The Wolf Of All Streets - ChatGPT | Will AI Be The End Of The World And Your Job? | Daniel Jeffries, Futurist

Episode Date: February 12, 2023

Daniel Jeffries is one of my favorite guests. After seeing the meteoric rise of ChatGPT, he was the perfect guest to discuss the evolution of AI and its impact on our lives. Should we worry about AI, can AI steal our jobs, or is it a good thing and we should embrace this technology? Listen to Daniel Jeffries, a futurist, author, engineer, CIO at Stability AI and Managing Director at AI Infrastructure Alliance and find out what our future and the future of AI will look like. Daniel Jeffries: https://www.linkedin.com/in/danjeffries/ ►► JOIN THE FREE WOLF DEN NEWSLETTER https://thewolfden.substack.com/  ►►NORD VPN  An essential crypto product to protect your privacy and keep your crypto safe!  Sign up on my link below & enjoy the benefits of NORD VPN from just $4 a month.  👉https://nordvpn.com/WolfOfAllStreets GET UP TO A $8,000 BONUS IN USDT AND TRADE ALL SPOT PAIRS ON BITGET FOR ZERO FEES! ►► https://thewolfofallstreets.info/bitget   Follow Scott Melker: Twitter: https://twitter.com/scottmelker  Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/wolfofallstreets   Web: https://www.thewolfofallstreets.io  Spotify: https://spoti.fi/30N5FDe  Apple podcast: https://apple.co/3FASB2c  #AI #ChatGPT #Crypto Timestamps: 0:00 Intro 1:00 Is this the end? 4:30 Cyborgs will help us do our jobs 6:00 ChatGPT & evolution of work 17:35 ChatGPT & cheating 20:22 Moving fast & breaking things 23:40 AI & crypto 29:39 Crypto killer app 39:20 How we can use AI 46:00 Wrap up The views and opinions expressed here are solely my own and should in no way be interpreted as financial advice. This video was created for entertainment. Every investment and trading move involves risk. You should conduct your own research when making a decision. I am not a financial advisor. Nothing contained in this video constitutes or shall be construed as an offering of financial instruments or as investment advice or recommendations of an investment strategy or whether or not to "Buy," "Sell," or "Hold" an investment.

You know, where did that come from, right? And it came from basically 50 years of sci-fi stories. The sperm whale industry is gone. Think about the witcher on steroids. You can even Google, like, are the robots coming for my job? You'll find a hundred different stories with basically that variation in the title.

And AI is not going to replace the radiologist. A radiologist working with AI is going to replace the radiologist who's not using AI. Are the robots coming for our jobs? Are any of us going to be employed in the future once AI takes over? The answer is no, they're not coming for our jobs and there will be more jobs as a result of this incredible advancement in technology. Futurist Dan Jeffries tells us exactly Every time that we've talked in the past, we've obviously spoken about the future

and what's coming with technology. Is the future here? Chat GPT? I mean, is this it? Is the AI taking over? Is Skynet coming for us? It's here, man. I'm on a crusade to end this kind of AI taking over, end of all jobs

narrative. In fact, I just finished an article on it because it's about where did that come from, right? And it came from basically 50 years of sci-fi stories and and now the media picks it up right it's you can even google like are the robots coming for my job you'll find 100 different stories with basically that variation in the title and what you have to understand is the sci-fi writers are writing about sci-fi before it existed for the vast majority of time right and and what do they do basically like they they just anthropomorphize it so it's your like robot buddy rgt2 or it's a villain in a metal suit aka ultron or it's the thing gone crazy right and how right so that's two out of three evil eye gone wrong but they're not real they're just they're just like adding in

another human character to it and i think i think the big problem is it's like people have now accepted that this is this weird fact, when in fact, nothing is that, like, it hasn't happened, like, an AI doesn't work this way. And then, I think the worst part is that people just sort of echo this kind of, you know, again, and again, and when you think about something like even like the three robot laws, as above, right? People go, Oh, those are great. We should we should base it on that.

No, we should not. First of all, we can't. They're just literary constructs. And second, they're literary constructs designed to do what stories do, which is drive conflict. The whole point of them is not to make laws that work, but to make it so that the robots

end up in conflict with them so they can write a story because that's the essence of the story. If I write a story where Johnny and Timmy went to the woods and they brought their dad's gun and nothing happened, that's not a story, right? The stories are about conflict. And so the entire thing about artificial intelligence has been conflict. And it's disappointing because I think we're going to miss out if this narrative gets too

far ahead of itself. We're going to miss out on cures for cancer and all kinds of amazing things. Think about self-driving cars. A self-driving car, how many people is it acceptable to die in a self-driving car? And most people would say none. But humans are terrible drivers, absolutely terrible. 50 million people are injured every year, and 1.3 million die on the road from humans. So if the AIs did it 50% better, it's a massive amount of life save. If they cut it down to a quarter, it's 975 billion or whatever it is, 975,000 people sort of running around playing with their kids and having dinner. So I think we just have to be careful of this narrative. I think it's super cool stuff. people sort of running around playing with their kids and like having having dinner right so i think we just have to be careful of this narrative i think it's super cool stuff and we just we we end

up it's just a nice story to like create conflict but i don't i don't think it's true it is interesting that the media and the narrative always is around the one car crash when the car was self-driving yeah as opposed to the as you said millions of trips where nothing happened and as if humans are perfect drivers that's right 16 car crashes with autopilot officially from tesla over the past like six or seven years whatever it is that's like two a year right and again humans are just terrible at this stuff and i think it's just you know we tend to focus on that kind of big fiery thing, but it's, we've sort of normalized the risk of humans

doing stuff, right. And in machines are actually just going to be much better at this stuff. And the other thing is, they're not coming for all the jobs like what they're coming for. They're, they're cyborgs, right, they're going to work with us on things, right, like, an AI is not going to replace the radiologist that a radiologist working with ai is going to replace the radiologist who's not using ai that's how it's going to work right and it's how it's going to work across a thousand fields we're seeing in art now right and people are going oh gosh they someone typed a text prompt and it's if you know every job is gone no it's not that's not there's not a single generative

eye company out there thinking about it that way. They're thinking, how do I enhance this workflow? And there's boring parts of it. If I'm a concept artist and I draw this character, that's the fun part. And then when I have to do turnarounds where I have to draw the same character

from eight different angles, that's boring and tedious. There's already models that can do that part. That's awesome. It lets people focus on the parts that they love. But I want to see a big shift in the narrative. And I think there's always these techno panics, these moral techno panics. And when you look back, everything from like cameras to like umbrellas to like bicycles, we're going to like destroy the fundamentals of civilization. And we've always adapted. We've always, always adapted. And then it's like, well, this time is different. It is not. It's not different. Technology is not outside

of us. It's a part of us. It's always been a part of us. Right. It's a shift. But could you make the argument with ChatGPT as an example that maybe this eliminates the first or second year jobs, the intern or the assistant, the person who's doing the first draft. Because the workflow of something like ChatGPT, summarize this article for me, write me a story about such and such. It's obviously not in its final form, but maybe it at least eliminates that first sort of iteration. Maybe, except there's another version of it. So at my foundation the infrastructure alliance i've got a fantastic uh operations person who speaks like six or seven languages right

and english is not her native language but she's you know she's a genius she knows how to put thoughts together in a clear and transparent fashion and so she you know wrote up the newsletter and usually she'll like write up the newsletter and then i have to like be you know i'm the writer i have to take it and like pretty much off the whole bunch of stuff out change stuff but she took it and fed it to chat tvt and said you know make it more dynamic you know make it you know correct it or whatever and when she gave it to me i had to change like 10 words that's awesome right to me there's and and when i asked it right that's exactly i read a newsletter every single day and it's like my final edit.

Right. It's like, it's like having a free extra editor. And that's, that's amazing. Like, and now if you ask it to write something from scratch, it's going to create something that like maybe makes the point, but it's also kind of bullshit, right? Not in the way that you want to make it. Right. So it's kind of like, can you get to the point where you're making like real concrete

strong points sometimes it's going to do that but in general you know it kind of writes like a high school essay style right which is fine unless you know how to prompt it and say don't do that like take this language take this structure make it more dynamic I think again more people are going to use it like that and the other thing is there's precedence for this kind of stuff right so we tend to think about like the jobs that will disappear or whatever first of all we've already destroyed all the jobs in history multiple times okay like you did not tan leather like you know to make your clothes today or hunt the water buffalo for your food 99 of people used to be involved in alcohol, agriculture, now it's 3%. And we've

always created more and more varied jobs like, yes, you can flip the light switch and the electric light comes on. Nobody is clamoring for us to go back to hunting sperm whales to dig the white gunk out of their head. Because like, you know, the sperm whale industry is gone. Like, that's, to me, when I think about these things, always we change we adapt like there's a new set of things that come around and yes sometimes there's things that that disappear but that is okay it doesn't happen overnight like that's the other part of the narrative where it's like bam like you wake up tomorrow everyone's not alert and it doesn't work the right and the other thing is there's a great book called innovation it Enemy. And it talks about the history of the music industry.

And in the 1940s, a bunch of the recording, like the biggest kind of like group of musicians got together. And they were like, okay, the thing that's destroying the music industry is recorded music, right? Records. And the reason that they were worried about it was because all of the musicians the job on the radio like they played live on the radio they didn't play records right and so they're like we've got to stop this notoriously horrible thing and so for a couple of years they actually managed to like stop the recording of music for a period of time now it's not what people tend to think about in this like one to like zero sum game of like, oh, you know, it's true. In general, over time, the musicians on the radio lost their job. But now, the impact of recorded music has made make money again is through touring because streaming has changed the music industry again. You can't go a decade without something out to destroy the music industry, and yet the

music industry adapts again and again. That's my thinking. I don't know why we panic over stuff all the time and why it never works out that way, and yet we just do it again and again. I think it's human nature to be terrified of stuff. I think we like to be afraid. There's going to be a huge movement towards becoming very good at prompting ai that be becoming an ai prompter the guy who knows how to get the most out of the technology could be

an entire new wave of jobs when you're thinking about it that way yeah like it's it's like it's actually programming a system with words it's not with code's actually programming a system with words. It's not with code. It's programming the system with words. That's really what it is. In its current iteration, the AIs will change over time, right? And maybe it won't be about giant training sets, for instance. Maybe they'll come up with ways that teach it to learn with feedback and like a human learns, right?

Where you take the kid out in the back, throw him the ball for a week, he'll learn how to throw the ball, he may not be in Derek Jeter or whatever, and throw in, you know, go to the majors, but he could study over time, you know, to become that thing that will probably we're going to start to mirror those techniques. And then it'll be who's the best AI trainer? And how do you how do you train their artificial intelligence to do things? I think those are going to be important. And I think you mentioned something that's super, super key here, right? And that is, it's really easy to imagine like, okay, the whale oil, you know, the whale hunters are going to be gone, right? And the lamplighters are going to be gone. It's very hard to picture all the things that come after, right? And it's like, once electric light takes off, all of a sudden, you have all these, like, nightclubs and things like that that existed in tiny form. You have bars. You have dinner out late. You have people being able to work at different times.

You have office buildings. And all of a sudden you have this kind of explosion of economic activity that comes from electric light. So there's always these additional things. And then when you think about something like a web designer right it's very hard to imagine a web designer if you're an 18th century farmer right because it's built on the back of 20 other technologies right the discovery of electricity and wiring it all together and uh digital technology and the internet and computers and web browsers you can't you can't imagine all these things so the people can see that the lamp lighter is going to be gone,

but they can't see the 50 things that replace it. And I don't want to go back to the only jobs were like surf and Viking Raider and housewife and teacher. Those are fine. Viking Raider does sound kind of fun to be honest maybe for a weekend or something yeah for a weekend right like but like virtually maybe you know because like i don't want to be you know maimed or mutilated but the it's i i we just have so many more varied jobs now and i think that's because like you know these one technologies

change something and it's a massive technology, right? And you look back, there was a writer writing about how information overload, for instance, was destroying our mind. It was weakening our ability to think clearly. And you'd think he was writing about social media, but he was writing in 1500 about the printing press, right? Never played with email or Twitter, right? And like, it's the same argument today.

Like, oh, you know, we're dumber now, we're rotting our minds, you know, we blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. And yet we always seem to adapt and create new things. I think that's exciting. I think too many people miss it and too many people just focus on the negative. And this really is on the negative. And this really is just the beginning. I mean, chat GPT is absolutely mind-blowing, but when you see the exponential projections of what it will be able to do, even in the coming months and years, to your point, it's

extremely difficult to imagine the final end state of this. Yeah, and they're going to get better with you know getting it to do be more aligned to what people want and in fact you know all the people were sort of you know gleefully pointing out how you know it's stupidly you know made up answers or whatever it's like you know what like you just used it wrong right like first of all like just google that you didn't you why didn't you answer that question and then first of all, like, just Google that. Why do you need to answer that question? And then second of all, like, it's what they didn't realize is that everybody who was pointing out all the hacks and the things that went wrong

there, right, they were able to say, like, this is something where, you know, it's like, they didn't realize they were part of the distributed qa team for it, right? And that like, that they were making that open AI was making it better at every step of the way. And they were already doing that early with reinforcement learning, and then it gets better. You have companies like Anthropic, working on a constitution of things for AI. So it's like, it has 10 principles, and then they keep, you know, automatically tweaking it to like, you know, get closer and closer to those principles over time. And we're going to learn these new techniques. Kevin Kennedy I think the other thing is a lot of folks are of this mindset now. I was just writing about this,

and an article is going to come out in a week or two, how everybody kind of thinks, oh, we've got to solve all these problems in isolation. We can't release this until it's absolutely perfect. And you're like, yeah, imagine if like, you know, they told the kitchen knife manufacturers, like you absolutely cannot release this for cutting vegetables until you make sure nobody ever gets stabbed with it. Like it doesn't matter that 99.99999% of people are going to cut vegetables with it.

You've got to find a magical solution to this. Or they have to find the solutions in isolation. That doesn't work either. Like the CTO of OpenAI was on record saying, look, we thought the biggest problem was going to be political disinformation. So they were working on that problem, trying to figure out how to stop it. No, the biggest problem, they were completely wasting their time. Nobody used it for that. The biggest problem was spammers writing more crap to sell you crap you don't need. And they couldn't have seen that problem until it gets out into the real world because that's how problems get solved. Like you have humans are very creative.

The systems were great at finding exploits, finding loopholes, getting around things. So only when you put stuff out into the real world can you actually solve these problems. There's this whole concept that we can solve everything in isolation. It's not that we can think of nothing in isolation. But behind closed doors, we're going to be able to make these things perfect pills. It's ludicrous. It's really ludicrous. And I don't know how we've gotten there as a society other than society has become so successful. Infra mortality rate is so low. So many people live below the poverty line like so people don't believe this either that's the craziest thing like but the statistics are there it's the greatest

time in the history of world to be alive literally always like that was always better than before right yeah right like so math so it's just massive it's this wonderful time to be alive and yet like we I think that's paradoxically made us more afraid of risk like in other words when you've got 100 million dollars you're more afraid of losing it i think we've got food stability and no like massive wars and like you know we we just overcome like a you know a global plague like in a couple years with minimal amount of damage considering like the amount of damage of plagues in the past like you know the black plague which wiped out you know half of europe right so like the technology's gotten better our ability to cope it's gotten better and yet i think that's paradoxically made us

more afraid of things and and that's a shame because i feel like some of these technologies we're going to miss out or we're going to restrain them for longer than they need to be they're eventually going to win out they're inevitable but we may rest them for longer than they need to be. They're eventually going to win out. They're inevitable, but we may restrain them longer than we need to. And that makes me sad. Yeah. And chat GPT is not dangerous relative to web two previous technology, the amount of misinformation that's out there. You just have to understand that it's effectively in beta and we're the focus group. That's right. I mean, look, people are like, oh, the high school students are cheating. Newsflash, high school students. Good for you. They mean, look, people are like, oh, high school students are cheating. Newsflash, high school students are cheating. Good for you. They were already cheating, guys.

Yeah, they've been cheating for a long time. There are, I think, real harms. And we use that term a little too loosely now. If you're a foreigner and somebody won't rent you, that's real harm. If you're the wrong color and someone won't rent you know rent to you or somebody punches you in the face that's real harm but you know we also get to this point now where we're sort of afraid of anything and like if we disagree with something that i've been harmed by that's that's not that's not correct we get it we get a we get too wrapped up in this kind of thing now yeah words right yeah yeah this kind of concept of like doesn't agree with my political beliefs. It doesn't matter what they are, whether you're like an arch conservative or super left or somewhere in between.

That's not hard. So I think we have to focus back on the things that do matter. We don't want Jack TPT advising kids the best way to commit suicide or giving wrong drug interaction wrong uh drug interaction right to somebody because eventually people will use it that way in other words google is right to be afraid of its search business now because eventually if i want a recipe right i i don't want to go to that website where it's got an ad every other paragraph that's jumping out at me and i thanks to the gdp you know i've got to click accept now and are you sure you want to accept that and it's like uh i just just tell me how to

make the answer give me the answer yeah tell me how to make sausage and peppers and we don't want it to say like conscious and peppers with our soup or something right but there are there are some real things but when it makes up an answer like those things are readily fixable with it being able to search things behind the scenes and already people doing those types of things and they're going to get better at aligning it. I don't worry too much about those things. And I do think that there are real issues, but I think we just get overblown about what those issues are and we worry about every little thing. And there's this gotcha thing now where people are like gotcha it messed up one time it's totally it's totally worthless but that's absurd that's like saying your bike crashed one time and bikes are

useless right bikes are awesome it doesn't make any sense i think it's a uh sausage and peppers with an arsenic reduction so the arsenic like when you you. When you put wine in a recipe, it doesn't get you drunk, right? So the arsenic's fine. Arsenic foam. It's just a topping. That's right. But interestingly, that means that

the model of moving fast and breaking things is effective most of the time, right? Obviously, I pander in cryptocurrencies over here. That's generally the tone and the topic of these conversations. We moved fast and broke a lot of things. And I'm not likening it to AI necessarily, but I can see an argument at times because this is people's money

or maybe being slower and deliberate could have benefited a lot of people. So what you touch upon in terms of the way to think about these things is where there are actual like real harm done. Like again, when we talk about harm, it shouldn't be used so loosely. It should be a very specific term. Like I punch you in the face, but if you stab me in the chest, those are those are hard. But if I steal all your money, right, these are harms, right? If, you know, if the motor is blowing up in the old Pinto or whatever, every time it gets hit in the back, that's hard, but these things have to be addressed. I think you have to, I think you do have to define a few sets of categories, lethal autonomous weapons, you know,

military use, you know, if it's dealing with medical advice, right? You know, if it's if it's dealing with people's money and loans and things like that, there are there are things that I think we could clearly and calmly kind of come to an understanding on now that may be challenging in today's world because you know people are going to layer on all these other things that they believe is harm it's not but these kinds of things are like we could say look in these areas there there's a higher standard there's a higher level of accountability there's a higher level of things that you're held to and they did things like this they used to do these things in the past like during the you know the early biotech uh treaties

in the 80s that were adopted the scientists when they figured out genetic engineering in the 70s were like wait a minute this could be really dangerous let's put a voluntary moratorium on it let's come up with rules and then those rules were adopted into law that basically said okay we're gonna have you're gonna have to prove that there was an actual harm done. There's got to be evidence of it. And then it's kind of flipped in the modern world in 2000, particularly with kind of the EDU into the precautionary principle, which is like, well, if we think genetic engineering is bad, we have the right to just ban it in our country. And they gave kind of member states the right to do that. So we kind of flipped the technology thing back on the technology and said, like, go ahead and prove a

negative, right? Prove it'll never do any harm, right? I think the earlier way going back to the original way of saying, like, here's what clearly what harm is, here's how you define it, here's what evidence looks like, right? And here's how, like the penalties for doing so across these kind of strata, right? You know, self driving cars, weapons, medical advice, drug, whatever it is, right? We can define these kind of coherently and clearly.

I think that's where you do have to be a little bit more careful. And I think that those are going to end up being more regulated anyway, right? And, and, and, and that's where we have to like step back a little bit and not sort of move fast and break things as much as crypto is a broken thing. Do you see any interesting implementations of AI and crypto partnerships or things working together? It seems like it would be a natural marriage.

I mean, it seems like it could be like a way of doing distributed funding for research or for reinforcement learning or crowdsourcing, it could be really useful. But the downside is, of course, you can kind of already do that with regular fee on money too, right? And I think there's ways to do it. I have to admit, I've been a little bit down on crypto in the last few a few months in a way i haven't i wonder why but it's more than just like you know you know you know sam bankman freeman and everything and this kind of stuff you know because i'm tired of that feed like i'm every i'm telling my phone no no no no until it learns yeah i learned some stuff showing me that story like i i think where i'm disappointed is is more like a fundamental level and that is for like for many years probably five or six years

i've been saying you know go develop really cool apps like develop a marketplace that's like i don't know like um like we chat on steroids right like we chat if you know that it's like a huge platform you can buy tickets you know get parking spaces WeChat, if you know that it's like a huge platform, you can buy tickets, you know, get parking spaces, go, you know, all kinds of stuff. It's an entire e-commerce platform. You'll make something like that in crypto where it's all, you know, where the vast majority of stuff is bought in crypto,

whether it's tickers or anything else, and make it so that it's just an amazing, you know, use case for us to do it. And I think what we've just continued to do, unfortunately, is kind of build semi-decentralized versions of the same stuff we already had, but in a kind of hackier way, right? It's been like, well, we can lend some money

or we can distribute some money or we can make some other kind of money again. And it's like, where have been the identity protocols? Where have been the distributed applications? Where have been the distributed applications? Where have been like, the apps that I can't live without, so that I don't even know that it's crypto, I don't I want to download something and click it and be using it. And magically, it tells me, oh, your, your wallet now for using the app has got coins, you can now spend like I'm in playing a video game like i i want i want i've

wanted that for some time and i think just sort of looking around i go okay i guess we're just swapping money around you know and that's fine i still think it gets there um it certainly gets there over time but it's i sometimes feel like i'm the only one talking about this and i don't know why i don't know why anyone's not trying to build a super killer app. So if they are, their definition of killer app is just weird. Preston Pyshko Do you think that's because we're earlier because people are so consumed with the profit? David Collum I think because it's money, it's probably second. It's too much of a siren song. It's like the idea that like you can spin up money from nothing and by the way

all money spun up from nothing but the idea that you could create well you yourself right out of your out of your city without consensus from a bazillion other like people like you used to have to come together after a war and like form a protocol ago we shall now make the monetary system or whatever you know there was a lot of stuff that went into new monetary systems historically but now it's kind of like boom poof i've created a new monetary system and i think the dangers of things like we go oh my gosh you know the s you know spf thing like how how could they have loaned out their money to to another company which well you know banks have been doing that for forever and insurance companies, what's his name, the richest man in the world at one point, Warren Buffett was making his money from having a giant

insurance company and then using the money there to invest in stuff. So we have regulations for stuff like that and we have precedence for that. So that kind of thing that he created is not new and it's not even interesting it's boring right and it was based on you know a coin that really probably you know just it could implode overnight and that was sort of the doubt you know the real downside of these kinds of things it's like we haven't gotten to the point where the monetary system is is feeding something that is truly. And it's not the money itself based on its distribution of the people who have it that makes it resilient.

Why is the dollar so resilient? Because so many people are bought into the idea of it. And people weirdly dismiss this. They're all, it's all going to zero. That's crazy town. It's not going to zero. It's total crazy town. It's the fact that we have these collective belief systems as as human beings and and there's this history behind it and there's this there's this government this whole identity of a nation state all these things that go into it that infuses that money with something there's been nothing exploding the crypto in the same way that's kind of then that sort of dellis you know even religious affiliation even religious affiliation to the thing. And then a wider market that it serves, like the idea that I can buy my coffee or donuts or a sushi or

PlayStation or whatever with that money. That's what really gives that money value. We haven't created that secondary system in crypto that allows the the the that value to then reflect back on the currency itself i think that's been the real the real tragedy of it to me is that i thought we'd be further along with it right and and on the flip side with ai i thought it would take longer and now we're getting ahead faster than i thought that that's the one downside of being a futurist, you can never actually figure out you know, what's going to happen at some point, probably

if it kind of goes in this direction. But getting the timing right is always wrong. And I think with crypto, I've been in love with it for so long. And I felt like it was just gonna be further at this point in my life. And it's not I feel like we're in the same place we were, you know, three or four years ago. And it hasn't it hasn't changed yet. I don't know what the trigger is going to be. I hope somebody is out there working on something amazing. Is there anything that you see in the pipeline that you think could be that sort of killer app,

something in gaming or potentially metaverse? Listen, we have all these buckets that we've seen sort of have their speculation and bubbles, but none of them have panned out, to your point, to be anything. No game in crypto is competitive with Fortnite or Call of Duty, right? I mean, we just don't see the quality. Yeah, so there might be something in the pipeline. I haven't seen it specifically. Like, I can't call it out and say that's it.

And I would say at some point in time maybe maybe there's a marriage with how you asked this earlier and maybe this is the answer i don't know the exact manifestation it would take but when i look at something like artificial intelligence and the way it's going to change certain things let's say it does start to devastate the ad business in some way right it's 190 billion dollar business for google alone right and they're you know supposedly issued the code red and said well you know these language models let's start to put them out there but they've been more conservative because you know the government can look at them and and you know they're the big tech has been soured and in the in the people have soured on

big tech and this kind of stuff so why risk it but when But when your business is at an existential risk, you go, wait a minute, are we going to take the ropes off? So I think all of a sudden you start to see Google getting into the fray. You start to see artificial intelligence change things. You start to see people like Microsoft, who are basically putting 10 billion into open AI, essentially say, look, Bing's been an off-the-ram for forever. We don't care about destroying the dirge business. Like, we care about getting more of it. And if we can get more of

it by embedding chat GPT in there, and it's summarizes websites or it's somewhere. At that point, the ad revenue starts to decline. And so you have to come up with a new business model. And when you think about the ad revenue, that came out of necessity as well, right? Like everybody was building on these apps on the web. It was all free, right? It's not me to pay for it. It's always shocked me that people are like, what?

You're tracking me? You want to sell me stuff? Yeah, you've been getting this complex service for free for a decade. What are you talking about? Who do you think pays for those services with people in this app that you love to use every day? And you're mad that someone wants to sell you shoes? I don't understand. So in this case, if that starts to go down, though, and artificial intelligence starts to be your interface to the world, it starts to be the thing where you're like, I need advice. I need

to buy my sister for Christmas. And it knows how to go look at the things that she likes in the store and tell you like, well, she doesn't really like wine, but she likes beer and she generally likes IPAs, you know, or, or, you know, Belgian whites, you know, and there's a door on the way to her house on the 23rd when you go there, right? Like that becomes this interface and it's left out, hey, I've got to find the answer and troll through sites. Then it, maybe there's an opportunity for crypto to start becoming kind of a, a way to pay for things there like and so and i would think of it as machine to machine money like not people trading

the money around but kind of like the money just sort of algorithmically moving around to pay for services and you're like i topped up my wallet and like it it's streamed out to a bunch of things and like i i only paid 25 cents for spotify because I barely listened to it. And then I went on a road trip. And you know, I paid 15, you know, the equivalent of 15 bucks and encrypted, like use case consumption or whatever. And, and machine to machine learning, you know, these kinds of things, I think, potentially, could be something interesting, but it's almost like the other thing has to happen first, or they're

afforded there to be a necessity you know for it and i think those things can be i think those things can be interesting um but who knows i don't i still i still think that it's about building the economic systems right the round crypto and stop worrying about the money like it's it's a religious argument whether deflationary or inflationary or partially inflationary or the Austrian, who cares? The fact is all of these things exist simultaneously in the world for a reason. We need all of them. We need loans. We need deflationary things. We need the hedges against downturns. We need inflationary currents. We need

all of these things. And anybody who doesn't understand that doesn't really understand economics. They think they understand economics, but but they don't they have more of a religious affiliation with economics as opposed to just observing reality and we need this those that crypto to kind of embody all those different systems and then also provide something new in fact when you look at a technology it's when it provides something new is when it really takes off so like if you think about the kindle there were there were ways to read books uh digitally technology. It's when it provides something new is when it really takes off. So like, if you think about the Kindle, there were there were ways to read books digitally, and they kind of sucked, like you could scratch the CD, like, there, you know, it wasn't portable, I'm not going to carry around the CRT on the subway, right, burns my eyes. But then all of a

sudden, like, you know, it's like the Kindle comes around, it's like, Oh, wait a minute, like, it's got a battery life of a month. And it looks like, you know, it looks like it's easy on the eyes and I can store, wait a minute, I can store like 10,000 books in here in the same port factory. I could store one. All of a sudden it mirrors all the old like capabilities and then it provides new capabilities. Crypto has barely mirrored the old capabilities, right? And it's got to provide new capabilities. It's got to mirror the old ones and provide new capabilities. So I don't know how much longer it takes, but it's not there yet. I don't know why. I will never forget when I was in college, must have been 1998 or 1999, when my first friend who was always ahead of technological trends got his first mp3 player and it held 13 songs.

And we said, holy shit, you can put an entire CD on this thing. I didn't even understand that it was a file. I said, where's the music? Where's the... But because before that you had to put your CD into your Discman and it would skip all over the place and you had to flip them out. But it was even mind

blowing to me that you could effectively put one cd into this digital format and listen to it and not worry about it you know skipping or being problematic right because it was providing new new characteristics right like it was cool we could already take music on the go but it was imperfect and then all of a sudden it could now you could mirror the old characteristics you could take take it on the go, but it improved upon the last day. And that's also the other thing is every new technology when it comes out, I should remember this in my own advice, every new technology when it comes out is flawed, inherently flawed,

tremendously flawed. And then over time, it gets better. You fix the thing. Initially, people actually argued that you shouldn't you shouldn't get a tractor because the horse is superior right now like and like for a long period of time it was like well the horse you know you don't gotta buy gas for it and like you know just sort of ignore that you had to buy food for it and clean up its poop but but you know it you could basically like you know have a new one when it broke down as opposed to buying a new one. So but eventually, over time, the

upside of tractor, you know, eventually displays this horse. And I think the same thing is, when the technology starts to aim error, all the old things plus provide those new characteristics is when it starts to make that leap across that chasm. And that's when it starts to get the adoption. And they just haven't seen that, like, I still haven't even seen things that I would expect like i don't know like we could build an algorithmic protocol for resetting passwords on a wallet that's like like it's not it doesn't even feel that hard to me like you when you call a bank

and you're like here are my three words and like here's my fingerprint here's whatever like we could bait that into a freaking automated protocol so that grandma and me and the guy searching the dump for his Bitcoin wallet or trying to remember the password that he changed one letter on and he screwed and now he's got one more guess before it locks in for eternity. It's a terrible problem. It's terrible, terrible crap. We haven't even fixed that problem. I don't know why. I don't know why. Yeah. it's definitely not ready for the spotlight with the mainstream. I mean, grandma's never writing down her code on a piece of paper, her private keys, and throwing it in a safe and hoping for the best. And you would think that we would have gotten farther along even with just private key security and logins and the very basic things that it takes to send

this to the next level? Yeah. I mean, it's not like a blockchain, like a distributed database, like I can look up information in many ways, right? But like, could I not have a protocol that allows me to reset like a key, right? And obviously we don't want it being attacked, but I'm sure that there aren't enough people to figure out how to make it very resilient. I mean, we've got the keys based on, you know, 30 words or 20 words or whatever now, right? The deterministic keys. That was cool. Like, okay, now I can remember the wallet. Now, there are ways to attack it, right? If you're foolish enough, you know, to show those, then somebody could just put those down and they don't need your password. Right. So there are flaws, but we could still come up with a protocol

for this kinds of stuff. And I don't know what's holding people back other than maybe it's just not interesting enough. But I think you would develop those things if you developed a whole platform. If you developed a platform for doing cool stuff you might be tempted then in addition to you know minting your money to like develop usability around your money because the main point is people using your platform that to me is how things happen right it's like we developed the seat belt because cars got really fast right we didn't develop the people before they got fast right so i think that's that's the thing we got to get to. Preston Pyshko I think we'll get there eventually, but I do think that it's fair to say that it hasn't been as fast as one would have maybe

anticipated. But we could say that crypto has somewhat had a zero to one moment and just has not been able to accelerate far beyond one. But then you look at chat GPT and it's like OpenAI went zero to one and now we're at five in a week. Yes. Right. And so if that's going to go to 10, what are the next things in AI that are exciting you? There's so many things in AI that are exciting me. And I think all the generative AI is super exciting.

I think like speeding up the artistic workflow. I think if the metaverse becomes a thing, it becomes a thing because of generator BI. In other words, our ability to kind of like rapidly create things on the fly in real time. I think people will be co-creating with it. You know, you'll be storyboarding with it and having the correct stories and generating initial stills, you know, and all these kinds of things, texture. There's a million kinds of things there. I think drug discovery is a huge possibility. I think we can get to the point where personalized drugs can be made for people, or it's going to become cost feasible to research smaller diseases that generally you just wouldn't have the economic

incentive because it costs you a billion dollars to develop this drug. So you're going to concentrate on big cancers and AIDS, but you're not going to concentrate on the disease that you can't go out in the sun and you need to stay under a heat lamp, well, 15 hours a day or whatever it is that 100,000 people on the planet have. But maybe you maybe you can now right maybe you can start to look at those things because you can speed up the process i see this thing as an accelerant for everything i don't see anything on earth that would not benefit from getting more intelligent from supply chains to economics to right like nobody's going you know what i wish my supply chain was stupider right I really wish that discovering new antibiotics was slower. I wish that discovering new materials was slower.

Nobody's saying that. So everyone is going to use it for accelerated pattern recognition, accelerated design of material science. You've got drones flying over agriculture looking for diseased plants and being able to spray them with pesticides so you're using less pesticides. These kinds of things, this kind of automation and this kind of scaling up

of intelligence is truly exponential. Use that word way too much. Way, way, way too much much it's like a bogo stick comes out it's gonna be an exponential revolution on transport right but like in this case right like literally this really is like you're talking about industrializing intelligence that's what i wrote recently it's the age of industrialized intelligence right and if you think about the opening of that i just was focused on on video game making in a decade, right? Where you can probably make a AAA game with 100 people instead of 5,000

to 10,000. And it's not going to be, oh, no, now all those people are gone or out of a job. No. Now, instead of 10 AAA games or five AAA games a year, we're going to have 1,000. Way more games, right? That's right. Right. Because you're going to have more people who are like boom i can i can draw this with an under sketch and then it'll paint it up and then i'll go i'll iterate 20 versions of it and i'll paint over the top of that and then i'll go oh wait a minute this one's amazing iterate on that okay good boom that's done now create the turnarounds for that okay cool now export that to the 3d modeler the 3d model is going to look at it and go okay it, cleaned up this, this, and this.

And now it's throw it into the scene and see what it can do. And the writer is going to be working with a, you know, a super advanced chat GBT thing where she's feeding like meta story prompts to it and going like, write the, you know, this chapter again. And going, oh, this one's great. Like let's create an infinite side mission. And all these kinds of things, right? You think about the Witcher on steroids, right?

Like infinite side missions that are actually compelling right and unique and personalized personalized music where you're like i like this plus this plus this it'll be like the beginning of her where after three questions you're like okay cool well you probably like old jazz and like you know tech yeah you know like and it'll be and it'll be kind of that infinite thing of that right or you know those kinds of things to me are just tremendously exciting and i i want i want people to embrace it i want people to stop like being nervous about it i want this story this kind of this mass panic you know to stop again we thought bicycles were going to destroy the fabric of society and like women's morals like bicycles are pretty awesome and ai is going to be even more so than the bicycle like literally there were their story in lines for those i'm not even making those up yeah i've

seen it right right and so it's like for this thing it's like every single thing is going to benefit from having an intelligence sort of bit into it and even if it's not fully sentient i don't i don't need that agi and whatever the hell that's correct i don't need it to be like a full human that does whatever it wants in fact i don't even necessarily want that i want i want it to be something that can be like you know an augment and and a uh a back and forth with me i want it to be aligned to me and what I'm doing. We're going to have that baked into everything. You're going to have the personal assistance baked into things.

It's going to know how to help you level up your writing and everything. To me, it's going to be a true renaissance. We're going to see just an incredible explosion of new kinds of jobs and new technologies and we're going to benefit from accelerating things and whenever you accelerate things you get you get you get new stuff right it's like now you know people tend to think oh gosh like you know someone generated an image from i don't know mid journey or stable diffusion or whatever for their article

like now nobody's are going to get paid for articles well it's like you know there's already 25 million like free stock photographers out there are they is did that destroy the stock photography industry no okay so doing just fine and now they just and maybe it's going to be for the the two kids you know who just got out of college who couldn't afford it you know shut a stock anyway now maybe their article is going to look better too right just like in the old days when you were like sorry adobe pirating photoshop or whatever as a kid guess what all those kids learned how to use photoshop went on to become like artists and now like their corporate license is paid for and like congratulations right like they benefit from those kind of things so i think that i think that's the kind of stuff that's really coming down the pipe. It's just a tremendously exciting time to be alive. I don't know why anybody doesn't

feel that way. It's tremendously tight. Well, after talking to you, I'm a hell of a lot less scared of the robots coming for us and our job. So thank you very much for that. Where can everybody follow you after this conversation? Not that they haven't seen you on this channel multiple times before, but okay. there's my sub stack that's where i tend to write the most these days it's the you know i forget what the url is but do you google dan jeffries sub stack you'll find it i think it's called future history in my sub stack so that's uh that's the one to find and uh find me on linkedin or wherever else that twitter if you really care about that platform anymore. Well, next time. I use it a lot less than I used to. Me too, man.

As many followers as I have. I actually removed it from my phone because I found it to be a distraction. So I tweet a lot less and I kind of never read it. So I think that's a... If my whole existence and livelihood has been based on Twitter and I'm willing to use it less, I think that's

definitely a signal for sure. So listen, Ben, we got to do this again. Just call me when you finally see crypto do something that interests you again. I'll call you in. Okay, it might be a while. We'll have to do it before then. 2030, but I'm always happy to come out.

We always have fun, man. So let's do it. Awesome, man. Thank you so much. Cheers, man. Have a good one you too