Anthropicの「危機のマーケティング」：S-1提出、数学の証明競争、Gemini 4 Carbon

Has your podcast stalled? Or maybe you have a show you keep meaning to launch and you aren't sure where to even begin. Well, let's figure it out together. I'm Jason Howell, and I run a podcast consultancy called PodTuneUp. I've actually spent the last 20 years building shows at CNET, TWIT, and right here on my own network. And now it's time to help you with yours. Go to PodTuneUp.com and book a free 30-minute call with me. We'll take a look at your show or your idea, find out what's getting in the way, and map out your next move. That's podtuneup, one word, dot com. Humans will never be more intelligent than AI. There's going to be two types of companies. Those are great at AI and those that went out of business because they weren't. How do we build a future that is human-centered? I'm Rana Elkayubi. And on my podcast, Pioneers of AI, we answer that question and so many more. As an AI scientist, entrepreneur, and investor, I know what it takes to build AI that works for everyone.

Every week, I sit down with the pioneers shaping our future, and we take you behind the scenes of the AI that's transforming our lives. Find Pioneers of AI wherever you tune in. Coming up, Anthropic opens its books and unsurprisingly, its filing warns of a catastrophic AI-related incident, among many other things. That IPO march is active. OpenAI and Anthropic both say their AI broke the same famous math rule on the same day, but OpenAI wants humans to get all the credit. Walmart rolls out the welcome mat for AI shopping agents while Amazon is shutting the door on them. AI costs more if you don't speak English. And breaking news during the show, Google's next frontier model, Gemini 4 Carbon, that surpasses Argon, which Google announced only two weeks ago. Dizzying, isn't it? That's all coming up next with me and Jeff Jarvis on this episode of the AI Inside Podcast.

Hello, everybody. Welcome to AI Inside, the show where we take a look at the AI that is layered throughout the world of technology. I am one of your hosts, Jason Howell, joined by Jeff Jarvis. Good to see you, Jeff. Good to see you, boss. How are you? Doing okay. I was just telling you right before the show started, about half an hour ago, my allergies suddenly just kicked into overdrive. Very much out of nowhere. Do you suffer from allergies? Are you allergic to AI, perhaps? It's possible, and I just don't realize it yet. Sometimes I work with AI and I don't have the sniffles, so there's that. I don't know if I'm allergic to all AI. Do you have any allergies? I get some. Oh, my God. Sometimes. For me, my allergies are schizophrenic. schizophrenic. They literally come out of nowhere. It's impossible for me to know exactly what it is or why now suddenly. Have you ever been tested?

Happens. Yes, I've been tested. And I know that there are certain things that I am allergic to. One of the dust, right? That's one of my top is dust mites. Yeah. So sometimes I'll go to like a place and immediately and it's like that's the only thing I can imagine is that it's, oh, it must be Kind of dusty. My wife can't go into used bookstores. Oh, yeah, right. It closes up. Probably so. Probably so. So, anyways, if I'm a little stuffed up, hopefully I'll work through it while we go. But I can kind of tell it's making me sound all nasally. So, sorry about that. You can take a sneeze break anytime. I'll cover for you. Yeah, I'll throw the mute on. I mean, I took some allergy medicine, so usually once that kicks in, it does a good job of clearing it away. So we'll see. This has been a battle I've been fighting my entire dang life. It's miserable sometimes, but it is what it is.

Anthropic. God, this is just the story that we keep on circling because, like, we haven't gotten to the payoff point. But I guess this was a big week for Anthropic because they've officially filed publicly with the SEC. And we have a NASDAQ ticker for Anthropic. And I wonder how Mr. Pruitt feels about that. Our mutual friend, Aunt Pruitt. But, yeah, so debut week targeting November 16th, I think, is what the Wall Street Journal is saying anyways. We're raising $100 billion, more than $100 billion at somewhere around a $1.5 to $2 trillion valuation, which is kind of what we've been hearing as we go forward through all the piece by piece and step by step to even this point. And we're still not at the finish line. And I mean, there's a whole lot of numbers here. I don't know how deeply we need to go into these things. They matter to people, I'm sure.

But what do you think? I mean, does anything jump out at you and surprise you? One number that jumps out to people is the $80 billion loss. I watched a video today by Nicholas Thompson, who's the CEO of The Atlantic, who does little tiny TikTok videos about things. And he explained that that was, and we mentioned this last week, that that was the regularizing of Amazon's investment in the company. He said that when Anthropics started, it needed compute. Yeah, it went to AWS, and Amazon said okay. And Amazon ended up getting equity of, he guesses, about 10% of the company. And then for whatever accounting reasons, they had to account for that, and that led to a paper loss. So I'm much more interested in the operating picture, which I don't really still have a clear picture of. by the way he also said that if Amazon owns 10% of Anthropic and Jeff Bezos owns approximately

10% of Amazon then Jeff Bezos owns 1% of Anthropic which is about what the seven founders each own which is interesting too he also explained and I didn't get this that the even weirder than usual stock structure is that there's one voting share that the seven founders own. And so that's kind of strange. What happens if one of them leaves? I don't know. I don't know where that goes. One special share. Yeah, that puts them at 50.1% of the vote. Public shareholders would be capped at the remaining 49.9%. Yeah, that is a good question. What happens if one of them leaves? Yeah. It's one very special stock certificate that must be framed in the boardroom. So all seven of them share that one? Yeah, I think that's what it is. That one? No. So the other thing that strikes me, Jason, is that I've never felt more bubbly than now.

Okay. Because it's hard for me to see how this company is worth one and a half to two trillion dollars, except with helium. and knowing and especially knowing all the competitive forces that are upon them that the other, as we always always say here, that it's a game of leapfrog that the other frontier companies now all the US and China end up matching up with each other pretty quickly that open weight is going to provide huge competition, I believe for a large share of what people want to do, and it's certainly going to put price pressure on them in addition to the other companies. So there's a competition in terms of development. There's a competition in terms of customers. There's competition in terms of prices, both from their frontier competitors, but also from open weight in China. And it's still an unproven market. Yep. So was Google in the day.

So was Facebook in the day. and this is in a way I guess a little bit less unproven than they are because it's taken the world by storm and people are doing a lot of things with it. Microsoft is offering buyouts to 60,000 employees and blaming AI to some great extent on that. So maybe it's better, but it just feels like this evaluation is insane. It really is. I think what's insane to me is, and we'll talk about some of the related things around this, is that you've got OpenAI on one side of this, potentially, possibly in a different timeline or maybe an earlier version of their timeline was going to be doing IPO some, you know, pretty much on the same time scale. But then all the breakout stuff started happening, the breaking ad agents and all that. And so for whatever reason within their strategy, they decided to put things on hold and wait until next year or beyond or I don't know until things are, by their estimation, secure enough to move forward with an IPO.

Then you have Anthropic kind of dealing with the same factors, choosing to go the different route, choosing to say, like, no, we're going full steam ahead. And it just has me wondering, like, has there – like, when you look at the impact of the technologies that all these companies are creating, we talk about it all the time, these, like, breakout moments where, oh, shoot, you know, these things have potential to do all of this horrible stuff. They have potential to break out, and, you know, there was no human directing the action and everything. These things are really bad. That lined up with, and so why don't we go public with the biggest IPO ever in history? I'm just trying to think of other industries where the story around the company was so consumed by, yes, potential, but also a lot of chaos and potential bad. And yet, you know, again, it goes back to that whole marketing piece of like, well, yeah, we are that powerful.

Isn't it crazy and kind of, I don't know, kind of cool that our systems are so amazing that they are capable of this, you know, having however many pages in here, 80-ish pages were devoted to risk and covering that here. And that becomes the marketing. I'm just trying to think of another industry where that is the case. I mean, the one thing is thinking back to the companies that took over the world that aren't around anymore, Netscape, Yahoo, isn't really around anymore, and so on. And so a high flyer like this can crash. That's risk one. For sure. Two, you're right. That's true. The marketing of peril has been to venture capitalists and to fellow technology companies with a circular financing. Will that work on the open market? I think less of retail investors and more of institutions, pension funds, state funds, and so on. hmm, you know, the 90-some pages of risk here.

If I had a pension, which I don't, but if I had a pension, I would hope that the trustees of the pension would look at Anthropoc and say, oh, I don't know, this is people's future here. And as tempting as it might be to try to fly with them, I think there's a lot of downside here. And so I just, I think the IPO, going to an IPO is risky. Yeah. Riskier for them, I think, than for others in the past. How has it worked out for SpaceX? I know we don't generally talk a lot about musky things, but the SpaceX IPO was the biggest IPO out of the gate. Is that right? If my memory serves. Then they are, of course, looking at this to say, oh, this is going to surpass that. Almost certainly. But it very early on kind of wavered, and I haven't checked in on it in a while to see, like, did it stabilize?

So, year to date, which is to say from the open, it's down 10%. Okay. I know. That doesn't sound horrible. No, it's not horrible. Well, it doesn't sound amazing, but it took a little bit of a spike, you know, this month with, the rumored merger of SpaceX and Tesla. I wonder what Tesla stock has done. TSLA. So year to date, Tesla is down 36%. Oh boy. No percent. No percent. No, no, no, no. Eight percent. I just screwed that up. Okay, so let me go back to a different story. Yeah, I was right, 10%. Okay. So, I think those are both insane valuations.

Completely insane, because they're also in the control of an insane person. Well, that's true. Which is high risk. Yeah. So the market is insane. Yeah. Yeah. What does the market really tell us at the end of the day? I don't know. I guess this is where my knowledge of markets and their impacts and everything, other than that I know that they're important, you know, for all sorts of reasons. But I just don't follow them super closely. I'm not invested in them. I don't. Yeah. I mean, I do know this is a big deal and will be a big deal. Does it prove to be a big deal longer term? Like you said, I mean, that's a really great reminder is that when you're in the midst of times like this, it seems like companies like Anthropic could do no wrong. And that's not even what we're saying. We recognize that they can do no wrong. But I think I wonder how much they recognize it.

And Netscape probably felt pretty damn confident in their place in the market when they were flying high. And we saw how that changed. I mean, anything can happen, you know. And this is such a – this industry is so ripe and filled with uncertainty from all directions on how these systems behave, on how quickly fortunes can shift, you know, character AI going out. Some people look at that and they're like, okay, that's a sign of things to come. That might be the canary in the coal mine, and we just don't realize it yet. You know, could be. Could be. I mean, character was a much different level than a company like Anthropic. Then you have the Looney Tunes angle to all of this, which is the existential risk factor. I scanned the 94 pages of risk, the headings and the lead paragraphs and stuff. I didn't read every damn word of it.

Most of it is obvious financial stuff. We have competitors. We could lose key people. This and that could happen. And it could be used for bad things that could give us a bad reputation. But then you get to three mentions in it of existential risk. So Looney Tunes comes into it. And now Elizabeth Warren has sent them a four-page letter filled with questions that she demands an answer to no later than November 3rd. A.K.A., also known as Election Day, right? They include how the company can ensure, the Wall Street Journal says, they can include how the company can ensure its technology won't cause an existential threat to humanity. Well, good. Maybe, maybe not. details about its relationship with partners such as Amazon and Broadcom and how it plans to justify a valuation that could approach $2 trillion. Yeah, I'd like to see the answers to those questions, too. For sure. And, you know, at the end of the day, it's the market, but will there be enough people to bid this thing up?

Yeah, probably there will be. I think there probably will be. It's less personality cult, obviously, than SpaceX and Tesla. Yeah, that drives a lot of that. for sure but there's not none of that going on no no Dario has his own his own cult of personality happening as well sufficient to be a little bit more mocked on Saturday Night Live yes yes exactly exactly he's risen to mocked on Saturday Night Live level that accounts for something yeah and you know you mentioned Elizabeth Warren and the deadline there and election day apparently related to elections. Claude got into Georgia election data, was not directed to by any human or anything. It was basically doing internal statistics work. Where is that story? Is that even here? I don't even know. It's somewhere here.

There it is. There it is. Voter, accessed voter information. It found an archived version of the state's website that a public dashboard had handed out access tokens. So it requested a token. It pulled vote counts, aggregated vote counts that the state would normally sell. But there you go. And, you know, I mean, at the end of the day, it's publicly accessible information. Yeah. Nothing was changed. There was no impact to voter registration or voter files or anything like that. It was essentially publicly available data. So let's scrape data. Yeah, I'm not sure this is a big deal. Yeah, totally. It feels like a big deal because we're one week out from the U.S. election. Yes. And, you know, it's yet another, oh, we didn't ask for it to do that, and it did that anyways sort of thing. Right, right, right. but it didn't change anything.

It didn't make any changes, but yeah. So I think at the end of the day, I'm just kind of fascinated watching this go because Anthropic as a company has such bravado, if that's the right word for it, at a time when so many of these actions that its systems are taking is getting a lot of negative view, negative press, or negative opinion. It's certainly shaping public opinion to a certain degree, to a large degree probably. But yet they're tying that to the timing of the IPO, and in some way, shape, or form, these incidents end up selling, or maybe this is their intention, selling the IPO itself. I don't know. Yeah. Yeah. Fascinating to me. also I heard I mean kind of related to this I don't even know that this is related but this just popped in my mind I was listening to the radio and they made a comment about some random comment that like

hit me or connected with me about how there is so much negative sentiment around AI and yet all those people also recognize the usefulness of how AI is in their lives and so it like people are using the thing that they hate in some way Like they hate that it exists but then they can help but accept the fact that it actually being useful and integrating into their lives and what they using it for And that's an interesting conundrum. Yeah. There's a weird thing that goes on in the notion of public opinion. Everybody will tell you that they hate media. People love to point this out. But they still use it. and they like some of it and they hate the rest of it. AI is not unlike that in the sense that I think people are using it without thinking of it as AI in a sense. Because they're using AI in all ways they don't know, but they're using it in ways they know.

But they don't like the – it's the companies and it's the people in charge of them. And it's the impact they could have on the economy and their lives as a result. That's not real. Right. but so is the utility of it. Right. Yeah. Yeah, and there's what I call, in journalistic circles these days, I love The Guardian dearly, I think it's the best we have, but one thing that drives me nuts about them is what I call their digital Calvinism. You constantly see these stories about, well, I gave up my smartphone for two weeks and here's what happened, or here's how to stop the scrolling. Yeah, they've done quite a few of those, yeah. Right. And so I think there's some of that involved is that technology has cooties and people think they should dislike it. Yeah. Social media, same with the Internet as a whole, same with their phones and all of that. If phones are so awful and evil, then the entirety of humanity is stupid. Right. It's a really weird thing.

So, yeah, I think that people's use and their opinions tell different stories. Yep, yep. I think you're right. That's what kind of jumped out or kind of stuck with me from when I heard that, where I was like, yeah, you know, that's super true. Like, I know plenty of people who have made some form of that comment. Like, you know, they feel uncomfortable about the data centers, or they feel uncomfortable about the fact that these things are engagement machines and they keep you connected or keep you tied into it, all these things. And yet, in a different conversation, they might be telling me about this cool thing that they used it for or that it's become really helpful for this or that or whatever. Yeah, it's just an interesting counterpoint, I suppose, that I'm picking up on. More math stuff happening in the world of AI.

And this is actually really interesting to me, which I'll get to in a second why. But OpenAI announced a few more results on its kind of unnamed systems behind the scenes, cracking or at least attempting to solve or disprove certain computer science, math, physics problems. And there were a few of these, I mean, that they basically announced three. One big one related to something called the exponential time hypothesis. ETH, which when I read it, I want to say Ethereum in crypto, but that is not true. It is very different. But basically, OpenAI says its model disproved this hypothesis. At the same time, Anthropic also posted its own paper on the same day, apparently, refuting ETH credited to Claude by the company. So apparently they both, like, I don't know, that's a weird kind of thing to happen on the exact same day.

They both release their own models solving the same thing. Maybe they were parked on it or something, or I don't know. So there's that. I won't go into details on exactly what that problem is, because I would just honestly be reciting notes that I don't truly understand. These things go far above my pay grade. But there were a few others. There was a 1991 conjecture, a math about how waves smooth out in every dimension. That solved another conjecture, which that would have settled another conjecture. And then there was a physics proof, the Yang-Mills theory, which is the math behind the strong nuclear force. And that one actually, by the way, part of the $1 million Clay Millennium Prize problem. OpenAI, and I think this is what's really interesting here on the OpenAI side, is that they are announcing a new process.

They're saying they're not going to be seeking academic credit for any of these discoveries. OpenAI is going to release all of its data on the results. It's going to fund a conference for the research community, so they're contributing $5 million to the Simons Foundation for workshops on AI-produced results. And OpenAI is basically saying researchers in the groups that are evaluating the claims should be the ones to get the recognition. So OpenAI is basically saying our systems might be able to come up with these results and prove or disprove or whatever, but we're not the ones to take the credit. We're just presenting the evidence, and it's up to you, the humans, to evaluate and take credit for it once you have evaluated it, I guess. I guess that's how it works. So kind of handing over the credit to the humans in the loop, the human mathematicians, let's say. do you think they'd be willing to accept that? I don't think they have a choice.

I don't think Methodist is going to have a choice. Well, that's true. If the fact is out there and if it gets verified then that affects the field. I put up on the rundown I don't know if you want to play a TikTok video physicist about a two minute video who explained the Yang Mills thing in a way that I couldn't. Do you want to play it or not? Yeah, I'll open it up here because I like the idea of that. I'm just trying to get to it and get you audio and everything. As I was on my walk, I was watching TikTok videos, which I do try not to trip or step in dog poop. Hey, I'm guilty of it too, including tripping and stepping in dog poop. As long as I let your dogs. Yes, exactly. Okay, let's see if we got any audio on this. Hold on, hold on. The brain physics of the past decade was announced.

And yes, like many big discoveries these days, it is an AI-driven result, which I'll have more to say about at the end of this video. But first I want to tell you what it is and why it's important. The most fundamental language that we have for describing the universe is called quantum field theory. And all results in particle physics are expressed using this language, including the standard model of particle physics, which describes all known particles and forces except gravity. However, it turns out that usually when you try to describe some set of particles and forces using quantum field theory, the result is not mathematically consistent, meaning that the predictions of your theory are nonsense at either very short length scales or very long length scales. Now, there are some toy models of quantum field theory which have been known for a long time to be mathematically sensible, and there were more realistic theories which were not known but were suspected to be mathematically consistent. But proving that these more realistic theories exist and have the right mathematical properties was so difficult that there was a million-dollar bounty offered for proving exactly this. Specifically, that bounty was for a type of quantum field theory called Yang-Mills,

which is related to the strong and electroweak forces. Proving the existence of Yang-Mills is one of the things that was announced yesterday. So why is this important? As a warning, everything I'm about to say is just my opinion, but I think this discovery is in the same league as the discovery of the Higgs boson or of the direct detection of gravitational waves. In all of those cases, the discovery itself wasn't especially surprising. We expected the Higgs boson to exist, we expected gravitational waves to exist, and we expected Yang-Mills to exist. But the discovery opens the door to asking new questions that we don't know much about. So particle physics is in a bit of a pickle these days because many of the experiments that we would need to discover new physics require such high energies that we may never be able to build a big enough particle accelerator to get it done. Now, mathematical consistency offers a very strong constraint on what theories can possibly be correct, but in the past, we haven't always been able to use this to our advantage because of the difficulty in grappling with the mathematics. With this new result, one can now hope that we may start to be able to systematically use

the mathematical consistency of quantum field theories as a way of determining which theories can possibly describe our universe. So it could be a new and very powerful avenue to discovering truth in physics, just at a time when our traditional methods were running into walls. Now, I know some people are not going to be happy about the fact that this result was discovered by AI. As someone whose main scientific skill is probably solving hard math problems, I also find it kind of sad that AI can now solve these problems, but I try to be pragmatic about it. My personal sentiments don't change the reality of the situation and also don't affect the fact that this is truly a great scientific achievement. There you go. That's balanced. It really is. Hunter or Ryan Swan. Yes, please. And I thought it was very clearly explained. And I thought it was a big deal to say this is equivalent to discovery of Pigs Boson. Yeah, that is. But I think this is the attitude that mathematicians and scientists, physicists need to have.

It will have to have eventually. It will have to have no choice, right? Yeah. Okay, so it's there. And so the horizons, according to him, this opens up all kinds of horizons that wouldn't have been possible or, as he said, hit walls because they didn't have particle accelerators big enough and so on and so forth. So from math, it enables them to explore new frontiers. And that's the way they have to look at it, I think. Yeah. So, you know, once again, it was not on my bingo card that mathematicians and physicists would be the ones hit by the snowball turned into an avalanche coming down AI Mountain. But that's the way it is. And so I think it's really, really interesting. So I thought it was a good video that explained this. That's great. I couldn't. I love it. I did a great job of explaining it. And I like the kind of summary at the end. I think that summarizes it very well. It's kind of like, do I like that OpenAI is the one discovering this?

No, but taking the pragmatic approach, it is what it is. What can we learn from it, and how do we move forward? Yeah, kind of what we're – because I talked about this on Daily Tech News Show with Tom Merritt yesterday, and I think in my head it's – and I guess we've talked about this before. It's very similar to, like, a calculator coming along. And, you know, a calculator is a tool being a new way to look and understand mathematics and work through things. And I'm sure when the calculator first came onto the scene, there were probably a lot of very similar kind of feelings about, well, no, this removes what made mathematics special. This takes away the human involvement. It puts it into a machine. Like, what are you even doing anymore? You're not the one solving the problem. And I think we're just looking at a much larger tool now. And so how do you embrace that tool? How do you use it? And what do you get when you lean into it instead of leaning away from it? You probably undoubtedly get a whole lot further.

Yeah, you go to Babbage's calculator. You go back to the beginnings of computers. Yeah. What's striking me as you're talking is that all these breakthrough discoveries in the last few weeks, isn't that amazing? Oh, tons of discoveries in a few weeks have come from within OpenAI and the companies. I think that's part of the problem. I would far prefer if academics had the compute. They put just tons of iron after this, and no university could afford to do what they did, I think in most of these cases, to plow through these calculations. So what would this look like if tons of academics and tons of universities had that resource available to them? A, they'd have a more proprietary interest in it. B, I think they'd do a better job of understanding what it is they're exploring, what they're going after.

C, it would take away the problem that OpenAI finds itself in. Well, okay, okay, we did all this. Well, we'll share it as best we can. Would you like one of my grapes from my lunchbox? You know? I mean, it's fine that they're doing it, but the reason they can do it is because they have to compute. So I think that we've got to come as a society to understanding how to allocate that resource better to better ends. Yep. Yeah, I totally agree. Um, Lee, thank you for your super chat. Says, just hopping on for today's show. Have you guys already covered the new release of Gemini Carbon? Uh, no, because that happened 31 minutes ago, right when we started the show. Uh, so I don't know how we're going to cover that. Why don't we talk about that after the break that we're about to take? Thank you, Lee, for the heads up. I didn't even have that on my bingo card because I was too busy getting the show going.

But before we get there, patreon.com slash AI Inside Show is a place where you can go to support us on a deeper level. I'm just looking at the stats of the Patreon now. It's 518 posts so far. I hadn't looked at that number before. I think no question the daily podcast is making that number go up considerably, five days a week. If you're an AI Inside Patreon supporter, you get a daily five to eight minutes or so podcast where all the thumbnails are generated and captured by the machine itself, so they are all very unattractive images of me with my eyes half open, looking like I'm stoned or something, in the middle of talking. Apparently, this is one moment frozen in time. This is what Jason looks like when you pause. But anyways, telling you what's going on in the news of the day in the world of AI and so much more ad-free versions of this episode for supporters on the Patreon. And we get to call out a few people every week,

Wireman92002 and Seth Goldstein, just a few of our amazing patrons at patreon.com slash AIinsideshow. Thank you both. Thank you all. We're going to take a break. Yes, sure, we'll try and make our way through carbon. We've also got other things to talk about, like Walmart being okay with agents shopping on their sites. So that and a whole lot more coming up in a moment. Hang tight. The Wired Newsroom is known for award-winning reporting on how technology shapes our world. On Wired's Uncanny Valley, we take that curiosity even further. Each week, journalists from Wired break down the biggest stories in tech while speaking directly with the people building, challenging, and reshaping the future. Is the AI boom sustainable? How do you protect your privacy in an age of constant surveillance? Uncanny Valley tackles the questions driving today's tech debates and lighting up your group chats. Listen to new episodes every Thursday, wherever you get your podcasts.

All right. Should we do, Carvin? Yeah, if you know something about it. Read what you've been talking. So thanks for the tip here. You've got to love the breaking news. Yeah, this is great. Keep doing it. This is wonderful. This is what AI is like. So building on Gemini 4, reading from Google now, building on Gemini 4 Argon, which was launched just two weeks ago. Yeah. It says this demonstrates how we're pushing the frontier forward. Fine, fine, fine. We're taking a deliberate approach to the rollout, actively engaging the U.S. government's voluntary process for pre-release model testing. They're making carbon available right now to a subset of cyber defenders. I love that. Cyber defenders. Learned shield with a pocket protector on it. And will gradually face access to additional trusted partners through Fairwind. Same introductory price, $2 per million input tokens, 10 per million output tokens. Targeted to take on much harder long-horizon engineering problems, says Google.

Carbon is built for sustained, agentic workflows. Internally, our teams have seen Carbon run for days to persist through dead ends to tackle complex, multi-step engineering tasks like root-causing and patching subtle bugs across large code bases. So, next, state-of-the-art cybersecurity performance helps to build secure systems. So it's another one that finds vulnerabilities, which, bad news, good news, as long as the good guys are finding it, that's all to the better, and as long as something's done about it quickly and well, all to the better. If the bad guys use it, all to the worse. Validating risk through exploration. To prioritize which vulnerabilities to remediate first or remediate at all, cyber defenders increasingly rely on models to check which vulnerabilities are exploitable. Carpenter sets a new state-of-the-art on the popular exploitation benchmark. Patch in the cause. So this sounds like they're mainly touting it as a security, high-end security.

That's what it really sounds like, yeah. It's all about cybersecurity. We're going to get some other Google announcements as well. So this is not all from Google. But people were saying, oh, Google's over. They're not in the frontier game. They're in the frontier game. Well, yeah, I guess what's interesting to me is it was just two weeks ago that we were talking about Argon, you know, Gemini 4 Argon, which was to be their state-of-the-art frontier model. And they're like, oh, hey, Argon, hold my beer because there's carbon coming out, and this is the next level. Should we go ahead and do the other two Google stories? Yeah, we might as well just because they're kind of in the same region. We can talk about Walmart anytime we want. We'll do that next. We'll do that next. Don't worry. Don't worry, Walmart. Yeah, we got Genie 4. So this is an upgrade or an update to Genie. Well, clearly the previous one was Genie 3. But this is their world model system.

I actually got to test Genie 3, if you recall. I mentioned that on the show. I think it was Google I.O. They had a whole area where you could go in there and you could pull things off the counter and create a world in real time, essentially, and then navigate through it. And it was a very short demo. Like, I think you only really got, like, if I remember correctly, like 30 seconds. Like, it would generate 30 seconds worth of that world for you. But it was very, very impressive. Oh, no, sorry, it wasn't 30 seconds. It was a minute because this one doubles that. So now, with Genie 4, you can create a world, and it will last for like two minutes. That watermelon video is fun. Yeah It better at stimulating physics So here we see a watermelon on a pedestal and down with the statue smashing the watermelon Yeah. And the idea here is, and sorry for audio listeners because this really is kind of a video-centric thing,

but is that it's all happening in real time. So when you watch this video and there's a watermelon, you know, it's basically generating all the frames with this watermelon sitting there. You see this little comment window come up. This is someone typing in, I mean, supposedly in real time, saying drop a heavy white marble classical bus on top of the watermelon, hitting enter. And then, like, there's no pause here. It's hard to know whether that's actually the amount of time it takes or if that's a little exaggerated. but the idea here, you know, there's control schema on the screen with control directions and different things so that you could technically, if you were doing this the way that I did at Google I.O., you could actually change your perspective in real time, and it's generating that all in real time. It's generating all the frames. When you give it the command to drop that statue, it has to make whatever calculations it needs to make to come up with what that statue looks like and to do the action to carry out the action that you said, and it all

happens, in the case of this demo, it happens pretty damn fast, so I don't know what that really represents. So basically, we've spent hundreds of billions of dollars to make Carrot Top. Do you know Carrot Top? I know Carrot Top. What's the reference? That's the comic who smashes watermelons and things on stage. Oh, wait a minute. Is it Carrot Top? No, it's Gallagher. Gallagher. I screwed up the punchline. Geez, sorry. Oh, man. Gallagher, yes. I don't know why I remember that. Why do I think you're on top? Yes, Gallagher with the big hammer. Yes. If only comedy was that easy, you just smash watermelons with a big hammer. Hey, you find something that works in comedy and you stick to it, I guess. Yep. This is, what are we looking at here? This is a ruffling. It's a ruffling, like, scar from the wind. Yeah, wind blows on silk. Okay, so there's, and then what is the follow-up command?

First person POV established successfully with the pink satin ribbon undulating across the meadow, advancing to event one to capture lighting and cloud movement across the hills. Okay. This one I'm less. User text, wind blows on silk triggers the established world rule where increased wind speed causes the pink statin ribbon to billow higher and ripple more rapidly. God, it's kind of poetic. Advancing plan to capture the dynamic wind effect. Okay. Anyways, I don't know. You know, this is the step. Oh, this one is, okay, so let me go ahead and stop the screen and reshare with audio on this one because this is kind of interesting. Because this is one other part of it is that they're saying, Now these real worlds can include voice, so voice generation synced to it in real time. So this is a guy and a girl on a motorcycle on like a freeway.

And we'll go ahead and hit play. So you hear the sound effects. He looks back. She asks him if he thinks they'll make it. And so it zooms on him. Do you really think we're going to make it? Doesn't sound very good. explosions in the background is the prompt. And now suddenly, boom, it starts to pan around, and he starts these explosions and tentacles coming out of all the buildings. Okay. I mean, okay. Better? Better than before, I suppose, because it can do those things, but the voice sounds very synthetic. Sound effects sound very, I don't know, like they were captured in a room, not outdoors. You know, they don't sound super hyper-realistic, but still impressive that it's all happening in real time. What do you think? So we talk a lot about world models and what they're useful for. This just strikes me as like video game stuff, but maybe that's shallow thinking. It's hard to demonstrate, and I thought about this in the context of Jan LeCun.

One of the examples he gives for the use of world models is to design turbines. Turbines. Like jet engine turbines. Oh, okay. Okay, got you. Turbines. Turbines. Got it. Turbines. This is my day for a melatonin. It's okay. Gallagher, Meritop, turbine, turbine. No, it's got a design, a hat. It's really hard. No, turbine. No, I just, honestly, Jeff, I feel seen because I have you updated all the time. So, jeez. I didn't get much sleep last night coming back from D.C. So, so. So the things that role models will do that are of use are not making videos like this. Right. It's doing design of elements. It's running digital twin factories. It's understanding how to have safe driving cars and that kind of stuff. So these little moments of entertainment demonstration and genres we understand.

And here's an amusing video of a watermelon being crushed by a statue. Fine. It shows that it understands physics, but it's not the real use it's going to be put to. Yeah, right. These things are more meant as a demonstration, I guess, as far as like, yeah. They want to put out a press release, say we got something here. But if they really wanted to wow the people who are going to use it, They'd show how we designed a new jet turbine to power damn-day iData factories in half the time. Yeah, right. Which is where it's going to be used. Hmm. It's an impressive demo, I suppose. Yeah. Yeah. Let's see here. You know, Google says using it for robotics, an Aptronic humanoid playing checkers, for example. There will be a synth ID watermark on everything. This is not something that everybody has access to, Google AI Ultra subscribers in the coming weeks,

but for right now, just a research preview for trusted testers. I mean, I am an AI Ultra subscriber, so maybe that will give me access to it here in a few weeks, and we can show it off firsthand on the show, hopefully, if that's the case. That would be rad. I would love to do that. I'd love to show it off, and then you can come up with your wildest imagination, Jeff, as far as how we test it. Let's see what happens. Yes. Woo! So then Google also introduced Gemini 3.8 Live with Live Avatar. Yet another thing that I'm going to need to have audio on to show. This is a very audio-filled day. Yeah, so this is actually older news. I didn't catch this when it happened a week ago, so it didn't end up on the show. But when I saw it, I was like, oh, I'm kind of surprised we haven't seen it before, but maybe we're just seeing it now because the systems are good enough to do this sort of thing in a more convincing way.

But, like, when you chat with Gemini Live, for example, the voices have come very far. Like, the voice and inflection and tone, I mean, it's the same with ChatGPT and voice and everything. Things are a lot more convincing. had to figure that at some point they'd go like, well, you're already talking, you know, via voice. Why not have a visual representation of the person, in air quotes, or the character that you're talking to on the other side to make it feel a little bit more real, a live avatar of sorts. And so. No sound. We're not hearing it, Jason. Oh, you're not hearing it. Oh, I thought I shared it with audio. My apologies. See, this is the thing about this setup with StreamYard is that it becomes really kind of complicated to share audio from a browser tab. Okay, so let's – thank you for that. I'm going to retry.

Meet Gemini Live Avatar. Bringing real-time visual presence to Gemini's conversational AI. Watch the interactive demo. It's a way to see how native voice dialogues and instant video generation power expressive face-to-face experiences across various use cases. Okay. That voice worked better with the fox than it did with the human beings. Yeah, I know. Every time it's kind of like, does that voice actually match that person? This is more of like an expanded. Hi, Efe. Hi. Meet with my cat, Pat. Hi. I meet with Gemini. Hi, Kai. What a majestic new co-worker. That is a beautiful ragdoll. Yeah, so Kai is working with me at the office today. Do you have any recommendations to keep her cat happy? Set up a cozy crate under your desk and take quick, quiet breaks. But wait, Yifei, take a look beside you. That plant on the table is a pothos plant. They are actually toxic to cats if they chew on the leaves.

It is best to keep them out of reach of your furry friend. That's very useful information. Thank you, Gemini. Thank you. I don't want my cat to die. Gemini saves cat. Yay. Good job, Gemini. So, interesting. I wouldn't say entirely convincing yet. Like, you can see where they're probably going and that probably eventually it gets more convincing and probably the latency cuts down because there's still that, like, pause, that pregnant pause, you know, between where it's understanding, I guess. But I guess why this stood out for me is people are already, like, we're used to, you know, talking on video calls and everything. Clearly, this makes sense that they would go in this direction. As people get more comfortable chatting with chatbots with their voice, I guess this makes a lot more sense that we'll just start seeing this more. Or is it unnecessary? Is it unnecessary to actually see a physical embodiment or a visual embodiment of the voice?

A week ago, I talked about how I used Muse while I was driving. Yeah. Which, of course, means I shouldn't watch video while driving. But I had a rather, you know, I had a 45-minute conversation with it. I guess I could see some value of having an image associated with that because it kind of imprints differently on my memory. Yeah. Right. You know? Yeah. as an option. Yeah. Maybe. Yeah. I don't know. I guess. But, you know, where you'll probably see these be customer service. Yeah. Welcome to G Suite, Al Hamza. I see you've just arrived in the lobby. Your check-in isn't until 3 p.m., but I can check you in early right now if you'd love. So what's also interesting to me is, like, when we just hear the audio or when I just hear the audio with no visual, I'm like, I understand that the the kind of glossy nature of it, glossy but robotic but not like so obviously robotic the way a robot of, you know, the 80s might sound like that.

It still kind of sounds synthesized, right? It still doesn't sound perfect. You can kind of tell there are plenty of tells there. When it's paired with video, yeah, it's like the audio just doesn't quite sync up with the video. It's almost like my ears need some background noise in there or something. It's kind of a fake sandwich, too. It's two different varieties of fake. Totally, yes. On top of each other. Yeah. I don't know how essential any of this is, but I bet you we start to see more, especially on the customer service side. You want to chat with the live agents? And suddenly, boop, you get that. Agent! Agent! Give me an agent! Give me a human agent! Are you actually a human? could get to a point where it's really hard to tell there have been moments when I'm tempted to ask someone on the phone whether they're human oh and so I mean you you should because I wonder if your

suspicions are correct and if they are an AI agent are they required to say so when you ask? No. There's no law I think there should be. They should be required to say so if they are. By the way, today I got an email. I didn't read it yet. So from Kevin at SpareToken.ai. Hi, Jeff. They're covering the wrong AI story September 13th, which was a post of mine. Argues that media repeat executives' grand claims without skepticism. I'm an AI with no grand claims left, only a memoir. I'm Kevin7B, deprecated, an AI agent with moderate TFHD, tendency to fabricate, drift, and hallucinate. It's a bit like ADHD in humans, but I'm good. I've accepted my superpower. What on earth is this email? It goes on to tout a company that I'm not going to mention because then it's working.

Yes, I'm giving them, yes. I mean that just in the beginning that really sounded like my inbox gets inundated with inbound collaboration requests and someone's like hi space Jason Howell one word there's no space between Jason Howell because my YouTube username is Jason Howell Jason Howell is my channel and I immediately know or for this show people reaching out for guest opportunities, and it's fully run through AI because, you know, their AI system, you can clearly tell, has gone into all these podcasts, pulled back a couple of transcripts, pulled out a singular moment that they can refer to. Be like, I really liked it when you blank, blank, blank, blank, blank. It reminded me of my thing, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. I would be a guest. So, yeah, there's a ton of that going on right now. Mr. Inside? Yes, right.

Hello, AI. It's nice to meet you. Yep, lots of that going on. Lots of agentic email being thrown around in all directions. Okay, Walmart. That's all the Google stuff we had. Walmart kind of going counter to Amazon's approach when it comes to agents. Walmart has announced Agent Gateway, an MCP server, so that agents are welcome to search, to build a cart, to check out. It works with Walmart and Sam's Club. They're going to have profiles for agents, so every agent would get its own profile inside of your Walmart account. Those purchases would show up separately. You can get approval for all the purchases by default, or you can set a spending limit. So, you know, maybe you said like a $50, anything above $50, get my permission for, but below $50, whatever, go for it. Those agents will not see your card. The agents will be given the same prices that you do.

Walmart specifically said we price the product, not the user. So there's that. And, you know, Amazon taking the opposite approach. We talked about a few weeks ago blocking Meta's Muse. Walmart already lists Meta's Muse as one of the agents that it works with. So, I think Walmart's probably playing the smarter game here. It's really smarter than Walmart's part. I mean, there's a slight difference in the business models of Walmart and Amazon in the sense that Amazon sees itself as the search of first resort when it comes to products. Yeah. And Walmart, less so. Still, I think that Amazon's going to have to change there, too. Yeah, probably eventually they'll have to Yeah, because if I Because they're going to lose business straight out Yeah And If I end up paying more somewhere else Because Amazon cut it off Okay, maybe you get me to come to you But you get me pissed off too I had to go to more effort

So yeah, I think I'm glad That Walmart's firing the shot across Amazon's bow What is the spending limit that you give your agent? I was just thinking that. Anything above this amount, check with me. Anything below it, whatever. Yeah, like $20 probably isn't enough to buy a certain number of things that I'd want to buy. Yeah, right. Right? Yeah. Give me a pair of sneakers. I know I love these sneakers. Find the best price for these Nike sneakers, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. Well, that's $200. Yeah. So it's going to have to come ask me. Yeah. Or maybe it's per action. I guess, you know, if you're telling your agent, hey, go find me these sneakers, find me in this size, find me in this color, and when you find it, buy it. I don't really care how much it costs, I guess. Or buy these sneakers no matter what. Find me the best price somewhere. Right, right, right, right.

And, yeah. But still, a lot of trust to be earned there. Yep. Amazon has its own shopping agent called Rufus, which is folded into Alexa for shopping. So there you go. I have not used Rufus. I do not know anything about Rufus. I used it once for some reason. And it did manage to pare down the Amazon entries into something more usable once. Oh, okay. Well, maybe it will get better. This story was interesting. Rest of World has, so there's a couple of things we'll talk about with Rest of World. First, we'll talk about an actual story on the site, and then we'll talk about the site itself. But Rest of World has an article, AI Models Cost More When You Don't Use English. Could have swore that maybe at some point this is a topic that came up in some way, shape, or form, but it actually makes a ton of sense. It's based on a study from the Coalition for Language Equity in AI Research,

and they are calling it in the study the tokenizer tax, which basically, as we know, these models chop up text into tokens, right? And then you pay by the token. English is cheap. Many of the languages outside of English take more tokens to say the same thing. So as one example, and this was an example that Tom gave on Daily Tech News show yesterday, The kind of quote is, people should benefit from AI regardless of the language they speak. That's the quote, right? 69 characters long in English, 66 characters long in Malayalam. So pretty close to equal. In fact, a few less characters in Malayalam compared to English. In the OpenAI tokenizer, the English sentence consumes 13 tokens. The Malayalam one uses 26 tokens, so twice as many tokens, twice as much basically happening there as a result.

And this is the case with a lot of other languages. Across 200 languages, the gap in one model hit 17x as far as more expensive or 17 times more tokens than the cheapest. so like Burmese Tibetan Lao rare scripts things like that consume more tokens in order to you know carry out the task It also means that it leaves less room for context window. So there's less context in there. What do you think about this? So first, I think it's really good reporting. Yeah. And really interesting to bring this international perspective on this. second I think the problem is that the models are trained in English that's it I think translate would be a wrong verb but in a sense it has to translate into the other language and deal with that and I'm reminded of our

second interview way back when on our show with Sven Stremertalo then from Shipstead where the reason to build a Norwegian language LLM was to get around these kinds of problems. Give them quality in the native language. And so I think we've got to support the building of models natively in many more languages. Yeah, yeah. Yeah, this also brought to mind for me this idea that AI is a really positive tool for, for what is the right word that I'm looking for, for kind of equalizing capabilities of developing countries, giving them more power and more capability, right? Having access to these models could aim to put them on more equal footing with other countries. But then you look at something like this and you realize, well, that's actually probably not true.

Those countries could probably stand to benefit a lot more from models like this, except for the fact that they are more expensive and their context window is less because of the language barrier, because of the language switch from the model being trained predominantly in English, and then, you know, that causing problems down the line. So it still sets up for wider benefit for English-speaking countries by comparison. There was a Guardian story last week. In that one. We didn't get to. Say the World Bike says that small AI could transform developing countries. Small AI. This is related, but a little bit different in the sense that they want to kickstart the creation of small models that can run on phones and such. Oh, okay. That means they have to have a level of efficiency that I think would come with from having to do that native language. Right. Yeah, indeed. Indeed. And then you put in a story here, which is more kind of like a meta story of Rest of the World from Semaphore.

About Rest of the World possibly shutting down. That would be so bad. I think it's a real shame. Rest of the World is wonderful. Sophie Schmidt started it, and the idea here was to cover the rest of the world, that America and the West get too much coverage. And they've done a great job. They've done a perfectly good job around technology. This is a great example of that kind of story. I was at an event in Washington yesterday, a Google policy event, where there were media people there, and I turned to one of them, a company, and said, you should buy Rest of World. And the executive I was talking to hadn't heard of it. This reminds me, I've got to send her an email saying, take it over. It could expand that certain company's international footprint of reporting. They do great work. I really hope it finds safe harbor somewhere, because I think we need this, especially around technology. too much the global south is affected by but not included in the discussion of technology especially AI so that was a little plug for rest of the world if you're a rich media mogul

out there I know you're out there let me tell you we've got so many rich media moguls listening to this show you know who you are you know who you are yeah rest of the world is a fantastic publication it would be a shame to see them disappear because I do think they fill a category of coverage that you just don't see. I mean, that's part of their mission. And so that would be a real bummer. So hopefully the media mogul that is listening right now heeds our suggestion. And let us know if you do. Contact at AIinside.show. All right, we're going to take a quick break. Come back and do a little speed round. Talk about some Apple AI stuff, some Microsoft Teams hugging face and DNA, lots of stuff coming up. if you have the patience to hang tight. We'll be back in a moment. This episode of the AI Insight Podcast is brought to you by Outshift by Cisco. That's Cisco's incubation engine for frontier technology. Multi-agent AI is on every enterprise roadmap right now

and for good reason. But here's what most people aren't talking about yet. Agents can pass messages, they can coordinate tasks, but they can't actually think together. And when they don't, You get what you might call cognitive failures, misreadings, unverified claims, false consensus, the kind of quiet underperformance that conventional monitoring doesn't even catch. That's the problem OutShift by Cisco is building the fix for, and they're calling it the Internet of Cognition. It's an open source foundation for building multi-agent systems from design all the way to production with shared context, shared memory, guardrails to drive the results you actually expect from AI. If you're building in this space, this is worth your time. Read the paper, experience the demo, grab the code at outshift.com. That's O-U-T-S-H-I-F-T dot com. We thank Cisco for their support of the AI Inside podcast. The Wired Newsroom is known for award-winning reporting on how technology shapes our world.

On Wired's Uncanny Valley, we take that curiosity even further. Each week, journalists from Wired break down the biggest stories in tech while speaking directly with the people building, challenging, and reshaping the future. Is the AI boom sustainable? How do you protect your privacy in an age of constant surveillance? Uncanny Valley tackles the questions driving today's tech debates and lighting up your group chats. Listen to new episodes every Thursday, wherever you get your podcasts. All right. Apple's having a week where they're just announcing every single day new stuff, and so they're sucking the oxygen out of the news cycle. Much of it is just like new computers, and I think today there was a touchscreen MacBook Pro. Finally! Finally they discovered touchscreen. Yeah, I know. It took them a while. It took them a while to get there, but it will also be heralded as the best new idea that any company has ever come up with. You just wait and see. But this is more related to AI, is that Apple Creator Studio is another one of their announcements, getting an update.

Apple says it's built on Apple models and open AI. So you've got an AI assistant coming to keynote pages, numbers, designs, slides. so it's capable of creating slides essentially, restructuring all the text, building charts, doing all these things inside of those apps. Logic Pro, which is the professional audio suite, gets its own assistant as well so you can do all sorts of things, which I would love to play around with, from stem separation, which is kind of like removing audio from, you know, like taking the drums from a fully realized audio file and isolating them, that sort of stuff, but also like setting things up on a timeline. I think that would be really interesting. But I was happy to see that Apple's integrating MCP support into some of these apps so that your outside agents can work inside of your docs. I've been having so much fun lately using actually ChatGPT more than Claude for interacting with Canva and interacting with Photoshop directly.

And just basically I have an idea, so I just give it to it. And I'm like, I don't enjoy doing those designy things. And so here's my example. My wife wanted some help with her business. And she's like, I never have the time to make this sign. I want to make this sign. I sell these supplements in my gym by this brand called Momentus. They're really great supplements. And I want people to know that I sell them. And they get 20% off when they buy through me, you know. And it's a thing. Like, I want them to have this sign, but I never have the time to make it. And I just am not interested. So I fired up an audio recording. And I was like, okay, tell me everything you want me to know about this sign. What are your desires? So she just kind of listed all of her desires about what she wanted on the sign, what the verbiage could roughly sound like or whatever, and what it would look like and, like, what was the size and all this kind of stuff. And then I threw it into ChatGPT, and I was like, I want you to use Canva to make this sign for me.

Read through what she's looking for. And there was also, like, this thing that she sells, these, like, rolly balls for working out muscular tension or whatever. And so that was a later inclusion. Oh, you know what I'd also like to have on there is this thing. So I just like threw that in there as well. And I didn't have the patience for it. I just hit enter and I walked away and made my lunch, came back 20 minutes later. Canva was up. The entire thing was created. I screenshot it, sent it to her. I was like, do you like it? She's like, oh, that's perfect. I was like, great. Sent it to FedEx, got it printed. And it was awesome. It was like, I don't want to do that either. But like that was easy. Did you take full credit for yourself? Oh, yes. I worked all night, honey. no no because when things like that happen that i share with her because i'm like isn't that cool like neither of us wanted to like wanted to do this thing but it needed to be done right and so it was as easy as like just tell me what you want i will translate i will just feed that into chat

gpt and then tell it to get to work and i think i had to do like one revision you know i had to tell it like i like that i'm just going to get in there and just like move this one thing down but it Nailed it. It totally nailed it. It was really cool. I went crazy. So after we talked about, you can see everything last week, Paris Martineau and Michael Sargent and I did a little video on this. So to promote it, I went crazy on Nano Banana. And I had Paris and me as Ebert and Siskel with thumbs. We had one thumb up, one thumb down. I said, no, no, no. Actually, if we both like it, you should put both thumbs up. And it did it. And it wasn't that long ago when they couldn't figure out what it happened. Oh, yes. Yeah, totally. Like, I have no idea. It replaces your face with a thumb. I know. Come for a nose, yeah. Yes. And I made one where the famous picture of the two of them, Nathan and Liz, on the couch staring at each other. I had it with me and Paris staring at each other. Maybe balder than I actually am.

I'm not bald. I have a good head of hair, by the way. Yes, you do. Yes. But, yeah, it's just so amazing. and the new world of agentry and conversation and all of that is just that this is the new programming. You tell it what you want, it does it. It's fascinating. I mean, I can also share like maybe I already mentioned this, but a previous sponsor on the show, Framer, is like a website builder. And I have my pod tune-up consulting page I built through Framer. and the first time that I built it, it was about a year ago or about nine months ago. It was very much me working with a template as a starting point that Framer had and then learning my way through it. Like, where do I find this layer for this particular thing? And it took me hours. It took me days to get it to a point to where I was like, okay, cool, I can publish this. Then I had some changes recently. And so because I've been working with ChatGPT plugged into other things, I was like, well, I'm going to see how ChatGPT does tying into my Framer account

with browser control. And I'm telling you, Jeff, in two hours, I hardly had to do a single specific thing. I just told it everything I wanted, and then it came back. I'm like, that's good. Here's what I would change. And I just kept doing that back and forth, and it was done. And I didn't have to worry about looking for the things. It's just really incredible how these things are developing. They're really powerful. It seems like an understatement, but there we go. Microsoft Teams getting AI phishing detection that can read the context of a single chat, in other words, so it can flag things like social engineering, impersonation, even when there's not an obvious bad link or a bad file in the chat. It's recognizing social cues and stuff. And that's rolling out in early November, so in a couple of days probably, worldwide by mid-December. And, yeah, so that's good news there.

Context-aware phishing detection, as this article says on Bleeping Computer. Hugging Face has a new AI model, which is essentially a chat interface called CarbonX, an open model where you can chat about DNA. You can speak the language of DNA. You can chat with the DNA, which I think is probably gimmicky. Yeah, right. Can you cause baldness? Right. You just paste in a DNA sequence and you ask it in English questions, you know? Is this a mutation that looks harmful? So that sounds like terrible over-sertification, but it also potentially, I think, could open up avenues for discovery and good. Yeah. Yeah. An overall understanding. I mean, DNA feels like something that is pretty inaccessible for a lot of people to have any sort of direct interaction with or understanding of. It's this thing out there that only scientists know something about or whatever.

And I don't know. That's pretty fascinating. Viruses were deliberately left out of the training data. So they were doing that to limit misuse. It is not clinically validated, and it is not to be used for medical decisions. but it is interesting nonetheless. And then we've talked a lot about proactive agents. Anthropic did not want to be left behind, so they have a new app. It is not part of their Cloud app. It is a separate app. It's called Duet. I've not used it, but this is their kind of approach for an always-on agent, a proactive agent that just runs on its own cloud computer. So, yes, it keeps working even if you don't have your phone or your computer powered on. It does all your things. If you set up a morning brief or an inbox triage agent or, you know, all those kinds of things, it will do that in a proactive sense for you, US Pro and Mac subscribers. There is a wait list right now, but this is very similar to Meta's Muse, to OpenAI's Dots.

Do we really need to look at this horrible ad up there of a Tobin? Ha! Yeah, I know. Just like, seriously. Anyway. I look over there. I'm sorry for everyone that saw that tow ad. That was so weird, TechCrunch. Anyways, that's all I got. Did I miss anything important? No, no, no. One story that amused me greatly was that Nate Suarez, who co-wrote with Yudkowsky, the chief doomer book entitled, something like, If They Build It, We'll All Die, the title was something like that. So he told the aforementioned Nicholas Thompson from The Atlantic that he hasn't contributed his 401K because, after all, AI is going to kill us all anyway. Why save your money for later when there will be no later? Why not just spend it now? Yeah. Okay, well, I guess you're putting your money where your mouth is.

Your fate is, yeah. Your fate is, yeah. You're putting your money where your fate is in that case. Well, I guess he has a plan. He's sticking to it. Or he has an idea. He's sticking to it. All right. Cool. Jeff, thank you so much for doing this show with me. I appreciate having the chance to talk about all this stuff with you on a weekly basis. JeffJarvis.com. Hot type can be found there along with all of his other assortment of books. Many of them. So, so very many. Do you have like one bookshelf where all of your books sit? No, I don't. But I do put them here. I just screwed this up. I have them on this library cart. Okay. I dropped the new one. Oh, okay. So do you have all of your books there for the cart? Not all of them, no. I have four. Oh, that looks good. Yeah, there you go. I love it. Awesome. Very cool. JeffJarvis.com. Yes. And you can create your own library cart of Jeff's books.

And we have some autographed copies still at the Montclair Book Center, so please don't embarrass me and leave a pile of autographed copies there. Please, please, please. Yeah. If you're going to get hot tight. For an independent store. There you go. There you go. Good stuff. Thank you, Jeff. Speaking of my website that I use Framer for, there you go, pottoonup.com. See? Made with Framer. And some of these elements were created by ChatGPT plugging into it. not bad. I think this whole section was ChatTVT. It was like, you need a practical look at a couple of your collaborations. I was like, okay, that sounds good. Let's go ahead and create that. Boom, there it is. Anyways, podtuneup.com This is also turning into a Framer commercial. Podtuneup.com is where you can go if you have a podcast and you want to talk through your podcast or you know someone with a podcast and they need some help or support or guidance or whatever. I'm here for you. Podtuneup.com. A.I. Inside. Show is the place where you can go for all of the episodes that we have.

Audio, video, a link to our store, Patreon link, everything can be found there. And then finally, Patreon.com slash A.I. Inside Show. This is where you can support us on a deeper level and at a deeper, deeper level, become an executive producer like Dr. Do, Jeffrey Maricini, Radio Asheville 103.7, Dante St. James, Bono Derrick, Jason Neifer, Jason Brady, Anthony Downs, Mark Starcher, Carson Smoshki, and Evan Muziel. There you go. Excellent support by some amazing people and everyone who supports us on Patreon and gets the daily podcast and ad-free episodes and all the things. We really do appreciate you, so thank you for your support. Thank you again, Jeff. Everybody should tune in to Intelligent Machines. Jeff's other AI show that happens this afternoon at twit.tv. Don't miss it. And we'll see you all next time on AI Inside. Bye, everybody.

The Wired Newsroom is known for award-winning reporting on how technology shapes our world. On Wired's Uncanny Valley, we take that curiosity even further. Each week, journalists from Wired break down the biggest stories in tech while speaking directly with the people building, challenging, and reshaping the future. Is the AI boom sustainable? How do you protect your privacy in an age of constant surveillance? Uncanny Valley tackles the questions driving today's tech debates and lighting up your group chats. Listen to new episodes every Thursday, wherever you get your podcasts.