Overtime – Episode #726: Kara Swisher, Rahm Emanuel, Jake Sullivan
17m 18s
The podcast highlights growing concerns about the unchecked development and deployment of artificial intelligence, driven by powerful tech leaders who profit from the technology while warning about its risks. Despite earlier calls for ethical caution, these same leaders are actively expanding AI access to major corporations, increasing the risk of unregulated, widespread misuse. The federal government is criticized for being too slow and reactive, unable to keep pace with the rapid evolution of AI. A key proposal is a 10% tax on prediction markets and online gambling, which would redirect funds toward vital U.S. research in areas like fusion energy and cancer treatment—areas where China is gaining ground. The discussion also underscores public distrust in tech monopolies, evident in social media trials and political backlash. Tech influence is further amplified through lobbying and new AI PACs, undermining democratic accountability. Japan's model of child safety and community respect—such as five-year-olds walking to school unaccompanied—is presented as a valuable cultural lesson for the U.S., where children’s safety and social trust are often compromised. The episode concludes with a warning that without urgent, coordinated federal action and accountability, the U.S. risks losing its technological edge and democratic integrity to both foreign rivals and domestic tech concentration.
Welcome to an HBO podcast from the HBO late-night series Real Time with Bill Mom. How's the end of this series, Harris Wissier wants to live forever in satan days at nine, Harris Wissier? These are Professor at Harvard's Kennedy School of Government, former National Security Advisor under Joe Biden, Jake Sullivan, and he was Obama's White House Chief of Staff, Mayor of Chicago, Ambassador Japan, from a manual, wow, what a, what a resume we have here. Okay, so you probably just watched your own overtime here at the show where I ended with that thing about AI, all of you said to me right after it ended, I'm right. So we all know that it's going to kill us, but we just keep going toward the cliff like the one thing. Is that, is that where, about it? You've said something very powerful in your, in your statement there. You said the very people building this technology or warning us about us, about what it's going to happen. They're saying we're doing this. We're on the cutting edge of this, and it's really dangerous, do something, and all of us are just kind of like, oh, I guess we'll see what happens. Here's the thing, they did this a long time ago. I was at dinner parties where they're like, we don't know how it works, constantly. Right. This is a decade ago. And one of the things I started warning about the social media was the same thing. This is, this is dangerous. And what they, they're more interested in the journey and the money. Because all of those people, Elon Musk took billions, millions of dollars to develop it more. It's not like they're stopping. And Elon Musk did not say it's so dangerous, I'm terrified of it, now I want to stop. He's suing to get control of open AI or paid by it or funded. So every one of those people who yells safety is also taking money from venture cows to grow bigger. So what can we do? The warning sign here, which is, well, the federal government's going to have to finally do something like that. Correct. They can't kind of go the three monkey routine, Sino-evil, here it is people. When Dario and Thropic says, I'm not putting this product out. I'm not living in a world where one CEO's moral compass is what saves us. That is not how this is going to work. And the federal government is going to have to finally do something. You're going to get industry, academics, public policy people, all around the table. And what we do in federal government is we set a regulation, we wait 30 years to say it'll work. This is going to have to be real time, constantly upgrading things. But the federal government cannot do, which is this wild west because these guys, as you put their pictures up there, it looks a little bit like an FBI photo shot, cannot be in control. They have to have adult supervision. But can we go back to Dario is not releasing this because he's got a moral conscience? He is. He's just releasing it to 40 big companies. Correct. You think it's not going to get it? You think you can release something to 40 major companies and it's not going to get out to everybody at a certain point? It is a low. I give it about a month. It is a low bar. That's what it is. He's the best and it's a low bar. What's interesting is that we're not going to regulate. They have so much money. You know how much money they have. They must be able to become a trillionaire and it's absolutely going to happen. With that much money and that much influence, they can't even pass a basic privacy bill. I've been screaming about it for 20 years. They get mowed down by lobbyists and PACs and everything else. Now there's a new AI PAC that they're funding. All of these same people are funding the AI PAC. They're funding. It's going to be out of the crypto PAC which got rid of, I mean, they can buy anything and that's it. But you know Elon, pretty good. Yes. Well, not anymore, but yeah. Right. Okay. Well. But he knows you. Yeah, he knows you. I know he's on one. Okay. Those quotes I read from him. They're from a few years ago at least. Right. It was. It seems like he was the guy because I do remember when he first said that statement and it was the first time I'd ever really heard anybody say anything like that. Well, he said it to me at an interview that we did, right? It was a while ago, over 10 years ago and I was like, oh, this has not been on my radar. Okay. Elon says it. Maybe it is a thing. But lately, I don't hear that from him. Of course. You know, because he wants to be part of the rush of winning and one of the things, when he said that and he said it at a conference because that's when he started open AI with Sam Alton and with others because they were scared of the power of the Googles and the Facebook's and the apples and it was just to protect people and create guardrails. And instead, it's so much money, they have to go for it, I think. And now it's a, it's a dick measure. So, Cara, is there any answer to this then? I mean, because you've, I think you've sketched out this money motive is massive, but we've got to be able to use that. You know, I think people, because people are sick of this, like it looks suicide. I've interviewed all those parents who, whose kids have died. And these people are still trying to skate out of culpability, like as if it's not accountability, legal losses. And someday, a perp walk, I'm sorry. It has to happen. One thing is, one, first I actually think it's one place that actually is Jean Trump, when they meet in about a month, actually can agree on something because both of them are scared of this. Right. Not fully not. The second thing. You think Trump is kind of it? No, I don't think Trump is, but he's desperate for a deal with anything with G, so he looks good. Desperate. And I think this could be the one place. Second, I would just say, he had two trials, slightly off sides. I mean, off to the side, which is on the social media and kids. They all went to jury and the jury took like ten seconds, boom, slapped them down. That tells you how angry and anxious people are. It's separate issue than AI. But these media moguls slash technology moguls do not understand the loathing people have for the way they are acting. Right. Almost as unpopular as the Democratic party. Right now the core. Right now the core. Right now the core. That's right. That's right. That's right. That's right. That's right. Yes, it is. They're buying everything, whether it's Apple, it's not just Lerials, and they're all buying the media property. See, I don't think it's on Trump's radar. I can't think of anybody in that administration. And this is why I fight back so people say you shouldn't have had dinner with Trump. I shouldn't have dinner with him again, because I'd bring this up in two seconds. Right. And he would listen. I can't. Who is bringing it up in that administration? Right now the person who's radar is on now is Scott Besson, who called in all these guys. Why? Because he's worried that this mythos gets out. You get cyber attacks. You get a complete collapse of the financial system with it. Right. But more than that. No, he did have people he brought in. We know that for a fact that Scott Besson is aware. And that he's actually summoned. And the federal reserve. They both called him in and said, okay, wait a second here. Time out. This has been a wake up call for that. Yes, okay. Yes, okay. But who did they put in place? David Sacks was the AIs. He's it's longtime Silicon Valley investor tight with Peter Teal and Elon and the rest of them. Emil Michael, the Pentagon, who did that ridiculous thing around anthropic, like calling them never called in America. Peter Teal, who was asked, like, should humans keep living? And it was like not a immediate answer. No. It was like, I'm thinking, you know, that is not enough to keep question. They think we're going to be the, we are the, you know, this is the singularity. I remember when Ray Kurzweil was talking, what, singular, he's still doing, he's still around. And he predicted it's a long time ago. Oh, he wants it. That's right. It would be predicting it and wanting it. Yeah. I don't want to be half robot. I mean, look, if it, the parts that are not my brain, yes. Okay. As your doctor, you're not half robot, okay. It's not happening to you. Okay. It's not everybody else, but for you, you're not going to be a half robot. You're not a doctor, that's your problem. All right. Let's move on. These are from the people. You have a proposed, this is for you around 10 percent, you have proposed, a 10 percent tax on prediction markets, a 10 percent tax on them. Okay. What kind of impact would this make? Well, give me the bones on this. The bones on it? 10 percent on online -- prediction market, maybe -- you know, polymarket, polymarket. Yeah, in California. Yeah. In California, when you guys were doing the interview, we're cutting National Institute of Health, National Science, Foundation, the DARPA by 40 percent, G and China is doubling up every year on their research. We're losing the race for certain fumes, and we have to increase our research and development dollars. We have $400 billion in growing spent on gambling. I want to bet on America, not bet against America, and that's what we're doing right now, and plow all the money into doubling up our research. So we don't lose this race on fusion, nuclear energy, quantum computing, all -- life sciences to the Chinese, which we are now losing. So you think the polymarket thing are that influential? I think the polymarket -- oh, absolutely, and I also think there's insight trading going on. Yeah. And I do -- Yeah. And I think there -- it's $400 billion and growing -- I'm $440 to $50 billion of additional money going into finding a cure for cancer, finding a new energy source around fusion. We're not doing it. And the Chinese are competing, winning, and we're sitting here on the sidelines. That's just created a pack for that, the gambling. Yes, I -- Of course. I can't tell you this since -- so my view -- 10 percent in the -- 10 percent across the board to create the revenue goes into the lock box. The second thing -- everybody in the federal government, everybody. You are banned from participating in the online market. [ Applause ] I'm going to say this. You have kids from Peoria and Pontiac fighting a war, and you got a bunch of nipple babies down in Palm Beach betting on it. That's not how we do this in America. Right. And make it a lot of money. That is wrong. Yes. Right? They pick the moment when are we going to hit the Supreme Leader? There's a bet on that hour before it happens. Right. Because they know. They know. They see more trades on oils within -- on the oil market, within -- within minutes before the trade. That is -- you don't need it, I don't know, inside of the trade -- it's against the law. And nobody, the cop's not showing up. So my view -- 10 percent tax? That was a trade. And if -- All right. And if you get -- I'm going to go on junior. Is in those two companies. I did say nipple baby, Palm Beach. Okay, got it. Right.
[ Cheers and applause ] -And you are. -Someone's my new quality. -Yeah. You're the only person at this table who has suggested that. [ Laughter ] -I saw their people running for government. Has the media overstated the rise of authoritarians in Europe and around the world? What do you think of Victor Orban's defeat last week? I did have that exact thought. Like, again, the media kind of played me. I mean, for years, all I've been reading about is he's the second coming of Stalin. There will never be democracy again in Hungary. And then, oh, actually, well, people got tired of a guy just like they'd do in every democracy. They didn't like him, and they wanted somebody with different policies, and they voted him out. And he went and conceded the next day. So I do feel a little used. -Well, I'll say one thing about this. This guy, you know what I heard? This guy. -This is Halleye, isn't it? -Did everything he could to tilt the playing field in his favor? -And yes. When you add up all the harms that he did to Hungary and this new movement that came in, that you would like because it set aside all the old constituencies, all the old specialties. -Yes, politics. -It said, "We're going to bring everyone together. We're not going to wilt," as you were saying before, this young guy, Peter Majar. And they went, they had to run through new media because they couldn't use the old media. In fact, this guy went on television now, having won the election, went on state TV, which would not let opposition figures appear, and said, "The first thing I do as Prime Minister is shut you down." -So, he was rigging the game. -No doubt about it. -I agree, but here's. -But here's the bad guy. -But here's a lesson for Democrats. I mean, this is in the rest of Europe. He made Orban's corruption relevant to your inability to pay. So, in my case, President United States gets a plane from Qatar, you get six bucks a gallon. Great trade, as my mother would say, such a deal who would not think it -- I mean, here's it. He's going to get his arch, and you can't afford the Golden Arches. And I, if I was going to go right -- -Well done. -Okay, thank you. My thing is, it wasn't, you know, only elites say, "Oh, it's corruption." -Corruption never sells you idiot. It's making the corruption relevant how you're getting screwed, and that's the lesson for Orban. -You're the only person at this table making that case, and I think it's a great point. It is. -You're not going to let go of that. -I'm not going to let go of that. -That's what a rest of your life is. -Cat of us use is on the rise among women, oh. In the United States. And for the first time, recently -- Oh, perfect, for 4/20, coming up on Monday. For the first time, recently outpaced men. Why does the panel think that is? -No, I can't. -Can we go back to AI? [ Laughter ] -Yeah, I don't know. I mean, because men are bad. -Who's the expert? -And we need to get high. -On pot? -Yeah. -And women. [ Laughter ] -What do you think of JD Van saying the Pope should be more careful when talking about theology? [ Laughter ] -Can we take that one? -No, I'm willing to take that one. -That's the Catholic one. -Right, yeah, yeah, yeah. -I mean, as I've said, he has the charm of a cyber truck as a politician. [ Laughter, applause ] I mean, look, the Pope is also an American citizen and should be able to say whatever he feels like. -I'm not afraid to name him. -Yeah, sure. [ Applause ] -He just looks like a pot. I don't know. -Yeah, I mean. -That's a one. -As -- look -- -Well, he's such a recent convert. -The Pope is an Augustinian-trained Pope. Augustin is one that can develop the concept of just war. You're going to lecture the Pope on the concept of just war. I think, as one Jewish kid, that takes a lot of Hutzpah. And I got a lot of Hutzpah, but that is a lot of Hutzpah. -That wasn't like Augustinian's main thing. His main thing was that you're born with original sin. You're evil to begin with, and that's why you need the Catholic church. -That's why you need him to tell you what a joke is. -Augustin was not a good guy. -He's going to out-calf the Cuban Catholic. -No, no, no. [ Laughter ] I'm not going for the cam. I'm -- I'm not for Jews for Jews, but I am for Jews for Pope Leo. I'm setting that up as my new nonprofit project. -You see, Jesus Christ did not have a great week. -I'll be lecturing the Pope. -No. -Okay, about theology, which I don't know what Latin for Hutzpah is, but that is crazy. -Right. -Going and showing up with Orban saying vote for this guy, and then getting absolutely repudiated, then 21 hours in Pakistan, and he comes home and says, "I got nothing." -Don't leave out the hall he couldn't fill. -Well, there he goes. So that's in one week. -Don't assume that Trump's not also setting him up. -And meanwhile, Marco Rubio is with Trump at the U.S. -Yeah. -Don't assume that there's not some evilness by Dr. Evil. [ Laughter ] [ Cheers and applause ] -You mean, plotting to discredit JD Man? Why does he have to do that? It's his pick, anyway. -I don't like it. -But all he has to do is say, "My pick for my successor is, and his people will follow." -It is not as delicious unless you're pulling out someone's toenails. That's how it goes with this guy. -Wayne was the last time he's ever showed any loyalty. -Oh, yeah. And what he wants to show is that the Republican Party is nothing without me. He's going to walk out and he's going to show them there's a one-way street on loyalty. -I know that personality trait of him because I've seen it in other people. He likes, he wants, needs, ask users around him, but then he does not respect them. If you do it, he doesn't respect you. He actually likes me, because I didn't do it. -Yeah, I can show blood in her boots. -Exactly. -Wayne, he likes to punch down and kiss up. That's what this president does. -Rom, what is one thing Japan does well that America should consider adopting? -It's the most beautiful thing I've seen. Five-year-olds walk to school all alone. -Yes. -And there's no fear. They go across the streets, they walk, they talk, and it is. I told all the Japanese business leaders, you can have them on Fuji. A five-year-old, this big, a backpack, this big, with their little uniform, they come to a street, they put their hands up, all the cars stop. No, it's sublime. It makes me cry when I think about how gorgeous that is. -Yes, and it is, but you're trans. -It's a one-person that's done it. -Right. But you think you can transfer that to America? -No. -Well, you as well. -We're not good people like that. -But they said, "Can we learn?" I'll tell you this. They have a sense of respect and sense of community. We wear masks to protect ourselves. They wore masks to make sure you didn't get sick. And respect, for others, is a quality that if you ask me what we could learn, Japan has it in spades, and it's a unbelievably beautiful quality. And you see it where they nurture these children and give them back. We stolen our children's childhood. They have given it to them. And that to me is one thing we can learn from them. -Oh, good. -All right. Thank you, everybody.
Podcast Summary
Key Points:
The rapid development of AI is being driven by powerful tech leaders like Elon Musk and Dario Amodei, who are both profiting from the technology while warning about its dangers—contradicting claims of moral restraint.
There is a growing concern that the federal government is too slow and reactive in regulating AI, and that private industry, fueled by massive capital, is outpacing public oversight and ethical safeguards.
The release of AI tools to 40 major companies creates a high risk of widespread misuse and uncontrolled spread, with experts predicting widespread adoption within a month.
Tech moguls and their allies have significant influence over policy, including through AI PACs and lobbying, which undermines democratic processes and privacy legislation.
Public anger over social media and tech monopolies is intense, with jury decisions in social media trials showing rapid rejection of tech companies’ dominance.
A proposed 10% tax on prediction markets and gambling platforms could redirect funds toward critical U.S. research areas like fusion, quantum computing, and cancer treatment.
The U.S. risks losing technological leadership to China, especially in life sciences and energy, due to diverted research funding and political neglect.
Political figures like Viktor Orbán and Donald Trump show patterns of using media and fear to manipulate public perception, highlighting the danger of authoritarian-style tactics in democracies.
Summary:
The podcast highlights growing concerns about the unchecked development and deployment of artificial intelligence, driven by powerful tech leaders who profit from the technology while warning about its risks. Despite earlier calls for ethical caution, these same leaders are actively expanding AI access to major corporations, increasing the risk of unregulated, widespread misuse. The federal government is criticized for being too slow and reactive, unable to keep pace with the rapid evolution of AI.
S. research in areas like fusion energy and cancer treatment—areas where China is gaining ground. The discussion also underscores public distrust in tech monopolies, evident in social media trials and political backlash.
Tech influence is further amplified through lobbying and new AI PACs, undermining democratic accountability. , where children’s safety and social trust are often compromised. S.
risks losing its technological edge and democratic integrity to both foreign rivals and domestic tech concentration.
FAQs
The main concerns include the lack of oversight, the profit-driven motives of tech leaders, and the rapid spread of AI technology to major companies without sufficient safety measures or regulation.
The federal government must act because private companies, especially those with immense wealth, can operate without accountability, and current regulatory delays are too slow to address the risks posed by rapidly advancing AI.
Elon Musk initially expressed concern about AI dangers and advocated for safety measures, but recently, he has shifted focus to building AI capabilities and is actively pursuing control over major AI firms like OpenAI.
A 10 percent tax on prediction markets like Polymarket is proposed to redirect funds into national research—especially in areas like cancer, fusion energy, and quantum computing—to counter China's growing technological lead.
The public is deeply angry and distrustful of tech leaders, who are seen as prioritizing profit over safety and ethics, much like media moguls, and their influence is viewed as out of touch with public concerns.
The podcast references jury decisions in social media-related trials that quickly dismissed cases, showing how the public is increasingly angry and anxious about how tech companies operate.
Chat with AI
Loading...
Pro features
Go deeper with this episode
Unlock creator-grade tools that turn any transcript into show notes and subtitle files.