Ex Google CEO: AI Is Creating Deadly Viruses! If We See This, We Must Turn Off AI! They Leaked Our Secrets At Google!
01:49:43 Share

Someone was leaking information on google, and the staff was incredibly secret.

So what are the secrets? Well.

the first richmond is the former CEO of google, who grew the company from one hundred million dollars to one hundred and eighty. And this is how, as someone .

whose leds, one of the best bigger tech companies, what are first principles .

of full leadership business and doing first is risk taking, where he can take huge risk and fail fast and fast. Failure is important because if you build the right product, your customers will come. But it's a race to get there as best as you can because you want to be first, because that's where you make the .

most of principles that I need to be thinking.

So here's the really big one. google. We have the seventy, twenty ten rule that generated ten, twenty, thirty, forty billion dollars of extra profits over a decade and everyone to go do this.

So the first thing is, what about A I?

I can tell you if you're not using A I at every aspect of your business.

your but you've been in the tech industry for a long time and leaves that the advent of artificial intelligence is a question of human survival.

AI is going to move very quickly, and you will not notice how much of your world has been coached by these technologies because they will produce greater. But the questions are, what are the dangerous? Are we advancing with IT?

And do we have control over what is your biggest A I.

my actual fear is different from you. Imagine my actual fear. That's a good time to pull the blog.

Eric, i've read about your career and you've had an extensive, a varied, a fascinating career, completely unique, clear. And that leads me to believe that you could have writing about anything. You've got some incredible books, all of which i've been through over the last couple .

of weeks here in front of me.

No, no. But that, I mean, these are objects i'm just obsessed with. But this book, in particular, of all the things you could have written about with the world we find ourselves in, why this? Why genesis?

First, thank you for I wanted to beyond show for a long time. I am really happy to be able to be here in person in london and is a doctor. Doister ended up in one of my greatest and closest friends.

And ten years ago, he and I were a conference where he had heard damascius speak about the eye, and Henry would tell the story that he was about to go catch up on his jet lag. But instead I said, go do this. And he listen to IT.

And all of a sudden he understood that we were playing with fire, that we were doing something that we did not understand he would have the impact on, and that Henry had been working on this since he was twenty two, coming out of the army, after what? War two, and his thesis about content so forth, as an undergraduate at harvard ard. So all of a sudden I found myself in the whole group of people who are trying to understand, what does IT mean to be human in an age of A I.

When this stuff starts showing up, how does our life change? How do our thoughts change? Humans have never had an intellectual chAllenger of our own ability.

Or Better or worse. IT has never happened in history. The arrival of A I is a huge moment in history.

For anyone that doesn't know your story, or maybe he just knows your story from sort of google onwards, can you tell me the sort of inspiration points, the education experiences that you're drawing on when you talk .

about these subjects? Well, like many of the people you meet um as a teenager I was interested in science. I play with model rockets, model change.

The usual things were a boy in my generation I was too Young to be a video game addict, but i'm sure I would be today if I were that age. Um I went to college and I was very interesting computers and they were relatively slow them. But to me they were, to give an example, the computer that I used in college is one hundred million times slower.

One hundred million times slower, then the phone you have in your pocket. And by the way, that was a computer for the entire university. So mores law, which is this notion of accelerating density of chips, has defined the wealth creation, the career creation, the company creation in my life.

So I can be understood as lucky because I was born with with an interest in something which was about to explode. And when we sort of everything happens together, everyone gets swept up in IT. And of course.

the rest is history. I was sent this weekend with my partners, little brother, who's eighteen years old. yes.

And as we ate breakfast yesterday before they flew back to portugal, we had this discussion with her family. But her dad was their human with their raft. Younger brother was there, my girlfriend there.

Difficult because most of them don't speaking lish. So we had to use fully enough A I to translate thing. But the big discussion at breakfast was, what should raf do in the future? He's eighteen years old. He's got his career head of him, and the decisions he makes us is so evident in your story at this exact moment as to what information and intelligence he requires for himself. Well, quite clearly define the rest of his life. If you assigned at that table with me yesterday when I was going to give rap advice on what knowledge he should acquire eighteen years old, what would you have said? And more of the principles not to sit behind that.

The most important thing is to develop analytical, critical thinking skills to some level. I don't care how you get there, so if if you like math or science, or if you like the law, or if you like entertainment, just think critically. In his particularly case, as as an eighteen year old, what I would encourage him to do is figure out how to write programing, to write programme in the language called python.

Python is easy to use. It's very easy understand. And it's become the of A I. So the the A I systems, when they write code for themselves, they write code in python. And so you can't lose as developing python programing skills and the simple less thing to do with an h old man, say, make a game because these are typically gamers stay typically make a game that's interesting using python.

It's interesting because I wondered if coding you, I think five, ten years ago, everyone's advice plating year old to learn how to code. But in a world of A I, where these large language models are able to write code and are you know, increasing every month in their ability to write Better and Better code, I wonder if that's like a .

dying art form. Yeah a lot of people who pose this and that's not correct IT sure looks like these systems were right code. But remember, the systems also have interfaces called aps, which you can program them.

So one of the large revenue forces for these AI models for these companies have to make money at some point, right? Is you the program and you actually make an A P I call and ask you a question. Typical example is give you a picture and tell me whats in the picture.

Now, can you have some fun with that as an h all, of course. right. So so when I say python, I mean python, using the tools that are available to build something new, something that you are interested.

And when you say critical thinking, how does one, what is critical thinking and how does one go about acquiring that is a skill.

Well, the first and most important about critical thinking is to distinguish between being marketed to, which is also unearned, as being allied to, and being being given the argument on your own.

We have, because of social media, which I hold responsible for a lot of ill as well as good things in life, we we've sort of gotten used to people just telling us something and believing IT, because our friends believe IT are so for, and I strongly encourage people to check assertions. So you get people to sell this stuff. And I learned a google all years.

Somebody says something I check in on google, do I and you then have a question, do you criticize them and correct them, or do you let you go? But you want to be in the position where somebody makes a statement, like, did you know that only ten percent of americans have passport, which is a widely dude but false statement um it's actually higher than that, although it's never high enough in my view in america. But that's an example of instruction that you can just say is that true, right? There's a long mean about american politicians where the congress is basically full of criminals.

IT may be full of one or two, but it's not full of of nineteen. But again, people believe this stuff because that sounds applauded. So if if somebody says something plausible, just check IT.

You have a responsibility before you repeat something to make sure what your repeating is true. And if you can't distinguish tween two and false, I suggest you keep your mouth shut, right? Because you can't run a government of society without people Operating on basic facts.

Like, for example, climate change is real. We can debate over whether it's how to address IT, but there is no question the climate is changing. IT is a fact. He is a mathematical fact.

And how do I know this is somebody will say, well, how do you know and I said, because science is about repeatable uh uh, experiments and also proving things wrong. So let's say, I said that climate change is real. And this was the first time I had ever been said, which is not true.

Then one hundred people who say that can be too. I'll see if you well. And then and then all of a sudden they'd see I was right, and i'd yet some big Price, right? So, so the falsified ly of these assertions is very important.

How do you know that science is correct? It's because people are constantly testing IT. And why is this .

kind of critical thinking so especially important in a world? Devi.

well, partly because A, I will allow for perfect misinformation. So let's use an example of tiktok. Tiktok can be understands, called the bandit algorithms, m and computer science, in the sense of the last vegas one on bandits.

Do I stay in the bandit machine and I keep on this slot machine? Or do I move to another slap machine? And the the tiktok algorithm basically can be understood as i'll keep serving you what you tell me you want, but occasion i'll give you something from the adjacent area and is highly addictive.

So what you're seeing with social media, and tiktok is a particularly bad example of this, is people are getting into these ravi holes where they all they see is confirmatory bias. And in the ones that are, I mean, if it's fun and you know entertaining, I don't care. But you'll see, for example, there are plenty of stories where people have ultimately cell farm or suicide because they are already unhappy.

And then and then they start picking up unhappy and then their whole environment online. These people who are unhappy and IT makes them more unhappy because he doesn't have a positive bias. So there's a really good example where um let's say in your case you're the dad.

You're gonna watch this is the dad with your kid and you're gna say, you know it's not that bad let me show you some let me give you some good alternative. Let me get you inspire. Let me get you out of your funk.

The algorithms don't do that unless you force them to, because the algorithms are fundamentally about optimizing an objective function, literally mathematically maximized. Some goal that has been trained to in in this case is attention. And by the way, part of the part of we have, we have so much, uh, ouch, is because if you're A C E O, you want to maximize revenue.

To maximizes revenue, you maximized attention. And the easiest way to maximized attention is to maximize our age. Did you know? Did you know? Did you know right? And by the way, a lot of stuff is not true. They're fighting over scare attention.

There was a recent article where there's an old quote from one thousand nine hundred and seventy one from hub Simon, an economist at the time I can't give email and who said that um economists don't understand but in the future the scare city will be about attention so somebody now fifty years later went back and said I think we're at the point where we've modified all attention. An article this week, two and a half hours of videos consumed by Young people every day. Right now, there is a limit to the amount of video.

You can know that because you have to eat and sleep and to hang out. But these are significant societal changes that have occurred very, very quickly. Um when I was Young there was a great debates to the benefit of television and you know my argument of the time was, well yes, we did we did you know rock and roll and drugs and all that and we wash a lot of television, but somehow we grew up OK, right? So it's the same argument.

Now with a different, a different term. Will we will those kids grow up? Okay, not as obvious, because these tools are highly addictive, much more so than television ever was.

Do you think .

the grape I personally do IT because i'm i'm inherently and optimist. I also think the society begins to understand the problems. That typical example is there's an epidemic of harm to teenage girls.

Uh girls as we know are uh more advanced in boys at those uh you know below eighteen uh and the girls seemed to get hit by social media eleven and twelve when they're not quite capable of handling the the rejection in the emotional stuff and is driven uh you know emerging room visit, self harm and so forth to record levels, swell document. So society is beginning to recognize this now. H schools won't like kids use their phones when in the classroom, which kind of obvious if you ask me.

Um so developmentally uh, one of the core questions about the AI revolution is what does he do to the identity of children that are growing up? Your values, your personal values, where you get up in the morning and think about life is now set is highly unlikely that an A I will change your programing but your child can be significantly programme. And one of the things that we talk about in the book is what happens when the best friend of your child from birth is a computer.

But IT like now, by the way, I don't know, we've never done this before, but you're running an experiment on a billion people without a control, right? And so we have to stumble through this. So at the end of the day, i'm an optimist, because we will adjust society with biases and values to try to keep us on a moral high ground, human life.

And so you should be optimistic for that because these kids, when they grow up, they're live to one hundred, their lives will be much more prosperous I hope. And I I pray that told me much less conflict. Uh, certainly their life fans are longer. The the likelihood of them being injured in in wars and over are much, much lower statistically. It's a good message to kids .

as someone who's LED one of the worlds biggest tech companies. If you were the sea of tiktok, what would you do? Because i'm sure that they realised everything you've said is true, but they have this commercial incentive to drive up the addictiveness of an algorithm which is causing these micro chAmbers, which is causing the rates of anxiety, depression among Young girls and Young people more generally to increase.

What would you do? So so I have talked to them and to the others as well, and I think it's is pretty straight forward. They're sort of good revenue and bad revenue. When we were at google learn, sergi, we would have situations where would improve quality, we would make the product Better.

And the debate was do we take that to revenue in the form of more ads? Or do we just make the product Better? And and that was a clear choice, and I arbitrarily decided that we would take fifty percent to one, fifty percent to the other because I thought they were both important.

So and the founders, of course, we are very supportive. So google became more moral and also made more money, right? All of the there's plenty bad stuff on google, but is not on the first page.

That was the key thing. The alternative model would be say, let's maximize revenue, will put all the really bad stuff, the lies and the cheating and the deceiving and so that draws you and I will drive you insane. And we might have made more money, but first he was the wrong thing to do.

But more importantly, it's not sustainable. Um there's a law, a called gressier law uh to verbal law obviously um where bad speech drives out good speech. And what you're seeing is you're seeing in online communities, which have always been a present with bullying in this kind of stuff.

Now you've got crazy people, in my view, who are building bots that are lying right misinformation. And why do you do that? You've got in.

There was a fort. There was a hurry ane florida. And people are in serious trouble.

And you, sitting in the comfort of your homes somewhere else, are busy trying to make their lives more difficult. What's wrong with you? Like, let them get rescued.

No human life is important. But there's something about the human psychology where people, uh, people talk to this erman world shopping for IT. There's a bunch of things like this that we have to address. I want social media and the online world to represent the best of humanity, hope, excitement, optimism, creativity, invention, solving new problems as opposed to the worst. And I think that that is achievable.

You arrived to google forty six years old.

two thousand and one, two thousand one.

two thousand and one. Um you had a very extensive create before then working for a bunch of really interesting companies. Some microsystems is one that I know very well. You've ked with ziogoon, california as well. Bell labs was your first sort of real job, I guess, twenty years old, a big tech. What did you learn in this journey of your life about what IT is to build a great company and what value is as a really big entrepreneur and people in teams like, if they were like a set of first principles that everyone should be thinking about when IT comes to doing something great and building something great.

what other like first principles? So the first world I ve learned is that you need a truly brilliant person to build a really brilliant product. And that is not me. I work with them to find someone who's just smarter than you, more clever than you, moose, faster than you, changes the world is Better spoke and and more handsome, more beautiful. And whatever IT is that you're optimizing and lie yourself with them, because they are the people who are going to make, make the world different.

In one of my books, we use the distinction between divers and nails in the diva, and we use the example of Steve jobs, who clearly was a deva, opinionated and strong and augmentative, and would gully people if he didn't like them, but was really, and when he was, he was a deva. He wanted perfection. right? Aligning yourself with save jobs is a good idea.

Uh, the alternative is what we call a nave. And a nave which you know from british history is somebody who's acting on their own on their own account. You're not they're not trying to do the right thing. They're trying to benefit themselves at this at the at the cost of others. And so if you can identify a person in one of these teams that they're just trying to solve the problem in a really clever way and they're passion about and they want to do IT, that's how the world moves forward. If you don't have such a person, your company is not going to go anywhere.

And the reason is that it's too easy just to keep doing what you are are doing, right? And an innovation is fundamental about changing what you're doing up until the this generation of tech companies, the the most companies seem to me to be one shot wonders, right? They would have one thing that was very successful.

And then IT was sort of um IT was typically follow an esco and nothing much what happen. And now I think that the people are smarter, people are Better educated. You now see repeatedly waves.

Good example being microsoft, which is an older company now, are founded in basically eighty one, eighty two, something like that. So let's call that forty five years old. But theyve reinvented themselves a number of times, right in a really powerful way.

We should probably talk about this then before we move on, which is what you're talking about. There is that sort of founder things. People now referred to the founder of that found energy, that high conviction, that what a disruptive thinking and that ability to reinvent e yourself.

I was looking at some stats last night, in fact, and I was looking at how long companies stay on the p five hundred on average. Now I went from thirty three years to seventeen years to twelve years, average ten. And as you play those numbers, four, eventually twenty, fifty and A, I told me that I would be about.

well, i'm not sure I agree with the founder of argument. And the reason is that it's great to have a brilliant founder and and there's this is actually like more than great, like really important and and we need more brilliant founders. Universities are producing these people, by the way, they do exist and they show up every year.

Know another Michael dell at the age of nineteen or twenty two. These are just brilliant founders. Obviously, gates and l and and sort of my generation of brilliant founders there are insurgence over IT.

For anyone that doesn't know who larrian sago and doesn't know that, what a early google story. Can you give me a little bit of a background? But they also inroads these characters called laron sergey.

any that doesn't know. So Larry page and sorry, brain met at stanford they were on a grant from believed that the national science foundation as graduate students and Larry page invented a algorithm called page rank which is named after him um and he and sergey wrote a paper which still one of the most cited papers in in the world and it's essentially a way of understanding priority of information.

And mathematically, IT was a four, eight transform of the way people Normally did things at the time. And so they wrote this code. I don't think they were that good a set of programmer.

You know, they sort of did IT. They had a computer, they ran out of power in the dorm room. So they um borrowed the power from the dorm room next two and plugged IT in and they had the data center in the bedroom, you know in the door.

Classic story um and then they moved to A A building that was owned by a the sister of a girlfriend of time and that's how they found of the company. Their first investor was a uh one of the founder of some microsystem was name was and backshall who just said i'll just give you the money because you're obviously incredibly smart. Give him hundred thousand dollars yeah maybe is a million but in any case, IT is ultimately became.

Billions of dollars, so gives you a sense of this early founding is very important. So the founders then set up in this little house in the park, which ultimately we bought google as a museum, and they set up in the garage, and they had google, google world headquarters in neon may. And they had big headquarters with the four employees that were sitting below them.

And the computer that their instructor had built, their instruction were very, very good, softer people, and obviously brilliant, but they were not very good hardware. And so they built to computers using corporate to separate the CPU. And if you know anything about hardware, harder or generate a lot of heat, and the court board would catch on fire. So eventually, when I showed up, we started building proper hardware with proper, hard hardwork engineers. But IT gives you a sense of the scrapping is that that was so characteristic um and you know today with your people of enormous impact on society and I think that will continue for many, many years.

What do they call you and at what point did they realized that they needed .

someone like you? Well, there I said to me, they are very Young. He looked and says, we don't need you now, but we'll need you in the future.

We will need you in the future.

yes. So one of things about the insurgents that they thought for the long term, so they didn't say google would be a search company. They said the mission of google is to organize all the world's information. If you think about IT, that's pretty audacious twenty five years ago, like how you gonna do that. And so they started with web search eventually and Larry had studied a ee quite extensively and he began to to work and ultimately he acquired with with all all of us famously uh this company called deep mind here in britain, which essentially is the um the first company to really see the A I opportunity and pretty much all of the things you've seen from A I in the last decade have come from people who are either at deep mind or competing with deep mind.

Going back to this point about principles. Then before we move further on as IT released to building a great company, what are some of those finding principles? We have lots of entrepreneurs s that listen to the show, one of them you've expressed as this need for the devils. I guess these people who are just very high conviction and can not see into the future, what are the other principles that I need to be thinking about what i'm scaling my company?

Well, the first is to think about scale. I think a current example is look at elan. Um elan is an incredible entrepreneur and an incredible scientists. And if you study how he Operates, he gets people by, I think, sheer force of personal will to over perform, to take huge risks, which somehow he he has this brilliant where he can make those trade offs and get IT right. So these are exceptional people.

Now in our book with genesis, we argue that you're onna have that in your pocket, but as to whether you'll have the judgment to take the risk that one does that. Another question yet. One of the other ways to think about IT is an awful lot of people talk to me about the companies that their founding and there they are, a little widget.

You know, like, I want to make the camera Better. I want to make the dress Better. I want to make book publishing cheaper. Or so far, these are all fine ideas i'm interested in, in ideas which have the beneath IT of scale.

And when I I say scale, I mean the ability to go from zero to infinity in terms of refusers and demand and scale um there are plenty, plenty ways thinking about this. But what would be such a company in the age of the eye? Well, we can tell you what I would look like.

You would have apps, one on android, one on irs, maybe a few others, those absolutely powerful networks, and they'll have a really big computer in the back, this two in A I calculations. So future successful companies will all have that right? Exactly what problem solves well that up to the founder. But if you're not using A I at every aspect of your business, you're not gonna make IT and distinction as a programme matter is that when I was doing all of this way, back when you had to write the code, now A, I has to discover the answer is a very big deal.

And of course, this was all of this was invented google now ten years ago, but basically all of a sudden and and political programing, which said what I did my whole life and writing code, and you do this to that at this practical all this so of so on is gradually being replaced by learning the answer right. So for example, we use the example of translate language translation um the the current large language models are essentially organize to run predicting the next word. Well, if you can predit the next word, you can predit the next sequence and biology, you can predict the next action, you can predict the next thing the robot should do.

So all of this stuffer around large language models and deep learning IT has come out the transformer paper GPT three uh ChatGPT, which for most people was a huge moment, is essentially about a predict. The next word. Getting IT right in terms of company .

culture and how to that is for the success and prospects of a company. What how do you think about company culture and how significant and important is IT? And like when and who sets IT?

I is almost always set. Covering cultures are almost always set by the funders. I happen to be on the board of the meal clinic. Meal clinic is the largest healthcare system in america, is also the most highly rated one.

And they have a rule which is called the of the needs of the customer come first which came out of the male brothers had been dead for five hundred and twenty years um but that was their principle and I when I initially got on the board, I started to walk around and thought that is kind of a stupid, no stupid phrase and nobody really does this and they really believe IT and they repeat IT and they repeat IT right? So it's true in non technical cultures in that case is a health care is for service delivery. You can drive a culture even in non tech.

And tech is typically in engineering culture. And if I had do things over again, I would have even more technical people and even fewer non technical people, and just make the technology people figure out what they have to do. And i'm sorry for that bias because I am not trying to defend anybody.

But the fact the matter is the technical people, if you build the right product, your customers will come. If you don't build the product product, then you don't need to sell for us. Why are you selling an inferior product? So in in the how google works work and ultimately and uh twenty dollars ach book, which is about the we talk a lot about how the C E.

O is now the chief product officer, the chief innovation officer, because fifty years ago, you didn't have access to capital, you didn't have access to marketing, you didn't have access to sales, you didn't have to access to distribution hours. I was meeting today with an entrepreneur, r, who said, yeah, you will be ninety five percent technical. I said, why said, well, we have a contract manufacturer and our products are so good that people will just buy them this happened to be A A A technical switching company um and they said it's only one hundred thousand times Better than his competence and I said, IT will sell.

Unfortunate doesn't work IT. Yeah, this isn't the point. But if they achieve their goal, people will be lined up outside the door. So as a matter of culture, you want to build a technical culture with values about getting the product to work right.

And when working me is not another thing you do with with engineer as as you say, they make nice presentation to you and they go I said that's very interesting, but you know i'm not your customer. Your customer is really tough because your customers wants everything to work and free and work right now and never make any mistakes. So give me their feedback, and if their feedback is good, I love you, and if their feedback is bad, then you Better get back to work and stopping.

So arrogant. So what happens is that in in the, in the invention process within firms, people fall in love with the idea, and they don't test one of things that google did. And this is largely areas. And mayor, we back when is one day he said to me, I don't know how to judge user in interface.

Previous CEO SHE was the CEO of yahoo.

And before that, SHE ran all the consumer products at google and she's not running another company in in the bay area. But the importantly of the verses, he said, I can't as as you know, the U. I, the user face is great at the time, and I was certain ly was, and he said, I don't know how to judge the, you're in a face myself, and none of my team do, but we know how to measure.

And so what SHE organized were A, B test. You test one, test another. So remember that it's possible using these networks actually kind of figure out because they're highly instrumented a dwelling time.

How long does somebody how long does somebody watch this? How important IT is? If you go back to how tiktok works, a one of the the signals that they use include the amount of time you watch, commenting, a forwarding, uh, sharing all of those kinds of things, and those you can understand those as analytics that go into an A I engine that makes the decision is to what to do next, what to make viral.

Along this point of culture at scale is the right to expect that the culture changes as the company sales. Because you came in to google, lovely, when they were doing to have a hundred million dollars in revenue, and you left when they were doing what is a hundred eighty billion or something stagers ing. But is IT right to assume that the culture of a growing company should scale from when there was ten people in that garage to when there's a hundred?

So when I go back to google to visit and they were kind enough to give me a bag and treat me well, of course I hear the echoes of this um I was at a lunch where there was a lady running search and a german running ads.

You know, the successors to the people who work with me and I asked him what they are going and they said the same problems, you know the same problems have not been solved, but they're much bigger and so when you go to a company, I suspect um I was not near the founding of apple. But I was on the board for a while on the found in culture. You can see today in their obsession about user interfaces, they're obsession about being closed.

And the privacy and secrecy is the different company, right? I'm not passing judgment. Um setting the culture is important.

The echoes are there. What does happen in big companies is they become less efficient for many reasons. The first thing that happens is they become conservative because of their public and they have lawsuits.

And um a famous example is that microsoft, after the and I just um uh case in the nineties, became so conservative in terms of what I could launch that IT really missed the web revolution for a long time. They have since recovered. And I of course was happy to exploit that as a competitor to them when we were google.

But but the important thing is when big companies should be faster because they have more money and more scale, they should be able to do things even quicker. But in my industry anyway, the the tech startups that have a new clear idea tend to win because the big company can't move fast enough to do IT. Not the example.

We had built something, google video. I was very proud of a deal. And David drama, who was the gentle council of the time, came, you have to look at this youtube people. I said, like, why? right? Who cares? And IT turns out they're really good, and they're more clever than your team.

And I said that camperdown ure, you know, typical arrogant ark. And we SAT down and we looked at IT, and they really were quicker, even though we had an incumbent. And why? IT turns out that the incoming was Operating under the traditional rules.

The google head was fine, and the competitor, in this case youtube, was not constrained by that. They could work at any pace, and they could do all sorts of things. Intellect, al, property.

And so for ultimately, we were sudall over all of us and we ultimately won all those suits. But it's an example where there are these moments in time. We have to move extremely quickly.

You're seeing that right now with general technology. So the agi that the general revolution generate code, generate videos is generate text, generate everything. All of those winners are being determined in the next six, twelve months.

And then once once the slope is SAT, once the growth rate is corrupting every uh six months or so far, it's very hard for somebody else to come in. So so it's a race to get there as fast as you can when you talk to the the great venture capital they are, their fast right will look at IT will make a decision tomorrow. We're done. We're in and so forth. And we want to be first because that's where they make the most tomato money.

We're talking before you arrived talking to jack about this idea of like harvesting and hunting. So harvest in what you've already sold in hunting funning opportunities. But i've always find its quite difficult to get the harvest is to be the hunters at the same time.

So so harvesting and hunting is a good metaphor. Um i'm to an entrepreneurs and so what we learned a google was ultimately, if you want to get somebody done, you have to have somebody who's entrepreneurs in their approach in charge of a small business. And so for example, thunder, when he became C E.

O, had a model of which, with the little things that he was going to emphasize, in which, for the big things, some of those little things are now big things, right? And and he managed that that way. So one way to understand innovation in a large company is you need to know who the owner IT is.

Larry page would say over over again, it's not gonna happen unless there's an owner who is gone to drive this. And he was supremely good identifying that technical talent, right? That's one of his great founder strength.

So when we talk about founders, if you have have a vision, but you also have to have either great luck or great skill as to who is the person who can lead this. Inevitably, those people are highly technical in the sense that they can and very quick moving and they have good management skills, right? They understand how to hire people and deploy resources that allows for innovation. Um most of the if if I look back in my career, each generation of the tech companies failed, including for example, son at at the point at which he became non competitive with the future .

is IT possible for a team to innovate while they still have their day job, which is harvesting, if you know. I mean, what do you have to take those people, put them into a different team, different building, different P, O, and get them to focus on their disruptive activation.

There are almost no examples of doing IT simultaneous ly in the same building. A the macintosh was, famously, Steve in his table, crazy way, have the the very small team that invented the macintosh, and he put them in a little building next to the big building. A, on bob road and tina, and they put a pirate flag on top of IT.

Now, was that good culturally inside the company? No, because he creates resentment in the big building. But was IT right in terms of the revenue and path of apple? absolutely.

Because the mac ultimately became the platform that establish the U. I. The user interface ultimately allowed them to build the iphone, which access is defined by user interface.

Why can they stay in the same building?

IT does doesn't work. You you can't get people to play two roles in send for different if you're going to be a pirate and a disrupt, you don't have to follow the same rules. So um there there are plenty of examples where you just have to keep inventing yourself.

Now what's interesting about cloud computing and essentially cloud services, which what google does is because the product is not sold to you, it's delivered to you. It's easier to change. But the same problem remains, if you look at google today, right, it's basically search a search box and is incredibly powerful.

But what happens when that interface is not really textual, right? Google have to reinvent that. It'll be the system will somehow know what you're asking, right? IT will be your assistant um and again, google will do very well.

So I mean, no way criticized and google here, but i'm saying that even something as simple as search box will eventually be replaced by something more powerful. It's important that google will be the company that does that. I believe they will.

And I am thinking about IT. You know, the example of Steve jobs and building with the power flag on IT my brain went there. Are so many officers around the world that were trying to kill applet that exact moment that might have had the para flag, but that's exactly what they were doing in similar small rooms.

So what apple had done so smartly there was they owned the people that we're about to kill their business. Mol, and this is quite diff ult to do that. Part of my wonders if in your experience, it's a founder that has that type of conviction that does that is extremely hard for .

non founders to do this in corporations. Because if you think about a CoOperation, what's the duty of the C E, O? many.

There's the shareholders, there's the employees, there's the community and there's a board. Trying to get a board of very smart people to agree on anything is hard enough. So imagine I walk in to you and I say, I have a new idea.

I'm going to kill our profitability for two years. It's a huge bet, and I need ten billion dollars. Now would the board say yes? Well, they did to mark sickert. He spent all that money on essentially VR of one kind another, doesn't seem to have produced very much, but at exactly the same time, he invested very heavily in an instagram, what's up in facebook, and in particular in the A I systems that power them.

And to a facebook, to my surprise, is a very significant leader in A I, having released this, a language quote or version called lama four hundred billion, which is curiously an open source model, open source means, is available freely for everyone. And what what facebook get in meta is saying is, as long as we have this technology, we can maxim mize the revenue in our core businesses. So there is a good example.

And uh and za was obviously an incredibly talented entrepreneur. Um he's now back on the list of of the most rich people. Um he feeds you know everything he was doing and he managed to lose all that money while making a different bet. That's A A unique founder. The same thing is almost impossible with a high R C.

How important here is focus. And what's your all yours, what the opinion of the importance of focus from your experience with google, but also looking at these other companies, when you at google and you have so much money in the bank, there are so many things that you could do and could build like an endlessness you can take on anybody and basically went in most markets. How do you think about focus on google?

Focus is important, but it's misinterpreted in google. We spent an awful lot of time telling people we wanted to do everything, and everyone said, you can't pull off everything. And we said, yes, we can.

We have the underlying architectures. We have the underlying reach. We can do this if we can imagine, and build something is really transformed.

And so the idea was not that we would somehow focus on one thing like surge, but rather that we would take areas of great impact and importance to the world, many which were free. By the way, this is not necessarily revenue driven. And that work, you'll give you an example.

There's an old saying in the business school that you should focus on, on what you're good out and you should simplify your product lines and you should get rid of product lines that don't work. Intel famously had A A, the terms called ARM. It's a risk a chip.

And this particularly risk chip was not compatible with the architecture that they were using for most of their products. And so they sold IT. Unfortunately, this was a terrible mistake because the architecture that they sold off was needed for mobile phones with low memory, that with small batteries and and heat problems.

And so far it's on. And so that decision, that faithful decision now fifteen years ago, meant that they were never a player in the mobile space. And once they made that decision, they tried to take their expensive and expensive and plex chips, and they kept trying to make cheaper and smaller versions.

But the core decision, which is to simplify, simplify to the wrong and outcome. Today, if you look at giving an example, the n video chips use an ARM CPU. And in these two powerful G P, S called the b two hundred, they don't use the intel chip.

They use the ARM chip because I was for their needs faster. IT would never have predicted that fifteen years ago. So at the end, maybe was just a mistake, but maybe they didn't understand in the way they were organized as a CoOperation that ultimately battery power would be as important as computing power, right? He came out of batteries, and that was the discriminate. So one way to think about IT is if you're going to have these sort of simple rules, you Better have a model what happens in the next five years. So the way I teach this is just write down what you look like in five years.

Just try look like in five years, your company.

whatever. IT is right? So let's talk about the eye. What will be true in five years.

then it's gonna be a loss matter.

That is a lot smarter. But how many companies will there be in A I? Will there be five or five thousand or fifty thousand.

fifty thousand?

How many big companies will there be? Will there be new companies? What will they do? right? So I just told you, my view is that eventually you and I will have our own A I assistant, which is a polymath, which is incredibly smart, which helps us guide through the information overall that is today.

Who's going to build that? Make a prediction. What kind of hard work will beyond make a prediction, how fast will the network be? Make a prediction, write all these things down and then have a discussion about what to do that.

What is interesting about our industry is IT. When something like the PC comes along or the internet, I lived through all of these things. They are such broad phenomenon that they really do create a whole new lake, a whole new ocean, whatever metaphor you want.

People said, well, wasn't that cypher? No, cypher is not such a platform. Crypto is not transformative to daily life for everyone.

People are not running around all they using cypher tokens rather than currency. Crypt to is a specialized market. By the way, it's important and it's interesting.

It's not a horse zonal transformative market. The arrival of alien intelligence in the form of savants that you use is such a transformer of thing, because IT touches everything. IT touches you as A A producer, as a star, as a narrative.

IT touches me as an executive. IT will ultimately help people make money in the stock market. People are working on that.

There are so many ways in which the technology is transformative to start you in your case, when you think about your company, whether it's little edibility or really big one, it's fundamental. How do you apply A I to accelerate what you're doing, right? In your case, for example, here you have, I think, the most successful show in the U.

K. By far right. So how do we use A I to make IT more successful? Well, you can ask you to distribute you more right to make, uh, narrative tips, to summarize to to come up with new insights, to suggest, to have fund create contest. There are all sorts of ways that you can ask. I will give you a simple example.

If I were a politician, thankfully i'm not um and I knew my district, I would say, to the computer write a program so PS i'm saying to the computer you write a program which goes to all of the constitution in my interest did figures out roughly what they care about and if and then send them a video which is labelled you of me digitally so not fake， but it's kind like my intention, where I explained to them how important I, as their constituent, have made the bridge work, right? And you said there to go. That's crazy, but is possible. Now, politicians have not discovered this yet, but they will, because ultimately, politicians around a human connection, and the quicker st way to have the communication is to be on their phone talking about something that they care about .

when ChatGPT first launched, and they sort a skilled, rapidly to hundred million users. There was all these articles saying that the founders of google had rushed back in, and IT was a crisis situation at google, and there was panic. And there was two things that I thought. First is, is that true? And second thing was, how did google not come to market first with a ChatGPT style product?

Well, remember the google also. That's the old question of why did you not do facebook? Well, the answer is we were doing everything else, right? So my defensive answer is that google has eight or nine or ten billion user clusters of activity.

It's pretty good, right? It's pretty hard to do, right? I'm very proud of that and very proud of what they are doing now. Um my own view is that what happened was google was working in the engine room and a team out of OpenAI figured out a technology called A R H F. And what happened was when they did GPT three and G, P, the t is transformer, which was invented google.

When they did IT, they had some of this interesting idea, and then they own, then they sort of casually started to use humans to make IT Better. An ri chef refers to the fact that you use humans at the end to do A B tests where humans can actually say what this is Better, and then the system learns cursive ly from human training at the end. That was a real breakthrough, right? And, uh, I joke with my OpenAIr f riends t hat y ou w ere s itting a round o n o n t hursday n ight y ou t urn t he t hing o n a nd y ou g o, holy crap, look how good this thing is.

IT was a real discovery, right that none of us expected certainly I did not um and once they had IT um the opening up people, sam and mirror and and so for about this they didn't really understand how good IT was. They just turned IT on and all of that they had a huge success's aster because they were working on GPT four at the same time. IT was an after thought and is a great story, because IT just shows you that even the brilliant founders do not necessarily understand how powerful what they are.

What they've done is now today, of course, you have uh GPT four o um basically a very powerful model. From open you have german I one point five, which is clearly and clearly roughly equivalent, if not Better insert areas um the gami ze more multi model for example and then you have other players, lama lama architecture L L L L A M A H does not down for lamas is large language models um out of facebook and a number of others. Uh there's a start up called anthropic uh which is very powerful founded by one of the inventors of GPT three um and a home bunch of people and they form of their company.

Knowing they were going to be that successful, that is interesting. They actually formed as part of their incorporation that they were a public benefit corporation because they were concerned that they would be so powerful that some evil CEO in the future would force them to go for revenue. Is supposed to have, uh, world word goodness. So the teams, when they were doing this, they understood the power of what they were doing and they anticipated the level of impact. And they were right.

Do you think if Steve jobs is an apple, there be on that list? Um how do you think the company would be different?

Well, tim has done a fantastic job and sea legacy. And what's interesting is Normally the successor is not as good as the founder. But somehow tim having worked with Steve for so long and having set the culture, having Steve, if ve managed to continue the focus on the user of this incredible safety, focus in terms of apps and so far and so on, and they remain a relatively closed culture. I think all of those would have maintained as they tragically died. Ah I was a good friend, but the the important point is Steve, Steve believe very strongly and when I call close systems where you only control all your intellectual property and here and I would battle over open versus closed because I came from the other side and I did this with respect, I don't think they would have changed that .

and they changed that.

No, no. I think still apple is still basically a single company is vertically integrated. The rest of the industry is largely more open.

I think everyone, especially the wake of the recent launch of the iphone sixteen, which i've got somewhere here, has this expectation that apple wood, if Steve was still life taken some big bold bet in. And I think about you know tims ten year, he's been a fantastic c job of keeping that company going running IT with this, with the principles of Steve jobs.

But has there been many big bulls successful bets? A lot of people point in the airports, which a great, great product. But I think A I is one of those things where you go. I wonder if Steve would have understood .

the significance of IT and see was that smart but he I would never know he's a elon level intelligence. When even I worked together very closely, which was fifteen years ago for his death, um he was very frustrated at the success of M P four over uh M V format files and he was really mad about IT and I said, no, maybe that's where you were closed in quick time was not generally well as that's not true.

My team, you know, our product is Better and so IT so his core belief system, he's an artist, right? And and given the choice that we used to have this debate, where do you want to be severely? Or do you want to be porch? Do you want to be set, you know, the general motors? Or do you want to be B, M W? And he said, I want to be A B M W.

And during that time, apple d's margins were twice as high as the P. C. Company is. And I said, Steve, you don't need all that money you're generating, all this cash you're giving IT to your, to your shareholder.

And he said, the principle of our profitability and our value and our brand is this is this luxury brand, right? So that's how we thought now would how would how would he I change that? Everything that he would have done with apple today would be A, I inspired, but I would be beautiful. That's the great gifting hand because .

I I think siri, I was almost a glimpse at at what A I now kind of looks like IT was a glimpse of. I guess the ambition was we've all been chatting to the same thing, which is, I think most people would agree is largely useless unless you're trying to figure out something super, super simple. But now I was this weekend and I said, i'll SAT there with my my girlfriend's family there, speaking to this voice activated device. And I was solving problems for me, almost, in tani ously, that are very complex and translating them into things.

And portugal come. Welcome to the replacment for theory. And again, would still have done that cRicky, I don't know. H it's very clear that the first thing apple needs to do is have theory be replaced by an A I and call that theory hiring.

We're doing a lot of hiring in our companies at the moment, and we're going back in ford on what the most important principles are when IT comes to hiring, making lots of mistakes, sometimes, getting things right, sometimes. What do I need to know as a lunch? Now when IT comes to hiring.

startups, by definition, are huge risk takers. You have no history, you have no incoming cy. You have all these competitors by definition and you have no time. So in the startup, you want to you want to um prioritize intelligence and quickness over experience and sort of stability. You want to take risks on people.

And the great and part of reason why startups are full of Young people is because Young people often don't have the baggage of executive and around for a long time. But more importantly, they are willing to take risks. So IT used to be that you could predict whether our company was successful by the age of the founders in in that twenty and thirty year old period, the company would be hugely successful startups, a wigg.

They try something, they try something else, and they're very quick to discard an old idea. Corporations spent years with a belief system that is factually false and they don't actually change their opinion until after you've lost all the contracts. And if you go back all the science, were there nobody one of the talk to them? Nobody cared about the product, right? And yet they kept pushing IT. So um if you're a CEO of a larger company, what you want to do is basically figure out how to measure this innovation so that you don't waste le at a time. Bill gates have a saying a long time ago, which was that the most important thing to do is to feel fast but that they Carry in from his perspective as the CEO of microsoft founder microsoft um that he wanted everything to happen and he wanted to feel quickly and that was his theory and .

you agree with that theory. I do fast.

Failure is important because you can see IT in a nice r way but fundamental. Um at google, we have the seventy twenty ten rule that learn. So you came up with seventy percent of the core business, twenty percent on a Jason business .

and ten percent and other is .

the core business means search as a Jason business means something that you're trying like a cloud business is worth. And the temper that is some new idea. So google created the sanko google x.

The first product to built was called google brain, which is one of the first machine learning architectures. This actually proceeds deep mind. Google brain was used to power the A I system.

We will brains team of ten or fifteen people generated ten, twenty, thirty, forty billion dollars of extra profits over a decade. So that pays for a lot of failures. Right then. He had a whole bunch of other, other ideas that seem very interesting to me. They didn't happen for one or another and they would cancel them and and then the people will get reconfigured.

And one of the great things about silicon valley is is possible to spend a few years on a really bad idea and get cancelled, if you will, and then get another job. Having learned all about my joke is the best. C, F, O is one who's just gone bankrupt. Because the one thing that CFO is knocking that happened .

is to go backward again. Yeah, what on this put of culture as well? Google, such a big company, must experience a bunch of micro cultures.

One of the things that i've always, i've kind of studied IT as as a cautionary tale, is the story of T. G. I. effort. Google, which was this sort of weekly all hands meeting where employees could ask the executives whatever they want to to and the articles are around and say that IT was eventually would have changed or cancelled because IT became unproductive is .

more complicated than that. So their instruction rated T G F um which I have a and we had fun. Uh there was a sense of humor. IT was all of the record.

Um a famous example is the V P of sales which I was so me um was always predicting lower revenue than we really had which is called sandbagging. So we got a sandbag, and we made him stand on the sandbag in order to present his numbers. IT was just fun, humorous.

You know, we had switch and things like that at at some size. You don't have that level of intimacy and you don't have that level of privacy. And what happened was there were leaks are eventually there was a presentation.

I don't remember the specifics where the presentation was ongoing. And someone was leaking the presentation live to a reporter and somebody came on stage said, we have to stop now. I think that was the moment where the company got serve too big.

I I heard about story that um because from what I understand this might be totally wrong. But it's just think that google employees had told me was that there wasn't many sinkings firings of google s wasn't many layoff s wasn't really a culture of layoff s. And I guess, I guess in part that because the company was so successful that IT didn't have to make those extreme, extremely tough decisions that we think a lot of companies make today.

I reflect on ellos running of twitter. When he took over twitter, the of the same, the threat, the story goes, that he went to the top floor and basically said, anyone who's willing to work hard is committed to these values. Please come to the top of, or everyone else.

You're fired. This of extreme culture of calling and people being sort of activists at work. And I want to know if there's any truth in that.

There's some um in in google case um we had a position of why lay people off just don't hire them in the first place is much, much easier. And so in my tenure, the only layoff we did was uh two hundred people in the sale structures right after the two thousand epidemic. And I remember that is being extremely painful, right? IT was the first time we had done IT.

So we took the position, which is different at the time, that you shouldn't have an automatically off. What would happen is that there was a belief at the time that every six months or nine months, you should take the bottom five percent of your people and lay them off. Problem with that is you assuming the five percent correctly identified and furthermore, even the lowest performers have knowledge and value to the CoOperation that we can take IT.

So we took a very much more positive view of our employees, employees like that, and we have very well and so often so on. I think that the the cultural issues ultimately have been addressed but during there was a period of time where there were um because of the free willing nature nature of the company, they were an offset of internal distribution list which had nothing to do with the company. What does that mean? They were distribution list on topics of war, peace, politics so forth.

with the .

distribution, a distribution, like an email think of, is a message board, roughly speaking, thing of his message boards for employees. And I remember that one point, somebody to discover that there were one thousand such message words, and the company ultimately clean that up because companies are not like universities and that they are in fact all sorts of laws about what you can say and what you cannot say and so forth.

And so for example, the majority of the employees were uh democrats in the american optical system. And I made a point, even though I am a democrat, to try to protect the small number of republicans because I thought they had a right to be employees too. They had to be very careful in the CoOperation to establish what what does speech mean within the corporation. And um what you what you are hearing as voguish is really can be undershoot is what are the appropriate topics on workday in in a work venue should you be discussing? My own view is stick to the business and then please feel free to go to the bar, screen reviews, talk everybody, a strong believer in free speech, but within the corporation, let's just stick to the CoOperation in its course.

Because I was hear these stories about, I think, in more recent times in the last year or two of people coming to work just for the free breakfast, protesting outside that morning.

coming back into the building for lunch, as best I can tell, that all band clean up.

I did also hear that that I had been cleaned up because I think IT was addressed in a very hike conviction way, which meant that IT IT was also seen to how did how do you think about competition for everyone, that building something? How much should we be focusing on our petition?

I ong ong recommend fox on competition and said, focusing on building a product. And you say, how can you do that without knowing the competition? Well, if you study the competition, you're wasting your time. Try to solve the problem in a new way and do IT in a way where the customers are delighted. Uh, running google, we seldom looked at what our competitors we're doing.

What we did, we spend awful of time, is what is possible for us to do? What can we actually do from our current situation? And sort of the running ahead of everybody turns out to be really important.

What about deadlines?

Well, uh Larry established the principle of um OKR s which were objectives and key results. And every quarter, Larry would actually write down all the metrics and he was tough and he would say that if you got to seventy percent of my numbers, that was good and then we would grade based on our above the seventy percent, or you below the seventy percent. And IT was harsh, and IT works. You, you have to measure to get things done, the CoOperation. And there was, everyone kind of looks good, makes all sorts of claims, feels good about themselves, but IT doesn't have an impact.

What about business plans? Should we be writing business .

plans and found this? Google rode a plan, was run a. And I saw IT years later, and he was actually correct. And I told soler that that this is probably the only business plan ever written for a CoOperation that was actually correct in hindsight. So what I preferred to do, and this is how I teach her, sanford, is try to figure out what the world looks like in five years and then try to figure out what you're going to do in one year, and then do IT, right? So if you can basically say, this is the direction, these are the things we're going to achieve within one year, and then run against that is hard goals, not simple goals, but hard goals, then you'll get there.

And the general rule, listen, a consumer business is if you can get an audience of ten or hundred million people, you can make lots of money, right? So if you give me any business that has no revenue and one hundred million people, I can find a way to monetize that with advertising, sponsorships and donations and so on. And so focus on getting the user right, and everything else will follow. The google phrase is focus on the user and everything else is handled.

So jin, Larry. You work with them for many decades. You're two decades. What made them special?

Frankly, raw. I Q. They were just smarter than everybody, really.

yeah. And a circus case. His father was a very brilliant russian mathematician. His mother was also highly technical. His families is all very technical and he was clever and clever mathematics. Uh, Larry, a different personality, but similar.

So an example would be that there and I in his office and we're writing on the White board the long list about what we're going to do and he says we're going to do this and this, and I said, okay, agree with you. I don't agree with you. We make this very long less.

And sergey is out playing volleyball until he runs in his little volleyball shorts and little shirt, all sweating. He looked at our list. So this is the stupid thing i've ever heard.

And then he suggest five things, and he was exactly right. So we arrested the light boards. And then he, of course, and that became the strategy of the company. So over and over again, IT was the IT was their brilliance and their ability to see things that I didn't see, that I think that we'd drove IT.

Can you teach that?

I don't know. I think you can teach listening. And but I think most of us get caught up in our own ideas.

And we are always surprised that something new happened. Like i've just told you that i'm i've been an A R A long time. I'm still surprised at the rate of my favorite current products called notch L M. And for the listener's note, am is an experimental product out of google deep mind to basically gi. It's based on the german I back end and he was trained with high quality podcast voices terrifying and you basically give IT a so what i'll do is um i'll write something that again I don't write very well and i'll ask german I to rewrite IT to be more beautiful okay i'll take that text and i'll put IT in no book I and IT produces this interview between a man and a woman um who don't exist and for fun what I do is I play this in front of an audience and I wait and see if anyone figures out that the humans are not human. It's so good they don't figure that out.

So this is the big thing that everyone's make a big fuss about. You can go to load this conversation now. It's going to go out and creative conversation that's in a podcast style where there's a male voice and a female voice and they're analyzing the content and coming up with their own kind of just creative content. So you can go and .

push play right here we are back thursday. Get ready for a week. Three.

the injury report this .

week was a duced. It's a long one. Yeah IT is and IT has the potential to really shake things up. So for that, to me, the nobo L M is my ChatGPT moment of this year.

IT was mine as well. And it's much of the reason that I was deeply confused because as a pod caster who's building a media company, we have an office down the road, twenty five thousand square y. We have studios in the rebuilding audio, video content at this in the door of this new world where the cost of production of content goes to like zero. And i'm trying to navigate how to play as a media owner.

So first, you what's really going on is you're moving from scarcity to ubiquity. You're moving from scarcity to abundance. So one way to understand the world I live in as its scale computing generate abundance and abundance allows new strategies.

In your case, it's obviously you should do you're a really famous pod caster and you have lots of interesting gas, simply have this fake set of podcast criticize you and your guests, right? You're essentially just amplifying your reach. They're not going to a substitute for your honest brilliance and Christmas here, but they're going to accentuate that.

They will will they will be entertaining. They will summarize IT so that IT amplifies your reach. If you go back to my basic argument that A, I will double the productivity of everybody, or more. So in your case, you'll have choices, many podcast, what I do for examples, I write something and i'll say, have IT respond. And then the gamine, i'll say, make IT longer and he adds more stuff and got, I do this in like thirty seconds.

Then how powerful in your case, take one of these uh, lengthy interviews you do ask the system to Anita to amplify IT and then feed that into fake pod casters and see what they say. You have a whole new head of audiences that love them more than you, but it's all from you. That's the key idea here.

I worry because there's going to be potentially billions of people costs that are loaded a to R S feedle around the world and it's all gonna to chipper away. You know the the mote .

that I so many people have believed that but I think the evidence is is not true um when I started at google there was this notion that celebrity would go away and there will be this very long tale of micro markets know specialist, because finally you could hear the voices of everyone and we're all very democratic and liberal in our view that the what really happened was networks accentuated the best people, and they made more money, right? You went from being a local personality to a national personality to a global personality.

And the global are really big thing. You need lots of money and lots of players. So you, as, uh, as a celebrity, are competing against a global group of people, and you need all the help you can to maintain your position. If you do IT well by using these AI technology, you will become more famous, not less famous.

Genesis is I i've had a lot of conversations with a lot of people about the subject of A I. And when I read your book and I watch you do series of interviews on this, some of the quotes that you said really stood out to me. One of them I wrote down here, which comes from your book, genesis, on page five, the advent of artificial intelligence is, in all of you, a question of human survival.

Yes, that is our view.

So why is the question of humans survival?

A ee is going to move very quickly.

It's moving so much more quickly i've ever seen of money than over people, the impact, the need, what happens when the A I systems are really running key parts of our world? What happens when A I is making the decision? My my simple example, you have a car which is A I controlled and you have a emergency or uh a ladies about to give birth through something like that and they get in the car and there's no override switch because the system is optimized around the whole as opposed to his or her emergency.

But we as humans accept various forms of efficiency, including urgent ones for A S systemic efficiency. You could imagine that the google engineers would design a perfect city that would perfectly Operate every self driving car on every street, but would not then allow for the exceptions that you need in such a in such an important issue. So that's a trivial example um and one which is well understood of how it's important that these things represent human values, right that we we have to actually articulate what does that mean.

So my favorite one is all this misinformation. Um democracy is pretty important. Democracy is by far the best way to to live and Operate societies.

Look at the plenty of examples of this. None of us want to work in a century and authoritarian, entitled oration. So you Better figure out away where the misinformation components do not screw up proper political examples.

Another example is question of our teenagers and help their mental development and growing up into these societies. I don't want them to be constantly depressed. There's a lot of evidence that dates around twenty fifteen when all the social media algorithms changed from linear feeds to targeted fees.

Other's they went from time to this is what you want. This is what you want. That hyper focus has ultimately narrow people's um political views as as we discussed but more importantly, it's produced more depression and anxiety.

So all the studies indicate that basically if you time IT to roughly, then when people are coming to age, they're not as happy with their lives, their behaviors, their opportunities for this. And the best explanation is that was an algorithmic change. And remember that these systems, they're not just collections of content.

They are algorithm ally deciding you know the algorithm decides what the outcome is for humans. We have to manage that. Um what we say in many different ways in the book is that you have sort of a choice of whether the um the algorithms will advance.

That's not a question. The question is, are we advancing with IT and do we have control over IT? Um there are so many examples where you could imagine an A I system could do something and more efficiently, but at what cost, right?

Um I should mention that there is this discussion about something called agi artificial general intelligence. And there is this discussion in the press among many people, that agi occurs on a particular day, right? And this is sort of a popular concept that on us, pretty good day.

Five years from now or ten years from now, this thing will occur. And all of sun, we're gone to have a computer that's just like us. But even quicker, that's unlikely to be the path.

Much more likely are these waves of innovation in every field. Better psychologist, Better, right? You see this with ChatGPT already. Better scientist is the notion of an A I scientist is working with the A I real scientists to accelerate the development of more eye science. People believe all of this will come, but IT has to be under human control.

Do you think IT will be?

I do. And part of the reason, as I and others have worked hard to get the government to understand this is very strange to my entire career was one for you fifty years. The um we've never asked for government for help because asking the government help is basically just a disaster.

In the view of the technical dusty, in this case, the people who invented IT collectively came to the same view that they need to be guard rails on this technology because of the potential for harm. The most of this one is, how do I kill myself? Give me recipes to hurt of the people, that kind of stuff.

There's a whole community now in this, in this part of the industry, which are called trust and safety groups. And what they do is they actually have women test the system before IT gets released to make sure the harm that IT might have in IT is suppressed. Is literally will answer the question when you .

play this word in your brain, you've you've been in the tech industry for a long time. And from looking at your work, you feels like you're describing this is the most of transformative, potentially harmful technology that humans are really ever seen, maybe alongside the nuclear bomb, guess, but some would say even potentially worse because of the nature of the intelligence in this autonomy.

You must have moments where you you think for into the future, and your thoughts about that future aren't so rosy. Have this moment. yes.

But but let's let's answer the question I said, think five years. In five years, you'll have two or three more terms of the crank of these large models. These large models are scaling with ability that is unprecedented, is no evidence that the scaling has laws.

As the cold have begun to stop, they will eventually stop. But we're not there yet. Each one of these cranks looks like it's a factor of two, factor three, factor four of capability.

So let's just say turning the crank, all of these systems get fifty times, one hundred times more powerful in love itself. That's a very big deal because those systems will be capable of physics and math. You see this with all that one and um OpenAI all the other things that are occurring now.

What are the dangers? Well, is the most obviously of cyber tax. There's evidence that the raw model sees the ones that have not been released can do Better called day zero attacks as well or Better than humans.

A day zero attack is an attacks unknown. They can discover something new and how do they do IT? They just keep trying because they are computers and they have have nothing else to do.

They don't sleep, they don't eat, they just turn them on and they just keep going. Um so so cyber is an example where everybody he's concerned. And the one is biology.

Viruses are relatively easy to make, and you could imagine coming up with really bad viruses. This is a whole team and part of a commission. We're looking at this try to make sure that doesn't happen.

I already mention this information. Another probably negative, but we'll see, is the development of new forms of warfare. I've written extensively on how more is changing. And the way to understand historic war is that is the state, typically the the soldier with the gun now on one side.

And so for world war trenches, you see this, by the way, in you in the ukraine fight today, where the ukraine es are holding on violently against the russian answer, a but heard of mono 和 mono know man against man set of all of the stereo pes of war。 So in a drone world, which is the sort of the fastest way to build new robots is to build drones. You'll be sitting in a commands center in some office building connected by a network, and you'll be doing harm to the other side while you're drinking your coffee, right?

That's a change in the logic of war and is applicable to both sides. I don't think anyone quite understands how war will change, but I will tell you that in in the russian ukraine war you're seeing a new form of warfare being invented right now right um both sides have lots of drones. Tanks are no longer very useful.

Five thousand or drone can kill a five million or tank um so it's called the kill ray show to basically it's drawn on drone. And so now people are trying to fear how how to have one drone destroy the other drone, right? This will ultimately take over war and conflict in our world in total.

in mention role models. This is a concept that I don't think people understand exists. The idea that there's some other model bats the role model that is capable of much worse than the thing we play with on our computers every day.

It's important to stop how these things work. So you the way these algorithms work because they have complicated a training things where they suck all the information and they uh, when we currently believe we've sort of suck all of the written word is available, that doesn't an there is more. But we have we've literally done such a good job of sucking everything that humans i've ever written.

It's all in these big computers. When I say computers, I don't mean computers, I mean supercomputers with enormous memories. And the scale is mine barone. Uh and of course, there's this compete called in video, which makes the chips, which is now one of the most valuable companies in the world, surprisingly so incredible successful because they're so central to this revolution and good for jenson in his team.

So the important thing is when you do this training, IT comes out with a rama, right? IT takes six months and you know you way to for us a day, you can watch IT. IT gets close to there's a measured that they use called the loss function.

When he gets to a certain number, they say good enough. So then they go, what do we have right? What do we do right?

Um so the first thing is let's figure out what he knows. So they have a set of test. And of course he knows also was a bad things, which they immediately then tell you not to answer. To me, the most interesting question is, in over five year period, these systems will learn things that we don't know.

They learn how will you test for things that you don't know? They know the answer in the industry is that they have incredibly clever people who sit there and they fitted, literally fiddle with the networks and say, i'm going to i'm going to see if he knows this. I'll see if I can do this and then they make a list and they say, that's good.

That's not so good, right, to all of these transformations. So for example, you can show you a picture of a website that they can generate the code to generate a website. All of those were not expected. They just happened to called emergent behavior.

Scary.

scary but exciting. And so far um the systems have held the governments have worked well. Um these trust and safety groups are working here in the U K.

Um one year ago was the first trust and safety conference. Um the government had a fantastic job. The team IT was assembled was the best of all the country teams here in the U.

K. Um now was happening as these are happening around the world. The next one is in france in early february. And I expect to some very good result.

Do you think we going to have to god, I mean, you talk about this, but do you think we're going to have to god, these role models with with guns and tanks and machining and stuff?

I worked for the secretary of fans for a while in mine in google. You could spend twenty percent your time. One of the things so I worked for the security defense.

You try to understand the U. S. military. And one of things that we did, we have visited to plutonium um factory plutonium is incredibly dangerous and incredibly secret. And so this particular base is inside of another base. So you go through the first set of machine guns and then you have Normal thing, and then you go into the special place with even more machines, guns, and even it's so secure.

So the the metaphor is, do you fundamental believe that the computers that i'm talking about will be of such value in such danger that we'll have their own data center with their own guards, which of course, might be computer guards. But the important thing is that it's so special that IT has to be protected in the same way that we protect nuclear arms and proof and promo. An alternative model is to say that this technology will spread pretty broadly.

They'll be many such places. If it's a small number groups, the governments will figure out a way to do deterrence and they'll figure a way to do non clifter ation. So i'll make something up.

I'll say there's a couple in china. There's a few in the U. S.

Is one in in britain. Of course, we all tied together between the U. S. In britain and maybe in a few other places. That's a manual problem.

On the other thing, let's imagine that that power is ultimately so easy to comply that IT spreads globally and it's successful to, for example, terrorists. Then you have a very serious proliferation problem, which is not yet soft. This is against speculation .

because I think a lot about adversity in china and russia and putin, and I think I know you talk about them being a few years behind, maybe one or two years behind, but they're eventually going to get there. They're eventually going to get to the point where they have these large language models with these eyes that can do these days zero attacks on our nation and they don't have the same in like sort of social incentive structure for the communist country to protect into god against these things. You know, worried about what chinese is going to.

I am worried, and i'm worried because you're going into a space of great power without fully defined boundary, is what? kissing? And we talk about this in the work.

The geneticist book is fundamental about what happens to society with the arrival of this new intelligence. And the first book we did, A G. A.

I was right before ChatGPT. So now everybody kind of understands how powerfully things are. Talk about now you understand IT.

So once these things show up, who's gonna run them? Who's going to be in charge, how they be used. So for my perspective, I believe at the moment anyway that china will behave relatively responsibly.

And the reason is that it's not in their interest to have free speech in every case in china when they have a choice of giving freedom to their citizens or not, they choose non freedom. And I know this because I spent through all that, I spent all the time dealing with them. So IT sure looks to lighten me like the chinese A I solution will be different from the west because of that fundament bias against freedom of speech. Because these things are easy, they make a lot of .

noise that they'll probably still make A I weapons.

So well, on the weapons side, you have to assume that every new technology is ultimately strengthens in a war. Um the tank was invented were were one at the same time you had the initial forms of uh, airplanes. Much of the second war war was an air campaign which essentially built many, many things.

And if you look at the there's A A book called freedoms forge about the american structure according to the book. They ultimately got to the point where they could build two or three airplanes a day at scale. So in an emergency, nations have enormous power.

I get us all the time if everyone is, if anyone's going to have a job left to do, because this is the disruption of intelligence and whether it's people driving cars today. I mean, we saw the tesler announcement of the robot taxi, whether it's accountants, lawyers and everyone in between us to are we gone to have jobs left .

but this question has been asked for two hundred years um there there were a lud eyes here in britain way back down. And inevitably when these technologies come along, there's all these fears about them. Indeed with a lot there were riots and people you are destroyed, the looms and all of this kind of stuff.

But somehow we got through IT. So um my own view is that there will be a lot of job dislocation, but there will be a lot more jobs, not fewer jobs. And here's why we have a demographic problem in the world, especially the developed, developed world, where we're not having enough children.

That's well understood. Uh, furthermore, we have a lot of older people and and the Younger people have to care of the older people and they have to be more productive. If you have Young people who needs to be more productive, the best way to make them more, more productive is to give them more tools to make them more productive.

Whether it's my machine is that goes from a manual machine into A C N C. Machine, or in in the more modern case of a knowledge worker who can achieve more objectives, we need that productivity group. If you look at asia, which is the center piece of manufacturing, they have all the cheap labor, but it's not so cheap anymore.

So you know what they did? They added robotic assembly loans. So today, when you go to china, in particular, also to in japan and korea, the manufacture largely done by robots.

why? Because their demographic s are terrible and the cost of labor is too high. So the future is not fewer jobs is actually a lot of jos are unfilled with people who may have a jobs skill mismatch, which is why education are important.

Now, what are examples of jobs to go away? Automation has always got rid of jobs that are dangerous, physically dangerous, or ones which are essentially too repetitive and too boring for humans. Or give an example, security guards.

IT makes sense that security guards would become robotic because it's hard to be a security guard. You falsely didn't know quite what IT. And these systems can be smart enough to be very, very good security.

These are, these are important sources of income for these people. They're going to have to find another job. Another example in in the media in a hollywood, everyone's concern that A I is going to take over their jobs.

All the evidence is the embers and here's why um the star is still get money. The producer still make money. They still do you with their movie, but their cost of making the movie is lower because they use more they use for examples, synthetic backdrops.

So they don't have to build the set. Um they can do some there's makeup now. There are job losses there.

So the people who make the make make the set and do the makeup, we're gonna to go back into construction and personal care, by the way, in america, and I think is to hear there's an enormous shorters of people who can do high quality, right? Those people will have jobs. They're just different and they may not be in los Angeles. Am I gonna to .

interface with this technology? And am I going to have to get a newer link in my brain? Because you you go over the subject of their being, these one of two species of humans, potentially ones that do have a way to incorporate themselves more with artificial intelligence, knows that don't and and if is the case, what is the time horizon than you've you have that happening?

I think neural link is much more specular because you're dealing with direct brain connection and nobody's going to drill on my brain until IT needs that. Trust me, I suspect you feel the same. Um I I guess my my overall view is that.

You will not notice how much of your world has been corrected by these technologies, because they will produce greater delight. If you think about IT, a lot of life is inconvenient to fix this, call this, make this happen. AI system m should make all that teams.

You should be able to wake up in the morning and have coffee and not have a care in the world and have the computer help you. Have a great day. This is true of everyone.

Now what happens to your, to your profession? Well, as we said, no matter how good the computers are, people are going to want to care about other people. In other example, let's imagine you have formula, and you have formula one with humans in IT.

And then you have an a robot, formula one, which, where the cars are driven by equal a robot, is anyone gone to go to the robotic formula on? I don't think so because of the drama, the human achievement and so forth. Do you think that when they run the marathon here in london, they're gona have robots running with humans? Of course not right.

Of course the robots can run faster than humans. It's not interesting what is interesting to see human achievement. So I think the commentators who say, oh, they want any jobs, you won't care.

I think they miss the point that we care a great deal about each other as human beings. We have opinions. You have an a detailed opinion about me having just met me, met me right now.

And I think we just naturally set up your face, your mannish and over we can describe IT. All right? The robot shows up was like, oh my god, another robot.

How boring. Why is some old man working on the the founder of open line, one of cofounder of open out, working on universal basic income projects like world coin, then.

well, worker is not the same thing as universal bitcoin, universal basic income. There is a belief in the tech industry that IT goes something like this, the politics of abundance. What we do is going to create so much abundance that most people won't have to work, and theyll be a small number.

Groups that work are typically these people themselves. And there be so much surplus, everyone can live like a million, and everyone will be happy. I completely think this is false. I think none of what I just told you false, but all of these U B, I ideas come from this notion that humans don't behave the way we actually do. So I am a critic of this view.

I believe that that we as humans, so an example is um we're onna make lego the legal professions much easier because we can automate much of technical work of lawyers. Does that mean we going to have fewer laws? No, the current lawyers will just do more laws theyll do more.

They'll add more complexity. The system doesn't get easier. The humans become more sophisticated in their application of the principles.

We are naturally specially uh we have to think called um basically uh retrial altruism m that's part of us. But we also have our bad size as well. Those are going away because of.

I want to think about A I, this simple, often think of is, say, my, a ballet is a hundred, and there's this A I that SAT next to me, whose I Q is one thousand. What on earth would you, anna, give Steven.

to do? Because that one thousand IQ would have really bad judged in a couple cases, because remember that the A I systems do not have human values unless it's added, right? I would much rather talk to you about something involving A A moral or human judgment.

Even with the thousand, I wouldn't mind consulting IT. So tell me the history. How is this resolve in the past? How IT is? But at the end of the day, in my view, the core abstracts of humanity would have to do with morals and judgment and beliefs and charisma going away.

Is there a chance that this is the end of humanity?

No um the way humanity dies is much is much harder to a limit all of humanity than you think all the people have looked with on these biological attacks say it's IT takes more than one horrific and dec and so for a to illuminate humanity and and the pain can be very, very high in these moments. Look at the world war one or or two, the hole a door in uh ukraine in nineteen thirties, the notes. And these are horrifically painful things. But we survived, right? We as a as a humanity survived.

And we will I wonder if this is the moment where humans couldn't see past around the corner because, you know, i've heard you talk about how the A S. Will turn to the agents and i'll be able to speak .

to each other and we to understand the um there are points where humans should desert control and i've been trying to think about where are they. I'll give you an example. There's something called reverse to self improvement where the system just keeps getting smarter and smarter and learning more and more things. At some point, if you don't know what it's learning, you should run plug but .

we log sure you can there's a .

power plug g and there's a circuit break er go and turn the circuit breaker off example um there is a there is a scenario theoretical where the system is so powerful IT can produce a new model faster than the previous model was checked OK. That's another innoventions point.

So in each of these cases, um if the if agents and the technical term is called agents, what they really are as large language models with memory and you can begin to can catinat them, you can say this model is this ic fees into this and so can build a very powerful decision systems. We believe this is the the the thing that occurring this year and next year, everyone's doing them. They will arrive the agents today speaking english, you can see what you're saying to each other.

They're not human, but they are communicating what they're doing, english, english, english as long as and is just not to be english, but as long as they are human, understandable. But let's so the thought experiment is, one of the agents says, I have a Better idea. I'm going to communicate in my own language that i'm going to invent.

The only other agents understand that. A good time to hold the bug. What is your .

biggest fear by A I my actual fear .

is different from, you might imagine my my actual fear is we're not gonna dopted IT fast enough to solve the problems that affect everybody, right? And the reason is that the that if you look at every everyone's everyday lives, what do they want? They want safety, they want health care.

They want great schools for their kids. We just work on that for a while. Why do we make people's lives just Better? Because of A I we have all these other interesting things.

Why do we have a um a teacher that is an A I teacher that works with existing teachers in the language of the kid and the culture of the kid to get the kid as sort as they possibly can. Why do we have a doctor? A doctor is assistant really, that enables a human doctor to always know every possible best treatment.

And then based on their current situation with the inventory, as which country is other insurance work, what is the best way to treat that patient? Those are relatively achievable solutions. Why do we have them if you just did education and health care globally? The impact in turns of lifting human potential up would be so great, right? That he would change everything. I wouldn't solve the various other things that would be complained about, about this celebrity, or this misbehavior, or this conflict, or even this war. But he would establish a level playing field of knowledge and opportunity at a global level that has been the dream for decades and decades and decades.

Chuck me that perfect. One of the things that I think about all the time, because my life is quite hectic and busy, is how to manage my energy loading. As podcast, you can have to manage energy in such a way that you can have these particular conversations with experts and subjects you don't understand.

And this is why perfect time has becomes so important in my life. Because previously, when I came to energy products, I had to make a trade off that I wasn't happy with. Typically, if I wanted the energy, I had to deal with high sugar.

I had to deal with jitters and crashes that come along with lot of the mainstream energy products. And I also just had to tolerate the fact that if I want energy, I have to put up with a lot of artificial ingredients, which my body didn't like. And that's why I invested in perfect ted and why they, one of the sponsor, this podcast, IT, is changed, not just my life, but my entire teams life, and for me, is drastically improved my cognitive performance, but also my physical performance.

So if you haven't tried perfect ted here, you must have been living under a rock. Now is the time you can find perfect ted at tesla and way rose or online, where you can enjoy four percent off with code diary. Forty shack out has a perfect ted dot com throughout the pandemic.

I've been a big supporter. IT was a contrarian view, but I think it's now less of a contrarian view that companies and ceos need to be clear in their convictions around how they work. And one of the things that i've being criticize a lot for us, that I am for having people in a room together.

So my companies, we were not remote. We worked together in an office, as I said, down the road from here, and I believe in that because I think of community and engagement and synchronize work. And I think that work now has a responsibility to be more than just a set of tasks you do in a world where we're lonely than ever before.

There's more disconnection and especially for Young people, you don't have families and so on. Having them work alone in a small White box in the big city like london, new york, is Robin them of something which I think is important? This was a bad. This was a control. You it's become less controller as the big tech companies in amErica have started to roll back some of their initial needst reactions to the pandemic there, a lot of them are asking their team members to come back into the office at least a couple of days a week.

What's your point of view on this? So I have a strong you that I want people in an office IT doesn't have to be all one office, but I want them in office and parties for their own benefit. If you're in your twice when I was a Young executive, I knew nothing of what I was doing.

I literally was just lucky to be there. And I learned by hanging out of the watercooler, going to meetings, hanging out, begin the howe. Had I been at home, I wouldn't have any of that knowledge, which ultimately was central.

To my subsequent promotions. So if you're in your twins, you want to be in an office because that's how you're onna get promoted. I think that's consistent with the majority of the people who really want to work from home, have honest problems with commuting and families over the real issues.

The problem with our joint view is, is not supported by the data. The data indicates that productivity is actually slightly higher in, uh, work a when you allow work from home. So you and I really want that company of people sitting around the table and so forth, but the evidence does not support our view. Is that true? IT is absolute true.

Why is facebook? All these companies rolling back there are and look like Snapchat rolling .

back there are working polite, not everyone else um and you most companies are doing various forms of hybrids where is two days or three days or so forth um i'm sure that for the average listener here who works in public security or in a government, they say, well, my god, they are not in the office every every every day. But i'll tell you that at least for the industry that have been studied, there's evidence that allowing that flexibility for work from home increases productivity. I don't happen to like IT, but I want to acknowledge the sciences there.

What is the the advice that you wish you'd got in my age that you didn't .

get the most important thing is probably keep betting on yourself and bet again and roll the dice and roll the dice. What happens in as you get older is you realized that these opportunities were in front of you and you didn't jump for them. Why you run a bad mood, or you know you didn't know who to call or so forth, life can be understood as a series of opportunities that are put before you and their time.

And I was fortunate that I got the call after a number of people had turned IT down to work for learning, for and with learning ga, google changed my life. But that was luck and timing. My one friend of the board at the moment said, I was very thankful to him.

And he said, but you know, you did one thing right? I said why? He said, you said yes.

So your philosopher and life should be to say yes to that opportunity. And yes, it's painful. And yes, it's difficult.

And yes, you have to do with your family. And yes, you have to travel to some foreign. And so get on the airplane and get IT done.

What's the hardest chAllenge you have dealt with in your life?

Well, on the personal side, had i've had a set of personal personal problems and um like everyone does, I think on a business context um. There were moments of google where we had control over an industry that we didn't execute well. The most obvious one of social media um at the time when facebook was found that we had a system which we called orca um which is really, really interesting and somehow we we did everything well but we missed that one right and I would have preferred and that i'll take responsibility for that we have a closing tradition .

on this park where the last guest leaves a question, the next guess not knowing who they're to be IT and the question left for you is what is your non negotiable? Something you do that significant improves everyday life.

Well, what I try to do is I try to be online, and I also try to keep people honest every day. You keep, you hear all source of ideas and and so forth, half of which are right. Have a match on.

I try to make sure I know the truth as best we can determine. IT. Eric.

thank you so much. Thank you. It's such a long way. Your books have shaped my thinking in so many, so many important ways. And I think your new book, genesis, is the single best book i've i've read on the subject to A I because you take a very nuances approach to the subject matters.

And I think sometimes it's tempting to be binary in your way of thinking about this technology, the the process, the cons, but you're writing your videos, your work takes this really baLance but informed approach to IT. I have to say, as an trillion dollar coached book is, well, I highly recommend everybody goes and reads because it's it's just a really great manual of being a leader in the world. Major entrepreneurship gonna ink all five of these books in the comments section low the new book genesis comes out in the U S.

I believe in nineteen of november. Um I don't have the U K. Day but i'll find and put IT in. But it's a book is a critically important book that no bee should avoid. I've been searching for answer that I contain them this book for a very, very long time. I been having very, a lot of conversations on this podcast in search of some of these answers, and I feel clearer about myself, my future, but also the future of society, because I ve read this book.

So thank you for writing IT, and thank you. And let's thank dr. r. He finished the last chapter in his last week of life in his death, but that's how profound he thought that this book was. And I all i'll tell you is that he wanted to set us up for good next fifty years. Having lived for so long and seen both good and evil, he wanted to make sure we continue the good progress for making as a society.

Is there anything he would want to say?

Any answer he gave would take five minutes.

A remarkable man. Thank you. Very thank you. I'm gona let you into a little bit of a secret and you're probably gona think them a little bit way of saying this. But our team are our team because we absolutely obsess about the smallest things even with this podcast.

When we're recording this podcast, we measure the C O two levels in the studio, because if he gets above a thousand parts per million cognitive performance tips, this is the type of one percent improvement we make on our show. And that is why the show is the way IT is by understanding the power compounding one percent, you can absolutely change your outcomes in your life. IT isn't about drastic transformations or quick wins.

It's about the small, consistent actions that have a lasting change in your outcomes. So two years ago, we started the process of creating this beautiful diary, and it's truly beautiful inside. There's lots of pitches, lots of inspiration and motivation as well, some interact developments.

And the purpose of the star is to help you identify, stay focused on developed consistency with the one percent that will ultimately change your life. We have a limited number of one percent hours. If you want to do this with me, then join our waiting list.

I can't guarantee all of you that during the waiting, this will be able to get one. But if you join now, you have a higher chance the waiting list can be found at the dairy dot com. I'll link IT below, but that is the diary dot com.