tech into, like, at first they were like micromobility, and I was like, dope, we're going to get some scooters. Because you know I love a scooter startup. But it sounds like it's going to be bikes, but they're going to use some of the Rivian tech, they're going to use a lot of Rivian's like manufacturing capabilities.

And one of the things that RJ, the CEO said is that he thinks it is ridiculous how expensive these great e-bikes are. And I also think it is ridiculous how expensive they are. And so that made me very happy. Yeah. Like if Rivian can figure out how to economies of scale its way into good e-bikes for like half what they currently cost, great. Forget cars. Just do that. I'm good. I'm super down with that. I am looking at an R1S like every day right now. Yeah. Yeah. I've, I've test driven one a million times.

RJ was on decoder. They gave me one for a weekend. It was cool. It's like they're not as nice on the inside as our Jeep, but they're obviously better cars because jeeps are made by Stalantis. I don't know what else to say about that. Like, if you want a three-year-o SV for your family and you want a bunch of range,

like the R1S is the thing that exists. Yeah. But they're pretty Spartan on the inside. they're also expensive. I'm just like, oh, these tariffs are coming. All these cars are going to get more expensive. So buy it now. That's the only answer.

Right. And I'm like, am I just going to pull the trigger on this car for kind of no reason, except I think the tariffs will make an expensive a year for now? I'm sure that's a case, Becky will buy. Listen, I don't need this car now, but it'll be more expensive in two weeks. By the way, if you have a Jeep 4xie, if you have one of the hybrids, you need to go to the dealer today because they just issued the software update for the recall they had, where they told everyone to not charge their cars,

because they might start on fire. Oh, boy. And part of that was not just don't charge your car. It was leave it outside in case it starts on fire. This is a real thing. They had defective Samsung batteries in them. So the recalls out. You could go to the dealer.

They do the software upgrade. Part of the software upgrade is just making the software know if there's going to be fire. Like, these numbers are out of spec. Like, there's going to be fire. And then another part of the software upgrade is after they do it, they drive your car around. And there's like some specific set of miles. You have to drive at specific speed.

To see if it does fire. To see if it hits the threshold that requires a battery call. You can understand where I'm like, I should get a different car. Because we did all the things, and a car was fine. But once that happens, you're like, I don't like you anymore. I'm, you know, I have uncomfortable feelings about you specifically. Yeah, you don't get that trust back. I don't think.

Yeah. Yeah. So, I don't know. If you can talk me into an R1S, you know, send me a note. There we go. I'm also open to a 2002 escalade, which you can buy at any point for $2,000. It's all, every time we talk about a computer on the show, and we're like, it's $1,500. We're like, a new iPad.

I'm like, I could get a 2002 escalate. It's the dream. All right, we need to get out of here. We got it. Let me know if you have a 2002 escalate. That's awesome. If you've got one, you know, let's make a deal. Let's talk.

All right. That's it. That's Vergecast. Fuck, go. And that's it for the Vergecast this week. And hey, we'd love to hear from you. Give us a call at 866 Verge. The Vergecast is a production of The Verge and the Vox Media Podcasts Network.

Our show is produced by Will Por, Eric Gomez, and Brandon Kiefer. And that's it. We'll see you next week.