The Vergecast - The end of the Sony era in TVs

Episode Date: January 23, 2026

Nilay owns a Sony TV. He loves his Sony TV, and he's a little sad that it appears this era of Sony TVs is ending. He and David talk through the news of a new joint venture between Sony and TCL, before digging into OpenAI's new-fangled plan to make money (spoiler alert: it's ads!), and some new news about an AI gadget Apple may or may not be working on. Then it's time for the lightning round: Brendan Carr, Netflix, the Trump Phone, and much more. Further reading: The TikTok deal could finally close this week. Epic and Google have a secret $800 million Unreal Engine and services deal Sony’s TV business is being taken over by TCL  What a Sony and TCL partnership means for the future of TVs OpenAI’s 2026 ‘focus’ is ‘practical adoption’  OpenAI releases a cheaper ChatGPT subscription  Ads are coming soon to ChatGPT, starting with shopping links  Opinion | A.I. Is Real. But OpenAI Might Still Fail.Apple is reportedly working on an AirTag-sized AI wearable  Apple is turning Siri into an AI bot that’s more like ChatGPT  FCC Targets Colbert and Kimmel in New Crackdown on Late-Night TV - The New York Times Bureau Provides Guidance on Political Equal Opportunities Requirement | Federal Communications Commission Free TV startup Telly only had 35,000 units in people’s homes last fall Microsoft wants to build 15 data centers in Mount Pleasant, Wisconsin  OpenAI says its data centers will pay for their own energy and limit water usage Netflix will revamp its mobile UI this year  600,000 Trump Mobile phones sold? There’s no proof. YouTubers will be able to make Shorts with their own AI likenesses  Subscribe to The Verge for unlimited access to theverge.com, subscriber-exclusive newsletters, and our ad-free podcast feed.We love hearing from you! Email your questions and thoughts to [e-mail] or call us at 866-VERGE11. 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. to the Virchcast, flagship podcast of the AI 8K and 5G ecosystem. Again, Neelai.

It's back, baby. We're doing this again. We're so close. I'm your friend David Pierce. Neil Yip Salis here. Hi, buddy. Hey, man. We have some local Neelai news again.

We're going to get to that later in the show. But there are very few times that the Vergecast and Neelai's hometown intersect, and we need to celebrate them. Someone sent me a video of like an MLM grifter in my hometown of Ristine, Wisconsin, making a video about how you should come join his MLMGryft, and the video opened with, I just bought an office building in Racine, Wisconsin, which is just one of the least impressive things you can say.

And then it was like a commission-only sales, like boiler room sales gig. I thought we should cover it. So here it is. That's the information I have for you. That's fantastic. I also love that your brand now has extended to Racine guy. Like, this is good.

This has been. Yeah. What are you talking about? The longer I live in New York, the more I'm from Wisconsin. That's just a good. dynamic that's been true for 15 years. Yeah, that's about right. All right, we have a lot to talk about today. We have some TV business to attend to. We have a lot of AI stuff. We have some gadgety stuff.

Brendan Carr, I assume, remains Brendan Carr. We should say it right at the top that we have some potentially breaking news either while we're recording or between when we record and when you hear this. Nilai, there are two big things potentially happening like any minute now, right? Yeah. One thing is literally happening as we speak, which is Sean Hollister is in a courtroom where Epic and Google are trying to convince a very skeptical judge that they should be allowed to settle their antitrust trial, which if the settlement goes through, Google will open up Android to alternative app stores, Tim Sweeney would be very happy, and if it doesn't go through, the judge will figure out what to do, and Google will probably make it even more costly to do alternative app stores in some way.

The judge, from what we can tell, from just reading Sean's live posts on our website, as we record, the judge seems very skeptical of these two companies saying that they've settled their disagreements. We're going to see what happens. But that news might break as we record. So we're going to keep an eye on that one. Yeah. And then the other one is apparently today, Thursday, January 22nd, as we're recording, was a deadline for the closing of the TikTok deal. I will remind everyone that all of these dates are made up. This deal is more or less nonsensical and has been sort of happening

and not happening simultaneously for a year now, literally a year. And I have no faith in any of this happening. So this is like normally when there's something like this going on, we would debate whether, you know, do we start the show late? Do we wait for this to happen? I am fully done waiting for anything to happen with the TikTok deal. But it is possible that that will happen officially sometime in the very near future. The way I've come to understand the United States Department of Justice under Donald

Trump and Pam Bondi is that it's a hype house. It is a content factory. Speak on this. So Pam Bondi is an influencer and she's got a bunch of friends who all think they're very attractive. You can decide for yourself whether that's true. And they make content together all day long. And that is their purpose. But they all do kind of get. Star in each other's things. Yeah. They're all in each other's videos. They're doing collabs, right?

There's phrases. They're clearly marketing products, whether or not they've disclosed it as per the law of the land. But it's a hype house. It's a content factory. It is in no way of functioning law enforcement agency. And so the idea that there's a deadline

for the TikTok deal to go through that if missed would result in some penalty has nothing to do with the operation of the hype house. The hype house is just going to do hype house stuff. And once you unlock this in your brain, right? That, like, they're just running a slightly worse business than, like, Logan Paul invented many, many years ago. And that some people are in and some people are out and no one will ever explain why the fake breakup occurred.

Suddenly you're like, oh, this makes, like, the world is ending. This is very dystopian. But the TikTok deadlines have nothing to do that. Right. Whatsoever. But that is, like. I'm now going to think about press conferences as collabs from now on. That's a very important new shift in my brain that just happened.

It does make a lot of things make a surprising amount of sense. Yeah, like you guys pretended to be best friends for 10 years, and now you just don't acknowledge that one other exists because you moved out of the high pass. That's what happened to you. Sorry, Marjorie. The contract ended. Yeah, it's all over. We're bringing up the new set of stars who have to pay less.

You can get your own brand deals now. That's pretty good. That is pretty good. It is, by the way, the dominant thesis of how The Verge covers the Trump administration. They're all just influencers. And they tweet, they try to tweet things into existence. Donald Trump is trying to tweet his way into owning Greenland. Yep.

And then he literally met the guy who runs NATO and he's like, you can't have it. And now he's like, I have concepts of a deal. Like when the social posts hit reality, things go sideways. But there are a bunch of content creators. It is increasingly true. O'Mallek wrote a great blog this week, basically saying that we've shifted to velocity is authority, is the way he termed it,

that if you can just move fast and say things often and loudly, you will win. And it is alarmingly how it works. And this is why, and I'm dead serious about this, we are about to unleash a bot army of clip farmers

to make this show more popular. And if you think I'm joking, just wait, because I'm motivated to play the game the way it's designed to be played. That said, I'd lack the capacity to make bombastic claims about owning other countries. I described you today to somebody on our team as NELA is in a manic state about social platforms right now.

I feel like I'm about right on that one. I just want to play the game the way it's designed to be played. That's it. And that way is psychotic. But we're going to do it. It's going to be great. Virgast hype house. It's coming.

Yeah. We're doing this. All right. So you, in your, you know, manic state about. Clipping everything. You want to talk about TVs. You demanded that we lead with some, I would say, both important and surprisingly popular news in the TV business.

It's not surprisingly popular. It's popular for all the reasons it should be popular. Okay. Which is that Sony is a storied brand, like the brand that initiates the most people into gadgets, or historically initiated the most people in the gadgets. And it is announced a deal to, to give up control of its TV business to TCL in some sort of joint partnership.

Very importantly, they've only announced a memorandum of understanding, which means they're going to work on a deal together, but they're announcing the deal, so it doesn't have to be a secret. Begly of concepts of a plan. It's 100% concepts of a plan. But the outline looks like TCL will control 51% of a new joint venture, Sony will control 49% of it. They'll make Sony Bravia TVs.

The branding will remain the same. and then other stuff will happen and various regulators on the world we'll get to chime in all the investors get to chime in maybe they still go through

but what they've announced is boy we went from a world where Sony was the dominant consumer electronics company around like the high end one to a world where they're selling their TV business to a Chinese competitor

most people had not heard of five years ago that's a big story it did huge numbers on our site it means a lot of things a lot of people there's some dynamics underneath it about TVs and displays

that I think important. But I think just saying, man, look at that arc. Look at what Sony has become. Yeah. I think a lot of people just have a lot of feelings about it. I think that's true. I mean, and I think storied is the right term for Sony as a brand. I think at this moment in time, Sony is not a particularly relevant electronics company. It makes the PlayStation. PlayStation is very important and very powerful and very successful. It makes the camera sensors. for a lot of things. So as a, as a manufacturer, it's very good.

It makes a lot of high-end stuff. It makes a lot of camera sensors, like you said. It makes expensive televisions. It makes it makes Walkmen that are like weird mid-range Android phones with high-end audio. But I think it's still true that Sony occupies this very important place in people's mind. All the way back to like the Walkman, which was a seminal moment in technology history. The Trinitron TV, right? Yeah.

Like the highest end best CRT TVs you could buy Retrinitrons, that was a brand that, you know, when people moved to flat panels like that went away, Sony never really recovered in big ways. But like they were the cutting edge for up into the mid-2000s. Like Sony was the the dominant consumer electronics company in a lot of ways. Steve Jobs wanted to be Sony. Yeah. He took a lot of inspiration from Sony and Sony's founders. famously he toured the Sony factories to get inspiration for Apple factories,

like way in the 80s. And you just see that they, basically between smartphones, their ideas about software, and I think crucially, their ideas about memory stick formats. Sony just lost the plot. Yeah.

And in particular, I got overtaken by vastly cheaper first Korean companies, Samsung and LG, and then as those companies moved in the high end, they were overtaken by vastly cheaper Chinese companies like TCL and High Sense,

and now those companies are moving on high hand. And TCL is basically skipping the line. There's like, we're just going to buy this stuff from Sony and run this brand. I just think there's something important to say about that dynamic. Originally, it was Samsung and LG were the cheaper foreign competitors to Sony, right? Like, there were the high-end Japanese companies, Sony, Panasonic, what have you. They got eaten by Korean upstarts.

And then the Korean companies moved way up. Samsung has basically high-end brand now. LG's a high-end brand. They all sell, like, billions of brands. products. So there's still cheap Samsung products in the world, but they wanted their brand to be at the top of top of the chain. And now you have T-Sel and Hysense, which started as budget brands. And they're also on their way up. And I just think it's fascinating that T-Sel skipping the line. And Sony's like, yeah, we're out. We're not going to do this anymore. So my immediate assumption

about what this deal was is TCL is going to make TCL TVs and put the Sony name on them. And that actually what TCL has is this incredible manufacturing infrastructure. It's able to make a lot of things very quickly and very cheaply. And that is how these Chinese companies have come up, right? They found ways to make things at unbelievably low prices and unbelievably huge capacity and have sort of slowly gotten better over time to the point where they've nearly caught up. But the Sony brand, for all the reasons you just said, is an objectively better brand than TCL. And so they're just buying a name and now they can start selling Sony TVs.

But it sounds like it's actually more complicated than that and that there's some technology pairing here that actually made sense. John Higgins wrote a great piece for us about this. And he actually seems optimistic that this might lead to everybody's TV is getting better somehow. Yeah, you know, this is what I was saying about kind of the display industry being in a really interesting spot. So there's really only a handful of scaled display panel manufacturers. There's Samsung, there's LG, and there's TCL. And, you know, there are other ones and other companies have their own displays, and they talk about high sense exists, right? But T-Sel is huge.

And they make all the panels for Sony's LCD TVs. And Sony has made this big bet that many LED TVs will overtake OLED on some timeline. And I don't know if that's true, right? Like Sony's picture processing is the best in the industry. You know, they win all the awards. John Higgins actually just reviewed the Bravia A-2, and he's like, this is beautiful. when I did the very, very technical King of TV shootout, it won that award, but A95L won it before that.

Like, their processing is what has made Sony TVs the best for so many years. Interesting. It's their picture processing, their motion handling, all that stuff. They care about it a lot. They talk about it a lot. But they have bought the panels from Samsung. They have bought the panels from LG. And increasingly, they have been buying the mini-LAD panels from TCL.

And so TCL's next generation. of many LEDs, which we're going to review soon. It's called the X-11L. Like, that's where the state of the art is. So T-CL is on the state of the art on the technology path Sony wants to be on. So you kind of see, okay, well, like, we're buying the panels from this company anyway. Why don't we just enter a joint venture with them?

Because this is the bet we're making on the future of TVs. I think LG's bet on the future of everything looks like OLED. But Samsung has a different refunola. And obviously, I think Samsung just wants everything to be framed TVs in the end. And so you just see the three biggest panel manufacturers making three different technology bets, like radically different technology bets. And Sony isn't in any position to do that. It doesn't make the panels. It doesn't determine the technology.

It's just sort of like one of the most important customers of TCL's panel division and not Samsung's most important customers. important customer. Like, not by a long shot. So, like, where does it go? What is this thing? If all its real value is the brand, whichever I loves, and the picture processing, which consistently wins, like, every competition it's ever entered in. And I think the answer is, okay, fine, we'll just continue to be a mid-sized Samsung customer. We'll get the benefit of working directly with TCL. T-cell is building an OLED factory. And maybe that's going to happen. And you're like, all that makes sense, and it's still pretty sad. Why is it sad? What's sad about I just think, like, the idea that Sony isn't driving the cutting edge of the foundational

technology is sad in, like, a specific way. Whereas, you know, in camera sensors, for example, Sony drives the cutting edge of camera sensor technology. There's a reason Apple puts Sony sensors in so many of its phones and always will for the time to come. There's a reason that Sony alpha cameras are used everywhere. It's because Sony is driving the cutting edge of sensor technology there. There's other places where Sony does that. I think the fact that it no longer makes the display technology means that it's not going to drive that. Maybe actually this deal, maybe one argument is a bunch of Sony people will start to drive the cutting edge of panel technology because they will have direct access to the company

that's making the panels because it's all just one joint venture now. So maybe that's the move. But the idea that Sony just ran around in circles doing dumb stuff for like a decade and forgot to build panels and forgot to invest in the foundational technology is a miss. Like this is a company that by all rights should be driving the bleeding edge here and just stopped. And so this is the big one. I mean, it also feels like a part of this whole race to the bottom in TVs that we've been in for a long time where everything is getting cheaper. Everything is getting better, but in a sort of, you know, plateauing way.

And the money to be made is not actually in being the company that makes and sells the best panels. It's in like advertising. And I think we're just in this place where I was reading a great, I think it was M.G. Seagler wrote a whole thing basically being like, I wish Apple would make a television, which is a blog post somebody writes every 15 minutes. I've written that blog post. Yeah. And it was like he made a bunch of good arguments about like, okay, well, you know, the TV is the center of our home. It's a very important piece of technology. Why don't we care for it more? That's all true and good. But it just feels like the market for that is dead and gone. and there is no getting it back. So the idea of like, what if we tried hard and made it great and thus could be a mainstream

valuable success as a result seems like a dead idea to me. And so what you do is you're either Samsung and you either have this new idea about how to sell me a bad television or you just sell them cheaper and cheaper and cheaper and cheaper and cheaper and you try to find other ways to make money. And if you're Sony and your business is or was, we make the best things and sell it to you at a high price, like, does that exist in the TV business anymore? I don't think people care about what their TVs look like. Like, the idea that the A95L and the Brabbi 82 were the best-looking TVs you could buy,

especially if you calibrate them, like, you say that to people, and they're like, what? Does it cost $500? Right. Like, it just simply doesn't matter. And, you know, I think the mini-LED bet is you can make a much cheaper panel that gets you, like, 80% of the way to the OLED look. and it's still great for sports, which is what people watch

in big TVs now. I was going to say, is it possible that the true upside here is not that it helps everybody invest in, you know, bleeding edge technology, but what it actually means is the $299 gigantic panel

that you buy in Walmart can be better because they can steal some of Sony's tech? Like on the level that like 10 years from now, the technology will trickle down to the 299 panel. Like 10 years from now, the $300 TV is as,

good as today's best TV? Yeah, sure. That's probably true. That's, that's probably true today if you look backwards. Sure, but I don't need it to be as good. I'm just saying, like, can I, can TCL take Sony's processing and make its own TVs six percent better for free? Maybe. That's what I want. I don't give a shit about all these expensive TVs. That's the promise of a deal like this. Again, memoranding of understanding, I don't know if governments around the world or don't this happen. There's a lot of question marks, right? Yeah. Doing a JV with a Chinese company, right? in countries around the world. There's a lot of question marks about

whether Sony's investors or T-Sales investors want this up. So who knows? But yeah, that's the idea, right? Is you get a full lineup of Sony-Bravia TVs at every price point that are good using T-Sales tech. And T-Sail's brand is irrelevant to all of that. Or maybe there's a split,

and at some price point, you go from T-Sail to buying a Sony TV, and it's the same. I mean, the other underlying piece of puzzles is they both run Google TV. Right. Right. So, like, the underlying operating system

is the same, more as like, I don't know, T-Cell tried to do this with Samsung. They'd be like, so we have to get rid of Tyson. And then like, they would do like a seance or something to like go over the past. And then the world would get measurably better the minute that happened. And as somebody who runs Google TV on a Sony bravia today, it's fine but not great in the way that all TV software is fine but not great. And the reason that TVs are able to be cheap is that the software is full of upsells and

add-ons and advertising. And that's, you can have whatever feelings you want about that. But the reason the TV has been devalued is because they made the price up front really cheap, and then they make all that money back on weird advertising and stuff in the interface. And there's no getting around that anymore. That's just reality. One of the reasons the high-end bravias are expensive is because I think Sony assumes that you're just going to run away from their software. Yeah, because at that point, you're a person discerning enough to do the work to get away from it.

And they're like, what we have to. Yeah, you have like a collide escape streamer, which is my dream in life is to get a kaleiderstakes streamer. But actually, Cloudyscape has offered me one. I was like, I'll review it while we have the baby, and I'm on leave, and that just never happened because honestly, what was I thinking? I'm still going to, I'm going to find out one of these things. My blueie looks so sick right now. This is great.

All right, we should get to a lot of this AI news, because there's a lot of AI news to do. But does this change? Here's a last question for you before we take a break. If you're a person looking to buy a TV and you want like a nice TV, does this change the speed with which people should go by televisions? If you're trying to buy the best TV right now, the move is to go find a discounted Sony A95L, the last generation, which some people say looks better than the Bravia 8-2, which is, by the way,

horrible name. Some people claim that's true. I have an 895L, so I need to believe that that's true. It's very important for me to believe that that's true. But that is, it's like, by far the move, because it's the previous generation, and they're only selling the 77 because the Bravia 82 doesn't come in that size. So if you can find one of the small. A95Ls on discount

because it's the previous generation, that's the move. The Bravia A2 sometimes goes on discount now, but it's not very much. But that would be my recommendation, because that is a great TV and you will not regret it for one second.

You know what I haven't regretted is all the horrible TCL TVs that I have. I'm just kidding. I regret that every single day of my life when I try to open an app and it takes an hour. How's your frame TV? It's fine.

It continues to take three power button presses to turn it on every day. And this is somehow the life I have chosen to lead. My three-year-old toddler has figured out which one is the power button. And even he can't figure out when it turns things on or not. And it annoys him every single time. And I'm like, buddy, I get it. Like, well, take it up with Samsung.

It appears fully that the person who was trying to write the home bridge integration for the frame TV was like driven to a state of madness and quit the project. Just because of how the power button works. Like you can't discern its state because Samsung, and its infinite wisdom decided that power buttons should not turn things on and off, but enter a weird liminal state where it shows you art. And is that on or is that off? Literally no one knows.

Samsung, everybody. All right, we got a second, then we're going to go back and talk about some AI news. 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 Heinz, 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 Upwork. The days of doing it all, all by yourself, are over. There's no romance in burning out while you're trying to scale. Instead, you can check out Upwork. Upwork helps grow your business

by giving you fast access to specialize talent across more than 125 categories so you can fill skill gaps, launch projects faster, and scale without committing to full-time headcount. And finding the right talent is easy.

You can browse profiles, review past work, and get help scoping the role so you can get started quickly. Seriously, you could connect with the right freelancer in just a few hours, especially when you sign up with Business Plus. Their AI powered shortlisting pairs you with the top 1% of talent in under six hours.

No endless searcher required. You can visit Upwork.com right now to post your job for free. That's Upwork.com to connect with top talent ready to help your business grow. That's UPWRK.com. Upwork.com. 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 to start selling. sell. Whatnot.com slash sell. All right, we're back. During the break in which Neli and I go and do many activities, which everyone likes to think about, we had some semi-meaningful Epic Google updates.

Let's just live blog our way through this podcast. What's going on? Yeah, I'm just going to read Sean's update. John's live-blogging from the courtroom, which is always the most fun. So Epic's Economist is in front of the judge, arguing that the settlement is better than the injunction the judge issued

which Epic argued for. You have to remember, Epic sued Google. Right. And won pretty handily. And they won. So the judge is like, why are you back here with a settlement when you were asking me for all this stuff that I gave you? And it seems to be very tense.

And the core idea, the core argument from Epic right now seems to be, this settlement is forever. Your ruling was for like three years. So give me forever, we'll compromise and take forever versus three years. The judge seems very skeptical of all this. Well, because the judge in this case has been very interested. this whole time in making sweeping giant changes to everything. Like, this has been, this is the judge who has been like,

I am going to basically tear Google open with my bare hands. And I can see why he would be skeptical of the idea that these two companies, you know, figured it out amongst themselves and actually everything's fine. Yeah. I'll just quote the judge. I questioned you about the need for the duration period. And you said it was such a critical remedy that you advocated for a period twice as long. But now they want to throw out the window for the show.

I don't know, man. Sure. We'll see what happens. We'll check in on it as we go. Yeah, we'll check in. We got time. All right. So right after we published last week's podcast,

Open AI announced that it was going to start doing ads. Essentially how I can put it. Open AI, Sam Altman, the CEO of OpenAI, has been saying pretty loudly over and over for the last couple of years that he didn't want to do ads, that ads was the last resort, that he didn't think ads was the right thing for chat beat GPT. And I would say our general assumption was like, buddy, you'll come around. Everybody eventually does. This is the only idea anyone has. Do the most lucrative business in the history of the world. Yeah, you'll do ads.

Google is the most lucrative business in the history of the world. Lo and behold, they're doing ads. They also announced they're doing, they have a cheaper chat GPT subscription called ChatGPT Go that is $8 a month as opposed to $20 a month. And then this week, Sarah Fryer, the CFO of OpenAI, published this memo of basically priorities for 2026. And the number one thing that they said was practical adoption of AI. And I would just say this is a very long memo of all of the things that Open AI is up to. And it boils down to essentially we have to figure out how to make money because everything is expensive.

We have all of these giant commitments to pay. I think the number is $1.4 trillion just in compute. There was a really great story the other day about how Open AI is paying its staff more per capita than any company in history. Like, the money is just outrageous. And Sarah Friar is basically like, we need to figure out how to make you use it in such a way that we get money now. Yeah. By the way, it's not just Sarah Friere saying this. The World Economic Forum is happening in Davos, as we speak. Another thing we'll live vlog as the podcast goes on.

Sure. A lot of stuff happened at Davos. Trump talked about Greenland. And so you might have missed in the flurry of absolutely chaotic news, Satcha Nadella in a conversation with BlackRock CEO Larry Fink, saying a telltale sign of a bubble is if all we talk about is tech firms, we need to talk about like everyone else using it. And then he was like, we need to make sure that we change the work with this technology

so that people use it more. Otherwise, it's a bubble. There's a lot of ways to read that. always been saying that, like variations of this for a long time. But he's basically like, we need to convince people to use AI more, otherwise it's a bubble. That's not great. And use AI more dot, dot, dot, dot at work, right? Like that is a thing.

And that's a piece of this open AI memo, too, is they go into, they talk all of this big game about all of the things that it's going to do in all of the ways that it's meaningful to people and all of the ways that everybody is using it to plan travel. And then it's like, it's like, and then they took it to work. And it's like, oh, right. AI is a SaaS business. Yeah. Like, do not ever forget it. For all the things they're going to tell you, AI is a SaaS business.

It is a corporate technology. Well, we think so. But now they're launching ads because they don't know if it's a good enough SaaS business. This is the thing. They are begging you to take it to work so that your boss will pay for it. But then you're exactly right. The flip side of this is they desperately need a lot of people.

Like, there's no question. that the adoption of these chatbots has been huge. Tons of people use it. Every number you see is gigantic, right? Like a massive number of people are using these in some meaningful way every month. But there's been a bunch of studies recently that suggests that some like small, single digit percentage of those people are or are even willing to pay for access to those chatbots. It's like I've seen numbers.

I've seen numbers like 8% of people say they would ever be willing to pay. I've seen numbers that say 3% of people say they're willing to be pay. And so it's like to go from chat GPT is fun to talk to and seems like kind of my friend to I will pay $20 a month for access to chat GPT is such a massive barrier for people that I think all of these AI companies are finally coming around to realizing $20 a month is like a hell of a lot of money. Yeah. And it's going to be a problem for them.

I'll just bring you back to the CEO of Razor on the coder at CS saying 20 bucks is 20 bucks, even though he's a billionaire. Like, first of all, there's pin drop silence in the room when he said that. I don't know, man. Like, first of all, the $20 price is kind of a historical accident. Like, opening, I believe, just like picked the number out of a hat. Yep. And they've basically said as much.

Yeah. They're like, we picked a number. Is this the one? So, you know, new products at lower prices, new products at higher prices. That's just what mature businesses do. Yep. But they're staring down Google at scale delivering most. of the value for free in AI overviews, as good or bad as you think AI overviews are, their

competitor is free and readily available. We're going to talk about Apple in a second. Apple's going to have a version of Siri powered by some RIF on Gemini that will be free on your phone. Google's obviously going to do that on Android. OpenA. has to be better or cheaper or faster or something in order to get the scale to make their business work. And I bet what they're going to end up at is the same as Google, free with ads. Yeah. And there's a reason they are hiring so many people from meta. Like, it is just a flood of people from meta going to Open AI.

So much so that I have been told that like meta executives have to address it at virtually every all hands inside of, oh, wow. Like, another person has gone to Open AI because they are, you know, they're paying more per capita than any tech company in the world. Like, they're paying these huge numbers and they're just bringing all over all these executives from meta, we're good at products who are good at advertising, who have those relationships. Are they good at it yet? No, but they certainly are hiring the talent as fast of a clip as you might think they're hiring the core AI talent. That's really interesting.

Yeah, and I think they are very much doing this in a meta-style way, too, right? Sam Altman has said that he is inspired, by the way, Instagram does ads, where he actually has found products that he's bought that he liked that he never would have found otherwise. Is that praise for Instagram or is that just everyone's a sucker? It's just everyone's a sucker. Like, I bought a lot of junk on Instagram, and I'm not like, yes, this is the future of commerce. I'm like, I am such an idiot.

Every day I'm an idiot. Yep. I have bought a lot of stupid things on Instagram. And I guess right now it's Quince. The like shopping or the clothing company is just all over my feeds. Just quince everywhere you look. Interesting. And I keep asking Anna, I'm like, is Quince good?

And she's like, I don't know. I bought something on Instagram. Yeah. It's like that one company, Viori, is a creation of Instagram. Yes. And if you're Sam Altman, you shouldn't be like, I need to create more of that. It's like, wow, everyone's a sucker. Yeah.

They are very soft. I don't mean to, if you're doing it, you're fine. But like, that's what Instagram created and that's what he wants, right? Is new brands can launch on this platform. But the pitch is very much like, it seems mutually beneficial, right? Mark Zuckerberg has been giving this speech for damn near two decades now, right? That if we can find the people who want to reach you with the product that you want, that actually we can have something that's really.

really great. And they've been singing the praises of targeting advertising for this reason for forever. That actually people want targeted advertising because it's more relevant and it'll expose them to products they like and on and on and on. And it's a really, really good business for meta. Like you just can't deny it has worked unbelievably well for meta to do this. And even some of the principles of Open AI's advertising plans sound a lot like meta in the ways that are both sort of interesting and devious, right? Like it says, we never sell your data. to advertisers. That's one of the things in their blog post. You know who also doesn't sell your data to advertisers is Google and meta. That's just like they don't, that's not how they make their money.

That's not what they do. They use all the information they have to put the ads that the company, they don't need to sell your data to do their job. The data is their moat. Right. Yeah. So all of this, like it's all just ridiculous. You control how your data is used. We don't optimize for time spent, like all this stuff. It's all fine and good. The thing that really kills me is, have you seen the picture of the ad that they used as the example? I have not. Let me open this and look at it. So it's in the story that we wrote about ads coming to chat GPD. There's a, there's a picture at the bottom.

Oh, this is horrible. That is an example. And just if you can't see this or haven't seen it, Nelai, just describe the screenshot you're looking at right now. So someone's obviously searching for travel. They appear to be looking at Santa Fe, New Mexico. So chat GBT is answered. Santa Fe, New Mexico is often called the city different and talks about the city.

And then there's what can only be described is a sponsored tweet below it? Like, that's what it looks like. Yep. And it says, here's the name of a hotel. These options may help if you're planning a trip to Santa Fe, and there's a link. And then you open the link,

and then it's like a chatbot about the ad. Is that, how else would you describe this? And all this seems like the single worst experience you could have with advertising. It also takes up, I don't know, 40% of the usable real estate of the screen, this one ad with sponsored results for what you might want to do in Santa, in Santa Fe.

This is bad. So I know how advertisers think, especially advertisers and product like this. The goal, and this is like broadly speaking the thing that's happening to the web industry, banners and boxes are bad. No one likes them. Everyone blocks them. So the goal is to make the advertising look exactly like the content you were there for in the beginning. This is why Instagram Reels or TikTok, their ad units are great.

Yep. Because you're scrolling, you'd scroll. Now you're just watching another video. in the same exact way you're watching a video to begin with, maybe you want to move on, maybe you don't, whatever. The advertising works because it's quote-unquote native to the experience you're having. This is why the ads in the podcast feed are annoying.

If I just interrupt you, by the way, you can subscribe to the verge to get the ad-free podcasts. Disclosure. We saw it why advertisers want the hosts to read the ads, right? It's all that the more seamless it feels, the more it feels like the content, the happier everybody is. The more integrated you are, the better. And so you can see that thinking arrive in the screen.

where they're like, well, you're chatting. Now you should chat with an ad. And it's like, nope. That's not right. That's not actually the thing I wanted. I bet they iterate off of this really quickly. I sure hope so. Because I think you're right that this feels like both bad UX and like a bizarrely loud ad unit that is not what they want.

Like this is borderline pop-up ad vibes in this screenstown. It's not that bad. It is very much like, why do you think I want to check? with the ad. Like, that's just a question mark of a, like, I don't, I don't understand that user experience at all. Like, here are some hotels you might look at. Here's a picture of one that is sponsored.

Like, click on this and you can go to a web page. That's very, everyone understands that. Click on this and like, now you can, now you're not even looking at another different picture. It's just another text box. But inside of this text box, we just relentlessly try to sell you a hotel. It makes no sense to me. Now you can talk to this hotel about other hotels. They'll get there.

Like I said, it's all meta people. They're going to figure this out so fast. They will. And I think this is clearly coming everywhere, right? Like this is the business model that's going to work. Google's response to this was saying Gemini would not have ads. And I think they're able to say that because they still operate search. And they're putting ads and AI overviews and they have all this other surface area to monetize before they get.

to we're going to monetize Gemini with hats. Right. Google has the ability to use all of the money that it burns on Gemini to make its other more lucrative products better. Right? And this is like the meta story too, right? That meta is all of the investment in AI for meta will work because it will make ad targeting on Facebook and Instagram better. And it will make it possible for them to just make ads for you out of whole cloth. A thing we've talked a bunch about, right, that Mark Zuckerberg's big idea is you will just type in a prompt or a customer that you want or you'll upload a picture of a product that you have

and it will do all of the creative, all of the targeting, all of the everything for you. Like if you can build a chat bot that you can give away and lose money on in order to make all of that work, handily worth it. Yeah, you're doing great.

Again, my prediction at the top of the year, spiciest prediction was opening I would not survive the year in a way that is recognizable to us. And maybe the sad stuff will work. Maybe they'll survive. I just see all of this. says, oh, it's time to be a real company.

And right in the background of that is that Elon Musk versus Sam Altman lawsuit saying OpenAI lied is supposed to be a nonprofit. There's a lot of spicy revelations from the first document dumps of discovery in there, including like Ilya Sutska were saying AGI as impossible in the timelines that OpenAIS promising its board. Just a lot in there. And so the pressure on this company to overcome all of its obstacles, while it has well-funded competitors that have real businesses already, who, that's a storyline for the year. Yeah, agreed. Speaking of one of those well-funded competitors,

I think next to all of this is the very clear idea that one very good way to make money on AI is to sell people hardware, if you can get people to just pay you a bunch of money for a gadget. Maybe. I'm not saying it's right. I'm saying it's the theory. Ads will definitely work because people will look at ads. But the idea of, I think, A, you can make people pay.

you for hardware and B, people who pay you for hardware are also going to be, by definition, more likely to then pay you for the subscription required to use the hardware. So, like, again, you can see the pitch. I don't know if it'll work, but you can see the pitch. But the news this week, there was a report from the information that Apple is working on an AI wearable, which, of course it is. But the news was that it's going to look like an air tag. And let me just explain to you the reasons I'm suspicious that this is a real thing that exists. This is for. from our story about it. The rumor device is reportedly the size of an air tag

with a thin, flat, circular housing made from aluminum and glass. Fine. Here are the things that are supposedly inside of this air tag-sized thing. Are you ready for this? A standard lens and a wide-angle lens, so two camera lenses, three microphones, a speaker, a physical button, and wireless charging. If you could put all that in an air tag, you will have accomplished, like an honest-to-God scientific miracle.

Sure. Who knows that sizing is accurate? I don't know, man. Maybe they're mixed up a MagSafe pocket air tag. I don't know. Like all that stuff is in the next iPad, not in the next. This is like when they were making the iPhone and the first prototype of the iPhone was an iPod with numbers arranged around the click wheel like a standard telephone. Yeah.

Like I think Apple makes stuff just to just to rigorously prove that some things are bad ideas. You know? Like they're like, we ran that one to ground. Like, let's. make a rotary foam like an iPod? We did it. We made one. Then we burned it and we never are going to talk about it again. And I get the feeling that their riff on the humane pin is more in that zone. Because the one thing Apple knows about you is that you have an iPhone in your pocket. Yes. They are never going to displace the iPhone in your pocket if they have to.

So I think if you are that company and you assume that you have an iPhone in your pocket that you, Apple, have unique access to all the capabilities of, which it will not give to any other companies. This is the kind of device that you would make because the only thing your phone can't do is be on your body collecting data all the time, right? And this is like the grand theory of every AI wearable is we're going to put the microphone somewhere where it is always in play so that you can get more data from it and then the AI can do more useful processing. That's the whole plod, pin thing is like just it'll be on your, it'll be around your neck and that way it'll hear all of your conversations better than the phone that's in your pocket. So if you're Apple, like, sure,

take a thing and give it a bunch of microphones and a bunch of cameras and then just let it record and dump all of that onto your phone. And make that thing round like you're wearing flair at Applebee's? Like, what is the idea here? It's a fair question. This is what I don't know is I think the funniest thing about all of this to me is that we have landed on one killer app for all of the recording stuff. And it's summarizing, meetings. Have you noticed this? Yeah. Every AI app that exists ends up supporting

automatic meeting capture because it's pretty easy to plug into Google Meet or Zoom or Teams or whatever and it's pretty easy to summarize a bunch of stuff and pull out some action items and that is medium useful to lots of people. And so this is the killer app for consumer AI wearables somehow. And a lot of it

sort of implies the rest of your life should work like meetings. Yes, yes. And at the end of every conversation you should generate action items. And it's like, I don't know, man. Like most conversations in my life right now, the action item is like, is the baby alive? We should keep the baby alive. Wait, so are you of the mind that Apple is not going to be sort of actively interested in doing an AI wearable because it's so invested in the phone?

I think Apple's entire business is the iPhone and selling services on the iPhone and taking 30% of candy crush on the iPhone. anything that disrupts that business, Apple will not do. Regardless if you think Apple is the best at disrupting itself, whatever, they're never going to touch the iPhone business. That is a monopoly through and through. That is how they have run it. Maybe Tim Cook steps down and whoever it is is the new CEO and they're like, we have to cannibalize ourselves first. Like Steve Jobs, but that's not happening today. Tim Cook is the CEO today.

Mr. Supply Chain is the CEO of Apple today. They are not going to introduce a product. it disrupts the iPhone in any meaningful way today. If you can leave your house without a phone, the only device you're going to leave your house with is an Apple Watch. And they will roll more of these features into the watch before they make another thing

that can disrupt their existing businesses. So I just, I don't buy it. I do think that they're caving. I think they're realizing that the industry and the consumer has moved on beyond their ideas on AI. Like, if you'll remember when they first announced Apple Intelligence, like a year or half ago,

they're like, we're not going to do a chat bot. We don't need to do a chat pot. And like, the rumor is, Siri's just going to be a chat bot now. Yep. I think they realize that that is a form factor that works. That is a user experience that works. We're just going to let people push the button and talk to Siri the same way that they're talking to chat chpT today.

That's a way bigger threat to anything open AI will make. Like the hugest threat to open AI is a thing that works like chat chabit will just exist on the phone and they'll get Sherlocked. Yeah. And I can wake it up with my voice instead of having to unlock my phone and open an app. Like that's, that just, it can move it two layers further up on your device and that makes it essentially. Will Apple be good at this? I don't know the answer to that. But all the rumors are they going to be using Google's models.

Gemini is pretty good at this. There's a lot there. But the reason people are excited about AI wearables and voice and all that is because it's a form factor shift. It's a user interface shift. And that is typically where you get to disrupt the incumbent. and I just don't see any of the stuff disrupting the iPhone because Apple's ability to build it into the iPhone, Google's obvious ability to build it into Android,

is right there. And no one made a thing that was good enough to beat Apple to the punch. Yeah. Maybe Open Eye will ship that thing this year, right? John, they promised that we're going to see it by the end of this year. I don't know, man. We'll see.

I'm skeptical of all of this, including and maybe especially the timelines. But with all of that said, I'm going to make you play a game that you're going to hate. Are you ready for this? Let's do it. So, okay, we have the rankomatto-matic, which our producer Travis, continues to heroically iterate his vibe coding on. And what I want to do right now is I want to rank the ideas about AI gadget form factors. I think we've basically seen six ideas or rumored ideas about what an AI forward gadget might look like. Okay. And you and I, but mostly you, are going to rank all of these things that you hate from number six to number one. And you're going to have to decide which one is the best form factor for an AI gadget.

You good at this? Oh, boy. Do I get to see the whole list first? Yeah, I'll read you the whole list. I'm going to share my screen. If you're watching this on YouTube, you can see us mess with the rankomatic. Because you're the hardest version of this game is where you don't tell me what's coming next. Oh, you want a blind rank? No, this is good. You can have all six, and we'll just go from here.

So the six, I will say, are a pin, which I think is sort of self-explanatory, whether it's the humane AI pin or something else that you kind of wear on your chest like that. A. A.m., which is what the Johnny I of Open AI thing is rumored to be, like an honest god, just pen. Sam Wilman claims to be a pen nerd, although a true pen nerd Liz Lapato on our team thinks he's a poser. Saying it for the record. Earbuds, which we've heard a lot of rumors about. AirPods with a camera is a thing we've heard some rumors about. Open AI and Johnny Ive might also be doing earbuds, AirPods, stuff.

Who knows? A pendant, something you actually wear as a necklace, kind of like the friend that we saw. What I'm calling rectangle, which is just something that is kind of smartphone-ish. The Rabbit R1 is probably the most known version of this. Do phones count as rectangle? What's that?

Do phones count as rectangle? No. Phone is, is excluded from this game. Okay, okay. So rectangle is like cut down, not phone. Phone has been like, phones jersey is already in the rafters.

You know what I mean? Like we've retired phone as the best possible. But what's the line of rectangle? Like if I buy a mid-range Android phone, put the Gemini icon on the home screen. No, this is a specific AI device, but it is kind of the shape of a phone. It's a rectangle.

That's right. Shut up. You know a phone. Okay. And then the last one is glasses. Okay. So we have pin, pen, earbuds, pendant, rectangle, and glasses. And you're going to rank them six to one.

All right. Let me just ask a few more questions. Please. Am I ranking the way that I think the verge should rank things, which is based on the products as they exist today? Or the way that the audience wants us to rank things, which is how the products exist in their hopes and dreams. I think for this one we're going to do hopes and dreams because none of this exists in it. Like, it's all, they're all tied for last in the world in which we live. It's just, it's just a big bundle of sixth place. But I think what I'm going for is like, what is,

what is sort of in theory the best idea in your mind right now for how to do this kind of device, which means you have to grant me two premises. Again, I told you you you were going to hate this game. I hate this game. Premise number one is there is a version of this that is a good idea. I need, I need you to hold that idea in your head. All right. All right. At least one of these is a good idea. And then premise number two is AI deserves a dedicated device.

So you don't, you have to agree with both of those things and then we're going from there. Okay. So in the hopes and dreams world. Yeah. Which I will again insist that I choose not to live in. Okay. Understood. It's number one is obviously glasses.

Right. Interesting. With a bullet. Like if you get the true AR glasses with the AI. overlays and the it's it's obvious even though it completely violates neelai's theory of wearable bullshit well in hopes and dreams world it has such staggering utility that it overcomes both fiddliness and most importantly face okay so the neilized chart of wearable bullshit as you know is utility is on one axis and fiddliness is on another and fiddliness encompasses things like how often i have to charge it

and there's a massive fiddliness penalty uh for face right and so try traditional glasses, huge penalty pervace, but massive utility, low fiddliness otherwise, if you make true AR glasses that are AI enabled that can see the world around you and provide useful information in your line of sight, obviously number one. Okay. I do not believe that product will exist in any time scale that we should have in. I think that's right. But I do agree that even for prospective reasons alone, the idea that it can see what I see makes

glasses more powerful than any of these other things. And it can layer digital information over the real world. Yeah. Fine. Many, many, many questions. Who is in control of the digital information overlaid on the real world? Is it Mark Zuckerberg? Because that sucks. But, you know, that's life. Right.

Who knows? But no, I think that's actually, I think you just perfectly described both why everyone is chasing glasses and why you and I are both very skeptical of them being the thing that we want them to be anytime soon, if not ever, because you're right that the sort of perfect end state is spectacular and kind of unparalleled in what it can in theory do. And the number of possible potholes on the way to get there is just virtually infinite. Yeah. Again, if you were asking me about reality, I would put this at like six. Yeah. No, we're going pure hopes and dreams here. All right, so glass is number one with the bullet. Let's work our way down. What's number two?

I think number two is earbuds. I agree with that. Right. This is like, what are the things that are, this is my theory of wearable bullshit. That's what we're talking about here, right? Where is the least amount of fiddliness and the most amount of utility

and earbuds already meet that bar for so many people? You add in a bunch of AI features, you're winning the game. So, but you don't get the big benefit of the glasses overlaying. Yeah, I had these two as my top two as well. And I think I would almost make the case to put earbuds number one

just because they are such a, less obtrusive thing. And as somebody who wears glasses, the idea of wanting to wear glasses feels essentially impossible. But I do think you're right that the upside of screen, if we get all the way to it,

probably outweighs the upside of what you can do with earbuds. Yeah, that's kind of my feeling. Again, this is hopes and dreams. Although I will say like AI translation on the various earbuds that support it, very empowering for a lot of people today. Yep.

So this is a little less, hopes and dreams. Like, the products exist today in a way that works for people. That's not something you can say of glasses. But again, David's insisting that I live in hopes and dreams. I'm like this close to selling you a shit coin. Like, buy, let's pump some crypto while we're doing hopes and dreams. Have you heard about NFTs?

At some point, we'll play the game of which one of these is most likely to reach its potential. And I think earbuds are much more likely to reach that potential than glasses are. Yeah. But that potential is much lower. Totally agree. Yeah. And the challenges are much. easier.

Yeah. All right. What's third place? Everything else in my mind is sort of tied for six. So, um, because everything else is like really, really fiddly. It imposes they, everything else imposes some sort of cost that is not a cost that you accept today. And so does PIN invoke that much cost?

I think there's something about PIN where you are the one who reviewed the Humane PIN. Did you feel like that was a free experience or did you feel like you were a giant dork? I felt like I was a giant dork and it was a bad product. But I do think there's something to the idea of this device being just like a little puck that I can put in a bunch of different sort of accessories. They made one that was like a clip that you can put on your backpack and one that you, you know, there's the one that you wear on your chest and you can wear it around your neck and you can have it be kind of a bunch of different sorts of devices.

And by the way, if I'm Apple, that's what I'm building. I'm turning the Apple Watch into that thing, this little modular, rounded rectangle of an AI device that can go lots of places and be. lots of things, rather than trying to invent a whole new device out of fall. The Apple Watch ankle monitor edition. Yeah. The Apple Watch, but it just is a clip that I can put on my backpack. Like, yes, give me that, please. They will never do that because the reason people buy Apple Watches, or at least in Apple's

conception, is fitness, and they need a heart rate sensor. Yeah, I mean, that's very much what it is now. But I'm just saying, if I'm building an AI gadget, I think you've done most of the hard work inside of the Apple Watch. I'll grant you pin at number three. Only because of all the rest of these, it is sort of the... Well, I still don't really know what rectangle is in your worldview. Like, is it a pin...

There's a picture of a Rabbit R1 here, man. It's not... But like, what is the difference between Rabbit R1 and Humane Pin? They both sucked. The Humane Pin doesn't have a screen. Okay, so... But it had the laser projector. Did it?

I can't argue with that rebuttal at all. All right, so PIN, we're... Putting number three at PIN. Can I make a brief impassioned case for why I think pen should be number four? Sure. I really like the idea of some kind of everyday object being used for this sort of thing. We've done smart pens a few times over the years. Like there's this company, LiveScribe, that would store the information that you were writing as you were writing it,

and it would transmit it back to your computer. And you could also use it to get audio that would sync to your notes. And there's something in that thing where it's an object that fits in my pocket, but I can also put it on the table, but I can also sort of physically use it for things that then add to the data. There's something about that that feels reasonable to me in terms of what it is to be a person. Yeah. I just think it's funny that this is premised on a thing you will do with this object is right and long hand a lot. Somehow we're back at this.

Meta's out here being like you're going to wear our neural band and scribble on the ground with your finger. and that's how you're going to communicate. This is what we're doing. I just think there's a lot of other pen-like things that, like, fit your description, like, knife. You know? Why not? Like, just have a knife that you pull out.

Sometimes you use your knife, and it's really useful. Like, you probably use the knife as much as you would use a pen. And sometimes you start a meeting and I just pull out a hunting knife and put it on the table. In many situations, I think that would be more useful. Then putting a pan on the table. Like, I mean, that's not bad. I've been in several meetings where I'm like, man, I wish I'd started this way. Just put a knife on the table.

You start, it's a switchblade and you turn it on by flipping up the blade. I tell you, that's how you start the recording. That's pretty good. Just throw it out there. Johnny, if you're listening, and I know that you are, you can have that idea for free. Please make knife. Like, honor roll mention here is AI knife. But it's knife.

It's, it's, it's K-N-A-I-F-E. It's just knife. I'll give you Penn at four, although I fully disagree. This is only because you hate the last two so, so very much. Well, pendant is six. So that means rectangle is five. I think that is handily correct. Why is pendant six for you?

It just completely violates the theory of wearable bullshit. Right. Like there's no amount of utility you can get from a necklace that overcomes its fiddliness and disruption to your life. You have to want to wear this necklace every single day of your life for it to be valuable, and then it just can't be that.

It's going to run into your own personal sense of style. It's going to run into the fact that it's a heavy thing around your neck that if you move a lot, we'll swing around and be annoying. Like, there's no level of utility that overcomes this level of fiddliness.

Yeah, I completely agree with that. And there's something about having someone come up to you wearing what looks like a fake Ironman core around their neck that just feels for some reason that feels at least as invasive to me as someone wearing AR glasses. That it's like, here's this glowing orb recording me feels awful to me. I just can't get past it. It's the rare wearable that has a higher or more punishing fiddliness score, without a face penalty.

But I think pendant is it. Yeah. Like this is more fiddly than things you put on your face. That's a, you've lost. It's always number six. Rectangle, I'm penalizing only because it remains in my mind. Ill-defined is anything other than bad phone? I mean, I think that's kind of why I put rectangle on here

because I think the question is, is there a thing that looks phone-ish, but is deliberately not a phone that can work? Oh, here's a question. So rectangle is maybe, I don't know what the rabbit is saying. If I could get you like a flip phone, like one of these like sort of popular, you should have a second phone flip phones. But it had Gemini in it. Would that, is that a thing?

It's a great question. What if you flipped open your flip phone and that's how you talk to Gemini? Right. It was just kind of, it was kind of a dumb phone. Like no apps, no distraction, no social media. I'll give you a Maps app. That's the one thing everybody always says they want. Yeah.

maps on their phone. And then you also have Gemini for all the other stuff you need to do. Or other, you're only your web browser, right? You're just not going to be distracted, but if you need to get a question answered, Gemini's there to confidently lie to you in whatever way Gemini isn't lie to you. Is that a meaningful form factor? I think there are people who say yes. I think to me that is just as fiddly as a phone, but vastly less powerful. And so the idea to me is like how do you how do you solve the ux of that to make it so easy to do jemini on that device that it's actually worth having a separate device for right because otherwise you get what we were talking about with syri where they're going to make it the top layer of the phone

is going to be the chat bot then it becomes i don't know how you beat that with hardware right i think you would say this thing doesn't have instagram on it i mean that's how all the dumb funds are being marketed today yeah they don't have social media it doesn't have a bunch of feeds on it. Like, this thing is going to make you more intentional. You're going to be in the moment. But when you need to call the Uber, there's a cut down Uber app here because that's what you need.

And you could see building a version of that where also you have, you know, an ecosystem of capabilities that are accessed through an AI system. And so you're not making the promise of like, here is, it's listening to you all the time to make meeting summaries of like your conversation at the bar. It's much more like this thing. You've removed all the things that cause distraction, but it's still just as useful as a phone. Right. It still does this one actually extremely useful thing, which is go be the answer engine for you.

I will say that we have now just described an Apple Watch. This is what I'm saying. Yeah. Apple, if you're listening, just a clip that I can put on my backpack. That's it. Thank you. And make the battery last longer. I'm curious for other people's rankings.

I'm also curious what other people think rectangle is. send us A, your favorite rectangle, and B, yeah, send us your rankings. We're going to figure out how to make the rankomatic into a website. I looked up how much it would cost by rankomatic.com, and it was $3,33. Of course. So we will not be buying rankomatic.com. But if you own it and want to give it to us for free, Vergecast at theverge.com, get at us. But until then, our rankings for now, glasses number one, earbuds number two, pin number three, pen number four, rectangle number five, and pendant number six.

with phone as the sort of large thing just slapped over top of the whole ranking. Can we make pendant lower something? We'll leave six, seven, and eight empty, and then pendant is number nine. Yeah, that's right. That's good. All right, Neal, thank you for playing this game with me. This is delightful. We're going to take a break, and then we're going to come back.

And it's time to hear from our man, Brendan, and do a lightning round. We'll be right back. 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, acid 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 HiringPro 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. Buzzwords like progressive and affordability are thrown around all the time in politics. But what do they actually mean? For me, being a progressive means at least two things. One, being willing to unite lots and lots of people,

all of the folks that are getting screwed over against the powers that be that are making your life worse. And then second, being progressive is essentially a hopeful, enterprise, that you think, I think that the world can be much better, that we don't have to settle for crumbs or settle for the status quo. And is there a difference between what it means to the elected officials and what it means to the people? So money is essentially the root of everything. I don't care if you're gay.

I don't care if you have all that. That's like secondary. Third, like that doesn't, that's not a priority. That's this week on America Actually. Let's begin. All right, we're back. Time for an update on the epic Google Live blog. Eli, what's going on?

As we speak, Epic CEO, Tim Sweeney, is being sworn in on the stand. Ooh. I have no idea what he's going to say. I will say, Sean, just reported in real-time as we're podcasting, that there may be a secret product deal between Epic and Google, that the judge is allowing them to keep secret as part of the settlement. What? Yes. The judge keeps asking Epic why it's suddenly agreeing to settle and has revealed that Epic and Google are in the middle of a deal that involves joint product development, joint marketing commitment,

and joint partnerships. And the judge is concerned that Epic is throwing out its case because Google's offering the best deal. Google Stadia is coming back, but the only game is Fortnite. That's what it is. We did it.

It's getting hot in the courtroom. We'll keep you updated as Sean continues to report. That's good stuff. All right. Let's get into the lightning round. Do we have any of the time? He did it.

He was particularly done this week. It's time, once again, for America's favorite podcast. Within a podcast, Brendan Carr's a dummy. He's such a dummy. That's the tagline for Brennan Gar's a dummy. He's such a dummy.

Yeah, with like two or three exclamation points at the end. Yeah, someone make us some AI theme music. It's going to be great. We don't have to work very hard on it. I won't feel bad about it. Just make it and send it. We'll start playing it. Okay.

So here is one of the weirdest aspects of Trump, too. As I have said, it's just a bunch of influencers. influencers armed with the power of the state and a weird unconstitutional police force that is doing horrible things every day, but influencers nonetheless. And the weird unconstitutional police force is also just like swarming our cities

with content creators to make content. Like it's weird. That's the whole administration, right? Content up and down. That's all they care about. Clout and views. J.D. Vance, content machine. They keep acting like the only thing people watch

is broadcast television. Like it's such a fundamental disconnect in the worldview of the people in charge that they all know that all of the action is on social platforms and they should do clout. They run a high pass. Like weird, right? They know it. You can see it's embedded in the administration. We should put vloggers with ice on the streets of America to make content and shape the narrative. And then they turn right around.

And they're like, we have to crack down on. broadcast television for misleading the American people. And you're like, what? No one's even watching this. But it's the power they have because our nation's airwaves are under control of the Federal Communication Commission and they're a scarce public resource and under some old precedents, including Red Line, which I bring up on the show all the time, because it's a scarce public resource and because the broadcasters have not paid a license fee, the government

has some interest in how those airwaves are used. and Brendan Carr has seized upon this to do whatever he wants to the nation's broadcasters. And it is just such a disconnect because he's always like the most important problem in telecommunications in America is not rural broadband or kids having to go to the library

to get wife access to do their homework or anything. It's what late night hosts are doing on broadcast television. And I will use the power of the state to crack down on Jimmy Kimmel. So this week, the FCC is targeting late-night hosts using a long-dormant law saying that if late-night shows book politicians, they have to. The networks have to provide equal time to the opposing party. Because you know what?

Politicians don't have enough access to in America is making and sharing media. Yeah. Didn't this become a whole big thing with SNL during the last? election that Trump got very good at this. So Carr came at S&L super hard because they had Harris on and NBC needed to give Trump equal time and Carr opened it inquiry, but it turns out SNL has long been good at this because under no circumstances can S&L be considered news and news has an exception to this rule. So if you're a Republican politician and you go on NBC news, they don't have to offer equal time to your opponent because the news has an exception. There's

a lot of reasons for that. Like, you want your elected politicians to show up on the news. And so you don't have to provide equal time. By the way, I should disclose that NBC is an investor in a parent company, Vox Media, whatever. It's true of all the networks, ABC, CBS. All the broadcast networks have these rules. Late night shows have been skirting under the idea that these interviews are newsworthy, so they get the news exception.

You can argue with that. Maybe it's true. Maybe it's not. Maybe these interviews are all puff balls, whatever. there's no argument that S&L is news, right? Like, none at all. So when S&L had Harris on during the election, NBC had already done the work and filed the paperwork. And if you recall, they gave Trump ad spots during a NASCAR race like the next day.

Right. And so Carr was all smoke and fury, but it came to nothing. And I had heard from people at the FCC. Like, this is nonsense. SNL is the only program that cares about this and they're good at it and they have been for a long time. Interesting. Okay. The daytime shows, right, the interviews are quote unquote,

news and they haven't done this work. So, Brendan Carr, how is he using his time? Well, he's not bringing down wireless prices. He's not expanding broadband access. He's saying that Jimmy Kimmel, Stephen Colbert, Seth Myers have to give equal time to the opponents of the politicians that show up on their shows, including daytime talk shows like The View. And everybody is like, well, this is kind of unconstitutional because you're interfering with their speech. This rule only made sense when these networks had monopolies on media distribution. That is long gone.

Again, no one's watching these things. You know, like all these shows, do you know where the majority of their viewers are? On YouTube the next day. Uh-huh. What are we talking about? And then you also run into the part that I think is particularly good. He's such a dummy. Well, you know what this rule would also affect?

Conservative talk radio. Oh, right. Because they're on the broadcast spectrum. Sure. So like, do conservative talk radio hosts have to offer equal time to Democrats? I don't know, but I know that Brennan Carr is not going to run that down. I know for sure Gavin Newsom would say yes to all of those. He would go. He would definitely go. So there's just a lot of arguing back and forth. This is just an enormous waste of time. I can't be clear about this. This is an enormous waste of time around government speech regulations over things that people are not. not watching. And one, you shouldn't have governments

future regulations. If I have one consistent political viewpoint on the show, it's that government's feature regulations are bad. The second one is that competition is good. You tell me what my politics are. It doesn't track with what people think. But that's what we say. And this is a government's feature regulation imposed on a bunch of comedians, basically, who do not have the monopoly over media distribution that at one time justified the ability of the government to make these speech restrictions because no one's watching this shit they're all on their phones watching ticot he's

such a dummy brandon as always if you can justify any of this nonsense you're welcome to come on this show i'll offer equal time to your opponents happy to do that uh but i don't think you can i think you're a coward so that's your invitation as always brendan uh once again i think you're a dummy that's been brennan cars a dummy america's favorite podcast for them podcast it's good stuff i really feel like The thing they say about newsrooms all the time is your newsroom's job is just like whatever your editor, whatever happened to your editor on the way to work that morning. The whole United States government is just like whatever Donald Trump saw on television. Yeah.

That's just what I mean. He is a creature of social media. Yeah. Right? Trump tweeted his way to the presidency, not once but twice. The second time because Elon bought Twitter and gave him access to the platform again. It's crazy that they know. They know where the power comes from, but they can't regulate those platforms.

It can threaten those platforms, and they do, and you can see that happening in different ways. But when the power they have is over the broadcast networks, and so they have to pretend the broadcast networks are massively more powerful than they are to impose these speech regulations. I suspect we'll see some lawsuits here. I suspect, you know, there'll be whatever argument, especially if they don't apply the rule to conservative talk radio. But in the meantime, this is just a huge waste of resources, time, and money.

We're good at that right now. Amazing. All right, my first one, while we're talking about TV, Netflix had its earnings this week and said a bunch of really interesting stuff. They talked a bunch about podcasts, which actually Nick Kwa and I are going to talk about on Tuesday's show. The whole Netflix podcast thing has been deeply bizarre. We're going to talk about that. But Netflix also said that they're going to revamp their whole mobile UI,

that we're going to get sort of a full redesign of the Netflix app. And they said pretty directly that most of what that means is more vertical videos in the Netflix app. And so, Nelai, what I wonder is, are we finally going to get the thing that you have been saying we should get for forever, which is just the Netflix app should just be a TikTok feed of clips from Netflix shows. And then you go through until you find one that you like, and then you press play and it takes you to the show. Like, it seems not crazy to me that that is actually the direction Netflix is going to sprint in as it changes its apps. Yeah.

By the way, this is my idea. And I proposed it directly to Netflix co-cio Greg Peters when he was on Decoder last year. So what's up, Greg? I should be in this press release. Where are my royalties, bro? At least promote the show. Like, shout me out. Where are you at, dude?

He's busy. He's trying to, I warner. He's busy trying to do the most suicidal thing anyone can do, which is by Warner Brothers. Yeah, that's fair. This is obviously what they should do. You know, Netflix has this problem, which is, as we've discussed so many times, people are not watching this stuff on their TVs.

And the thing that's growing on TVs is podcast viewing on YouTube, which obviously they're getting into. And how do you feel about when you see like Bill Simmons-Ringer podcast in the Netflix feed next to like the rip? Like, there's something inherently weird about that that they're going to have to solve. It has not. I'm getting increasingly used to Netflix just feeling like a, of mishmash of stuff.

Yeah. Podcasts, it's still new, so maybe I'll get used to it, but every time a podcast appears, like, I'll give you an example that you in particular will appreciate. My wife sat down the other night to start. She's watching owning Manhattan, Ryan Sirhan's show on Netflix right now and loves it. I think Ryan Serhan is, I'm like a little bit in love with Ryan Serhan. It's a whole thing. But anyway, she sits down to start watching the show, opens up Netflix.

And you know how it, if you leave it for a second, it'll auto play the first thing in the first tile. The first thing in the first style was pardon my take. the Barstool Sports Football podcast. And so I walk into the room 10 seconds after Anna sits down and she's just watching, pardon my take on our television. And I was just like, what has happened to the world that this is the autoplay experience being put in front of my wife? Really bizarre. It's deeply confusing and it's so funny because there's a world in which I just want to sit down and like have NFL gossip presented to me. And I'm still not sure that I want that from Netflix, you know?

Yeah. Anyway, I think they've got to figure out a bunch of stuff on the TV side. The question is, well, if all the viewing moves to the phone, then you really are competing with TikTok. Right? And this is what I keep saying. Like, the reason people buy frame TVs is they leave them in whatever liminal off-state Samsung has decided art mode in, and they're actually just watching their phones. And we saw Matt Damon and Ben Affleck talk about the rip in exactly this way to have all people, Joe Rogan, where they said Netflix told us to stop the movie and explain the plot several times. because they know people are on their phones.

Yep. So this is the reality of the entertainment industry that we're in. And I think if your Netflix, you're like, well, we got to get people to open this app more often.

Video games isn't going to do it, which is their first cut. And like, okay, TikTok is going to do it. We're just going to straight, like our stuff is pirated on TikTok every day anyway. I also believe that all the studios

that started secretly clip boosting their own content when they want to show it to people. Like they're running their own clip farms? Yeah. Like, I don't think Landman is so popular that it should generate as much seemingly pirated clips is what I see.

Do you know what I mean? Uh-huh. Like, I think Zazlov is like, unleash the bots. Like, I think that's what's happening there. And you can see, like, whenever there's a thing everyone wants you to watch, like the clips just start appearing.

I think that's marketing. And I think Netflix knows this. And they're like, why are we paying to this on TikTok? We'll just make our app fun to use on our content. And then truly, you can push the button and just drop into the show right where you started. They should have done a, this ages ago. Actually, all these platforms should have done this ages ago. I think in Netflix,

from what I recall that conversation with Greg Peters, there's just a bunch of licensing you have to do to make that go. Oh, sure. Whereas you can kind of like, it's piracy. We don't know what's going on over there, like wave it away. But it's in the app. There's a lot of content licensing you have to do to pull that off. Yeah, that makes sense. I mean, and I think it's just weird to see Netflix go from being, we want to be prestige TV, which is what Netflix was for a long time, to basically we want to be prestige YouTube, which I think is kind of where it is now, where they're pulling in creators to do stuff,

they're pulling in video podcasts, like the sort of curated creator universe is a real thing that Netflix wants to be. Now it wants to be prestige TikTok. And I think how far and how weird you can get with that brand and still be the prestigious thing. Oh, I don't think they care about that. They want to be the monopoly.

Maybe. Maybe they're now so big that being, the prestige play is a waste of time. Netflix is a company that said our only competition is sleep. That's true. That's true. But I think Netflix has continued to pride itself on being very good, right? That it is, they're not trying to have the sheer volume because they're like, well,

what we have is guaranteed quality. And it feels like their grip on that is loosening a little bit here. Maybe they don't care. Maybe they're, as long as you are watching, they care less and less about what it is. you're watching. The pressure of now we have a mobile UI that looks like TikTok and people are watching a thing that looks like TikTok going from this is the solution to discovery on our platform to this is the thing we monetize. That's when the switch flips. If it works, that will happen. But also, to be clear, all of this is downstream from, I think this is an exceptionally good idea.

It's very good. I actually really do think this is what the Netflix should be. Once again, I will point out that I pitched this idea to Greg Peters that co-sia of Netflix last year. And Greg, the next time you mention it, just, you know, to code or exist. You could just say the name. It's throwing out there, buddy. All right, what's your next one? More TV.

I got to talk about telly. Telly is the company. Their big idea was that they would give you a free TV, but underneath it would be a second smaller widescreen screen that just showed ads. And the rules were bananas. If you agreed to this, they would send you a free TV. The ads would be on all the time.

You had to use this free TV as your primary TV in your main room, and you had to keep the camera on all the time so they could check out that you're watching it. And if you, like, disconnected the ad screen or blocked it and so when you got in trouble. This is a lot for a free TV. Yeah. We reviewed it. The thing didn't work very well. Whatever.

They told us they were going to sell millions upon millions of these TVs or give away millions about millions of these TVs. The CEO at one point said he thought this was a trillion-dollar company. Our friend, Yanko Ruckers, who, uh, Right, so low pass, there's a column we syndicate. He got some data. Telly's only moved 35,000 free TVs last year. That's as many as they have installed.

10% of the units they shipped broke in transit, because I think they cheaped out on who their shipping provider would be. So now they've switched providers, the same one Samsung uses, because a 10% shipping breakage rate is ridiculous. And then he's done some math. based on the revenue numbers they were quoting in the documents that he saw. And they made $22 million in annualized revenue in Q3 of 2025,

which if you just divide out by 35,000 TVs, they're making $50 in advertising revenue per TV per month. That seems hot. That seems like a big number. It seems like a great business. If you can ship TVs that people want and they don't break on the way. That don't break. Your 10% breakage rate really cuts into your revenue of $50 per month, right?

Yes. And I have no idea how much the service costs to operate. I don't know how much the executives are paying themselves. Like that's not profit. That's just revenue. Right. Which may not be enough to comfort the operation of business. But so far, they've only managed to ship 35,000 of these things,

10% of which are breaking. And who knows if they're going to ship all of the pre-orders that they've taken. Yeah. That whole thing is so fascinating to me. I remember Ilya Pozen, who's the CEO, he came on the Vergecast like two years ago now. and made an incredibly compelling case for why telly should exist. And I think, you know, to the extent that it's saying the quiet part loud about how advertising works on TVs anyway, this is the stuff we were talking about, right? That the reason your TV is as cheap as it is is because it's watching you and collecting data on you and targeting advertising against you.

And so for him to say, well, we're just going to make that agreement the whole agreement. Yeah. Works. And they got a lot of pre-orders. and there is a clear version of that trade that people are willing to sign up for. And what he said over and over to me and to others was that actually making and shipping you,

the TV is not the hard part. That it's the rest of this stuff, building the software and building the advertising business. That's all the hard part. TVs are simple commodities. We can just get one of those to your house. So the fact that that is the thing that is tripping them up is sort of fascinating and frankly very telling.

Turns out it is actually pretty hard to manufacture and ship a lot of people, a lot of television. I mean, it's huge sheets of glass. I got straightforwardly, this is hard. But I would say I think a lot of those pre-orders are people who thought they could just cover up the ad screen or defeat it or shack it or whatever. And it's unclear whether as you hit real scale, people are going to agree to the, you know, have a billboard in your house. Yeah. we'll see 35,000 units, that's the number. You know what I think telly should do is make one of these that is explicitly designed to be like your outdoor deck television.

The one that you like, the TV you care about the least in your house should be the telly. And then I would sign up for that. I'm like, I don't want that to be the TV in my living room. But if it's like the TV here in the basement behind my desk that I barely ever watch, but sometimes like, yeah. I want you to just take the other side of that equation and be like, I'm going to go to advertisers and be like, here's what we did. We gave everybody a screen that they don't care about by that time. Like, oh, there's a reason they're like,

we has to be in your main room and be your main TV. Okay, I have a new idea. Telly should only work with sports bars. It's actually pretty good. I'm saying that would work. It's actually pretty good. Yeah. Did you ever sign up for a telly, even just out of morbid curiosity?

No, no, no. I have a limited amount of self-respect, and that's about where it's where it goes. Fair enough. All right. So for my next one, weekly Trump phone update, but also this one in particular is a shout out to Don Preston on our team who did some truly fascinating journalism in the service of our silly weekly Trump phone column. He ran down this claim that has been repeated all over the internet that there were 600,000 pre-orders for the Trump phone, which even if it were true, right? Let's say that's true. that is not, it's not like the most successful phone in history, but that, that's a big number. If, if, if, if, if, if, if, if, if, if, if, if, if, if, if, if, if, if, $60,000, $60,000, just in pre-orders and that this is, like, a meaningful thing that clearly a meaningful number of people want. Uh, so he ran it down trying to figure out where did this number come from. And it turns out, this number appears to have come from

essentially nowhere. The, the Trump phone, everybody. Yeah. So, he found. a couple of different social accounts that had posted this number with no sourcing, no information, more or less just writing a number out of nothing. And then these things get picked up by what I would call relatively specious news publications, news, quote-unquote news publications. Content farms. Yeah, content farms, which then gets picked up by slightly more reputable news publications.

and this number gets sort of laundered up the chain to the point where Governor Gavin Newsom's press office did a threads post of a grok summary of this number. So if you ask one of these AI chatbots, Grock or the others, they will go find this number, which has been laundered through these different sources. But it's on a bunch of websites. And when it's on a bunch of websites, the AI bots are going to look at it and say, okay, this number has come up over and over. thus it is probably reputable and real and they present it as real in the incredibly confident way that they do. Grock even cited some sources

like Fortune NPR and the Guardian but Dom couldn't find any of those things that existed. So it's just a social media post very slowly turns into a bunch of random nonsense on the internet, turns into AI summaries of that random nonsense on the internet,

turns into people who shouldn't be trusting AI summaries of random nonsense on the internet doing so, and poof, it's legitimate because the governor of California is posting it on his threads account. Like, what an unbelievable story about the internet in 2026 in the guise of 600,000 Trump mobile pre-orders? That's it, everybody. We're shutting it down. I don't know I don't know what to say about this. Yeah, it's a real like turn off the internet kind of moment. It's very bad. You know, this is like an old pattern. We've run a variation of the story about where flat earth came from

and flat earth is a conspiracy that won't go away is legitimately a product of search algorithms like you can get a bunch of views for flat earth content so people make it and then people search for flat earth like is the earth flat

and then people see that search demand and they make web pages about whether not the earth is flat and then they're like those web pages rank and like just a circle of clout that makes people stupid. If you write a thing that says is the earth flat even if you say no

you've now acknowledged the existence of a theory that the Earth is flat, which just continues the cycle going. Yeah, it's truly, like, that whole thing is just a weird algorithmic cloud cycle that resulted in, I believe, Kevin Durant, believing the Earth is flat. Like, I don't know what to tell you about that. What is Aaron Rogers? And you're like, the end of an algorithmic cloud cycle. Real.

Boy, do I have thoughts about professional athletes using the Earth. I didn't even realize that I had so many thoughts, but it turns out I do. there's like a million ways this happens over time and we see a cycle play out I think the thing with AI in particular is that it like wanders everything

into the same amount of authoritativeness yeah this was true by the way another part of the cycle which was really weird remember Facebook instant articles in Google AMP I was just thinking that yeah when every page looked the same

so you had no idea what came from where yeah yeah and so even the content farms took on the authoritativeness because all you were changing in the layout was the logo. And so you would have these Facebook and articles and Google AMP pages where it was like, is this the New York Times

or is this the WebAsphere Times? It just didn't matter. This is very bad. I will say that there's no chance that they've sold 600,000 Trump phones or even taking that many priors. The company refuses to talk to us about this. So we're going to keep reporting on it. We've got some

ideas on how to get some leverage in their reporting. We're going to... You'll see. You'll see. We'll talk about it next week. It's going to be good. But also, if you have one, I live in Washington, D.C. If one exists, it's probably here. I will come to your house.

I will meet you in a parking garage. Like, I meet, this is my white whale. Do not meet Don Jr. in a parking garage. Like, what is the fastest way to get arrested for a cocaine possession? It's meeting Don Jr. or parking garage. Don, if you're listening and I know that too hard, get at me. As your friend and nominally your boss, I insist that you do. Do not meet Don Jr.

All right. I understand. I appreciate that. You have a young family, David. What's your last one? Speaking of things that never happened, promised by the Trump administration, I have a Foxxon up page for you. So Mount Pleasant, Wisconsin. AI5K-A-G.

He did. AI 8-5. I don't know. It's mostly just the AI. So as you know, in Trump won. Donald Trump used a golden shovel to break ground on what was promised to be a giant LCD factory in my hometown of Mount Pleasant, Wisconsin. Mount Pleasant, Wisconsin is right next to Racine, Wisconsin.

When I was growing up, Mount Pleasant wasn't an entity. But now it's bigger, so it's Mount Pleasant. So I think, whatever, it doesn't matter. This site is five minutes away from the house I grew up in. So, of course, we covered the hell out of it. There was never an LCD factory. Many, many things happened, including Foxxon employees screaming at us to leave them alone. Dezze wrote a truly spectacular story.

Award-winning feature. Award-winning feature on the reality of the Foxxon. We'll put it in the show notes. It's one of my favorite verd features ever. Hearts broken, political careers destroyed the whole thing. But there's a dome. They did build a dome that they claimed was a data center. The data center is actually located in a shipping container outside the dome.

The dome itself is a party facility. Very confusing all the way right. The dome is still there. It's very small, which is actually the funniest thing about the dome. Microsoft bought all the land. Here is this big land where they'd run a bunch of power and water for their fake LCD factory. What do you need power water for?

You need them for data center. So Microsoft bought all the land, and they have ever so slowly been expanding their data center ideas in Mount Pleasant, Wisconsin. Most notably, because Microsoft President Brad Smith is from Appleton, Wisconsin.

So he's investing in his home state. Love Brad for this. Very good. Anyway, they just announced they want to build 15 more data centers on the Foxon campus. It's going to be like a data center campus. and they're trying to get approval for it.

And they are promising, and this is why I think it's interesting, that they're going to give back more water than they're using, which seems to violate the water cycle. More power to you, Brad. Yeah. And that's how Microsoft is trying to get over the enormous amounts of community opposition to Data Center that's popping up all of the country, which we've written about.

And just in the context of this, you recall, this is a tiny community that really thought Foxcombe was going to revitalize. southeastern Wisconsin. It was 15,000 jobs, they were promising? 15,000 jobs, an entire network of incubators for startups. They were going to do robot cars. Like every idea you could have. None of it came to pass.

And now Microsoft is saying, okay, here's what we can do here. It's data centers. And the community is pushing back because people hate data centers. So now Microsoft is promising. They're going to solve the power problem. They're going to pay for their own power and not raise power rates in the area. And they are making big promises about reporting. clenishing the water, because if you recall, the water for that site comes from the Great Lakes, which people in Wisconsin care about a great deal.

This is a lot, and it's all because Wisconsin basically did not stop for one minute to ask, hey, is it a good idea to build an LCD factory in Racine, Wisconsin? The answer to a question to which the answer from the very beginning was no. Anyway, Microsoft's in my hometown. I'll drive by it the next time I go home. I'll see what they want to do with the dome. you feel like this one gets higher odds of being a real thing at some point? Yes, they're already building the stuff. Again, they're committed to it.

They need the capacity. They need the water. They need the land. I think they're going to get approval. I just don't think it's going to generate a bunch of jobs and revitalize the economy. Like the economy in that part of Wisconsin right now is basically a bunch of like Amazon logistics providers.

Like there's big warehouses all over there and they're all three pels. Like so goes. Yeah. Yeah. Well, it feels like just have Josh move there for the next 12 months. I would say that the Foxcon of Trump, too, is the phone for us. Do you know what I mean?

There's a sentence that no one who has ever, every new listener of the Vergecast, just that went what and stopped listening? It is a little bit harder. But if you understood that you are our people. It is a little bit harder. Do you remember the first big story we did on Foxconn, Wisconsin is we just sent Josh as around Wisconsin asking anyone if they'd seen Foxcon. And they were like, nope.

They were like, who? And then all of the buildings they had bought were empty. And we just ran photos of the empty buildings. And then Foxcon had a press conference to announce they were buying another building. And at that press conference, a Foxcon executive said, the buildings are not empty. And we were like, yeah, they are? Here are the photos of the empty buildings. Like, it was so chaotic.

And all of it's all happening again with the phone. I just need to find something that hits as hard as photos of empty buildings. If you know, let me know. We're on the case. I'm sure there are empty buildings involved in this story. I'm just saying. This LLC is in a strip mall somewhere in Kansas and we're going to go to that strip mall. That's all I'm saying.

Yes, 100% agree. All right, my last one is very quick. And it's that YouTube CEO, Neil Mohan, published his sort of annual letter. He does this at the beginning of every year, basically laying out a bunch of priorities for YouTube in the year to come. a bunch of different stuff, some small YouTube TV announcements, some things going on. But the one that caught my eye on a lot of people is that at some point this year, creators are going to be able to make shorts using AI versions of their, and these two words are in quotes because they're very important, their own likeness.

Sure. There was not a lot of information, not a lot of new ideas about what this is going to mean, not a lot of specificity when we reached out to YouTube. But this suggests to me that YouTube is so far down the just use AI to make your stuff rabbit hole that actually what they're trying to do is not make you have to be in the video at all. Not that long ago, it was AI backgrounds and we're going to use AI to find the right music for your video and whatever. We've gone in the span of not a long time all the way down to just type in a prompt and it'll make a short for you. with your face in it. How many videos have I seen of shirtless Donald Trump and Nicholas Maduro doing dances in the Oval Office?

It's more than I have wanted to see. They're just doing SORA. Yeah. I mean, this is, this is the final solution to create a burnout. You don't want to make a video today? You want to go on vacation? Let the AI make videos of you for a week while you're gone. Who knows, man?

I feel like all these platforms are so nihilistic about AI on their platforms. and AI content flooding their platforms, that they're all just giving in. Yeah. Oh, yeah. There's not a single ounce of thought about, do consumers want this? Anywhere in this.

It is just, we have weird monopolies. They're already, these algorithms are already flooded with AI slop. We might as well just be a part of it. That's what we talked about with Missouri and Instagram. Alison wrote about that this week. I suspect as YouTube rolls us out, it's what we're going to talk about YouTube and their creators and their AI.

And I keep saying that creator economy, is going to implode this year because of the pressure being put on all these platforms and all these creators. And this is just the biggest pressure of all. Yep. When supply goes infinite because of AI, the rates for the brand deals that keep all these creators in their homes will drop. And then you have no other game to play except being one of one, being Mr. Beast. That's a game you can play. Very hard.

Or just infinite content, which means you're going to turn to AI likeness. of yourself. Right. And and either YouTube and everybody else fundamentally misunderstands what their creators want or they just absolutely don't care and think that it doesn't matter what they want because the the toothpaste is out of the tube and AI is going to win anyway. So we might as well embrace it. Yeah. I mean, there's another version of this where YouTube says, hey, we value the authentic creator. We will unrank or der rank or deprioritize AI. content and make sure that the stuff that our actual creators are making is good and people can find it if they want it. And instead they're saying, no, we're going to let the creators make AI content.

And there's something, I think it's pure nihilism. I think they can't figure it out and they don't want to. Also, if you're YouTube, you can't say AI is bad because you work at Google. Right. So, like, what are you going to do? Yeah. Man, I don't know. I have a lot of sympathy for creators in this year to come because I think the pressure on output is going to go through the roof is all of these platforms are just flooded with AI slot.

Yeah. Yeah, I mean, back to what we were talking about at the beginning, right? The way to win is just to do a lot of stuff as fast and loudly as you can. Yeah. You're not going to beat the AI-AI models at loud and fast.

You're just not. Every second I watch an AI cat doing that Electro Breakers dance, you know, I'm talking about it. This one I actually know. Every second you spend watching that is a second you're not watching a real person. Yep. And that's how these platforms work, right?

There's only a limited amount of time. They're all just monetizing attention. Every second you watch that AI slop is a second you're not watching a real person. I know what creators want. They say it to us. We are friends with a lot of creators. They want to make the content that they are passionate about and find a real audience that cares about them. And you listen to how some of them talk about their content strategies.

And they're like, I make the one thing for the brand. I make the one thing for the algorithm, and then I try to make one thing for myself a month. And you're like, that sucks. Like, that already feels painful to me. Again, I'm saying this out of sympathy. Like, these are people I care about that already feels painful to me. And then you add, you need to make infinite content to compete against the dancing kitty cats. I don't know, man.

Like, I hope these platforms come to their senses. I hope the creators push on these platforms in serious ways to strategy shift. We're certainly going to do reporting on it. But I, man, again, it's nothing but sympathy. I know a lot of people think I'm doom and gloom and I dislike creators. Like, I promise you this is coming from, I know a lot of these people who work really hard. And they are trying really hard to build real businesses. And they are just buffeted by other people's ideas that they have to respond to because of the algorithms.

Yep. Anyway, you should own your own audience. That's the end of it. That's the main thing I have to say. True. I can promise everybody one thing, which is that you and I will not be replaced by AI because what would we do all day then? Do you know what I mean? I would send angry letters to Brennan Carr.

All right, so this podcast is going to be me and AI, Neelai, at some point in the very near future. But until then, we should get out of here. Eli, this has been a delight. We're going to go, we're going to do one of these live in Wisconsin. Oh, that would rule, actually. This is what I'm saying. Also, I don't know if people have told you about the top gear in China thing that Andy and I have been cooking up, where the three of us are going to go to China and go on EV adventures together.

We floated this on the show this week. The feedback has been incredible. I think this may have gotten away from us already. It's going to be great. Like, you can't pay us to say what you want is going to come into real conflict with Chinese EV companies allow us access to their facilities and cars. What could possibly go wrong? That's going to be great.

That's it for the Verge cast. Remember, as always, if you subscribe to the Verge, you can get this podcast and all of our podcasts. We talked last week about the decoder you were going to do explaining the whole Scandal. That's out now. It's a really good episode. Go listen to it and you can listen to it and all of our other shows, ad-free. If you subscribe to The Verge. It's a very good website. We're doing our best over here. Theverge.com slash subscribe. Reach out. We want to hear from you about anything and everything. Vergecast at theverge.com is our email. The hotline is 866

Verge.1-1-1. This show is a production of The Verge and the Vox Media Podcast Network. Today's show is produced by Eric Gomez, Brandon Kiefer, and Travis Larchuk. We will see you next week. Nilai, Rock and Roll.