Trump's Next Online Speech Cop + Doctors vs ChatGPT + Hard Fork Crimes Division
01:09:52 Share

Whether you're starting or scaling your company's security program, demonstrating top notch security practices and establishing trust is more important than ever. Venta automates compliance for sock two. I saw twenty seven O O one and more with venta.

You streamline security reviews by automating questionnaire and demonstrating your security posture with the customer facing trust center. Over seven thousand global companies use venta to manage risk and prove security in real time. Get a thousand dollars of fanta when you go to vento dot com flash hardworking that's vented dot com flash hardworking for a thousand dollars off.

Cassie, what's going on?

Well, I have really changed my feelings about blue sky in the past week. Yeah, you know, before last week, I have to admit, while I did use IT and I did occasionally see stuff on there that I thought was like really funny or interesting, the feed was so political that I had just sort of written IT off, not for me, but done something really powerful. Happened, Kevin, what's which is that my following doubled in four days.

My two, I got a weird number of followers.

I mean, something is happening. Yeah, there is something in the water. yeah. What I think is funny about a Kevin is that my own experience reminded me how truly small minded and pet we are about these social networks because we will speak in such laughing terms about, well, you know, here is kind of the vibe of the site. And, well, this one, the end of suppresses political contents.

I hate all the ads, or there, at the end of the day, IT is, how many followers do I have and how many little internet points do I get for making my little quip? And whatever the number is the highest, that is where you will find me. And that is all to say. Please follow me and.

On cavender attack holmness at the new york times, i'm a former, and this is week. The future of the internet look very different next year, the verge, st. Nei patel joins us to talk about president electrons pick for the head of the fcc.

Then a new study found that ChatGPT outperforms doctors in diagnosing sub diseases. One of the study's authors, doctor adam rodman, is here to discuss the future of medicine. Finally, courts back in session. Kevin, is I for hard for crime division? And you can, at the the end.

sorry, I journ no, no, stop. Where's my gamble?

Well, Kevin, let's get started this week with a car crash. O yeah, yeah. Branded car has crashed into the news. As the next potential chairman of the federal communicators commission?

yes. So obviously in the post election period, president electric has been announcing many of his picks to lead top agencies. And the one that really stuck out to me that I thought was relevant to the topic of our show was his pic to lead the federal communications commission of the fcc, who's amending .

branding car. Yes, branding car is a republican. He spent on the fcc sense seventeen, and uh, the fcc is has five members on IT. And collectively, they do control a broadcast media in this country. They have a lot of legal authority to do that. They have less legal authority over the future of the internet that brenon Carry somebody who has a lot to say about how he thinks the international work.

Ah he's a real activist in in some of these debates about internet regulation. Very vocal about going after big tech as he calls IT for their political bias and what he views as anti conservative censorship. He's constantly picking fights with people online and defending his vision of an internet free of leftwing censorship. And he also starts every day, literally every single day by posting on ex good morning and got sir ah you up.

But so recently I think of fear, somebody who does not agree with bread car on these issues. IT has been easy to dismiss him as a crank, but within a couple of minds, he is going to be a person potentially shaping internet policy in this country. And whenever internet policy issues are in the news, I want to know what nei patel takes.

Ni was my old boss at the verge. He's a cofounder of the verge. He is also a formidable podcasts. Ter, and one of our greatest adversity in the rubble podcasting as a host of decoder and the verge cast. And Miller has been writing recently about what the arrival of branded car as chairman of the fcc could mean for not just the internet, but for speech in amErica in general.

Yet nei thinks that we are headed into a truly scary and dark uh timm's ine with the appointment of brand car at the fcc. And as someone who has not followed brand cars career super closely and curious to understand why he thinks this man poses such a threat to the future of the internet.

we're gonna hear about that. We're also gonna him for maybe some more empower ing thoughts that we can bring into this next chapter in american history. So at that, let's bring in new life.

Welcome to hard fork. Nella is great to have you here. And I want to get started with some basic background information.

shame. Who is a branded car? And why does trump see him as a, quote, warrior for free beach?

Yeah, Brandon. He is extremely online commissioner of the S C C. He was appointed by trump. His view is that the fcc should spend a lot of time regulating not only the traditional preview of the S C C, which is wireless petro and broadcast television, but also big tech companies.

He's about a lot of ideas about how he might get that power and then how we might use that power. But really, what you have is a guy who likes going on fox news and twitter and rAiling about how there's a censorship cartel in big tech and IT should be crushed. And I think Donald trump likes a lot.

So most people, poly, don't think of the fcc as a very powerful agency in their daily life. But there was a time in recent american history where IT did play a larger role. So I tell us a bit about the recent history of the fcc.

So most americans, I think, in twenty twenty four, never think about the fcc. Not especially last five years after he has really receded. IT has been sort of a neutered agency.

No one trusted in any war to do the things people wanted to do. That has not always in the case. If you go back twenty years, the S.

C. C is a cultural force in america. And this really hit its peak with Janet jacks. And at the super boy.

I just in timber.

get he ribs off the course. That about us americans forced to endure like half a second of a nipple, and the world goes crazy. And if you remember the George to be bushed administration, like hated nipples, where john as shot is Georgey bushes turning general.

He covers famous that covers up the statue of lady justice, the dog, because, god forbid, lawyer signals this. Just A A very weird time in america. And all this is based on the dominance of broadcast media.

Most americans at this time get most of the media from broadcast television and radio stations over the airways. right? You hang up in in china, you get N B C or C B S, uh, A B C.

You hang up an intending your car, you get whatever a local radio station and that spectrum owned by the government and it's license start his requesters in the public interest. And that's really where the fcc authority comes from. There's like a long string of supreme court cases that basically add up to the spectrum belongs to the people.

The government gets to make rules based on the spectrum. And the americans do not want nipple es on their public public waves. So like we're going to where a freak out about this.

So this is like the high point of the fcc is a cultural force. And what happens during all of this is the iphone comes out and youtube is introduced in podcasting is introduced americans by a large switched to cable television in huge numbers. They stop watching broadcast v.

They stop consuming this content. So the scc itself says, we have to get out of this first. We have to be out of the speed policing business. Michael powel, whose Colin Powell sun, chairman of the fcc, and he's like we ve got to stop this. These brocas providers, they're not competing with each other or they're not the dominant force, are competing with cable television.

And cable television is not regulated the same way as broadcast television because IT doesn't go over the air on this sort of publicly .

owned spectrum, right? It's on conchas wires, not the public know he's republican. He's his chairman. He's like we're making these really weird rules.

His companies, we have to do this business and we need to get into the business of bad and development. And this has largely been what the fcc has been focused on since twenty eleven and twenty twelve. That's where you get the big net neutrality .

fights and net neutrality just for people who are not steped in the history in the context series. Basically the the rules that say what if you're comcast, if you're an internet service provider, you cannot dictate what goes over your pipes, right? You can impose censorship or speech regulation at the level of the internet service provider. You are just supposed to be like the dumb pipes. That that is essentially the reality, correct?

yes. And that's really predicated on this year that you're a massive competition for international content, which turned out to not be the case for you. You only ended up with a few few giant platforms.

You ended up with youtube in tiktok, in meta like that, those your choices. So something very weird happened along the way of the internet, where we recreated the dominance of broadcast television. Just a handful of giant company is control most of the media in a country without any of the legal foundation for how the government might involved in that content.

So this is like, this is the stage where in we unwound this previous dominant broadcast media regime, where we had pretty overt speech policing all the way to you. Well, if you want to see a nipple, the internet will provide your point. It's time like no one cares anymore, but you still have a lot of people who are very interested in how the platform moderate and the political biases of these platforms.

You have a very active right wing which is insistent that any moderation at all that disfavors them is a moral catastrophe that should be stopped to the full way of the government. And this is where you get brand in car, who up until recently, was a pretty Normal, if somewhat overly online, d regulatory force, right? That's that's his world view.

Until a couple years ago, when the big push for what we should start yelling at mark atter work more to make sure the algorithm favors conservative viewpoints, or at least doesn't overly favor liberal viewpoints. Brennan takes this up. And in the sweep of this history, you can see that what he wants is to be an old school chairman of the F.

C. C. Where if you're mad about nipples on instagram, you can write him a letter and he will have the power to fine or otherwise penalty ze meter. And that is just the wheel that is turning right now.

And so I think that gives us a good sense of like what what this person's world view is and what he might do if he had that sort of power. I guess the next logical question that the light is, does he have this power? Is any of this authority in the fcc? And if it's not, you know what what do you expect them to do about IT?

Yeah, I hope, I hope I did a good job of laying out what feels like a logical pendulum. M swing. yeah. But actually, legally, none of this makes any god instance like in a very real way. He does not have this power, and he was the auto of the project twenty twenty five chapter on the fcc.

And what you might do with that and how you might use IT, notably proto twenty twenty five does not say we should dismantle the S. C. C.

Like he says, we should dismantle every other agency friend dance chapter of product twenty twenty five says the S. C C should get even more power. He should yeah.

more of the chapter that he wrote. I think most people associates project twenty twenty five. This is a sort of document, this road map for a second trumpet administration was put together by, you know, some some conservative thk tanks and groups, anything most people associated with advocating for all backs on abortion and another social and cultural issues.

But and actually does have this sort of interesting part about the fcc and how brand car specifically wants to regulate the internet. And a lot of what's in these chapters, you know, boring or Normal fcc chair stuff about spectrum auction and girl broadband access and stuff. But he starts with this thing about the raining in big tex. So like, what is brand card idea? His big idea for how to rain in big tech for?

I want to be very clear. My personal opinion in Brandon car is this man is in capable of having big ideas. I do not have a high opening, a brunning car, but his idea is the same idea that everyone else has was, which is we should mess with section to thirty until the platforms do what we want.

And section to thirty, for people who are not experts, is the part of the the federal law that basically shields online platforms from legal liability over user atter content rights. If you post something illegal on instagram, the government can go after the poster, but I can't go after the platform. I appreciate that .

you think there are a hard working listeners at this point who don't know it's second to there might be a few a section to that, the stakes of messing with two thirty right now. Or do you want youtube to exist? Those are mistakes to two thirty, right? Do you want any user generated platform to exist at scale? Because if you make google liable for the continent, youtube, there will quickly not be content on youtube.

You will actually turn them back in the cable companies. So these are existent. Al stakes and .

brennan card does not propose getting rid of section to very interesting ly, as some conservatives have done, he doesn't say we should repeal the whole thing. What he says instead is we should sort of limit these court added extras the judges have piled on top of section to thirty to sort of extend the shield granted by the original law.

right? And that's the part that is holy nonsense. Co, like IT is a fantasy. So first of all, section to thirty is a law congress wrote its famously twenty six words long and he has gone to court numerous times in numerous ways in the course of uniformally upheld the idea that these twenty six words are there to keep platforms from being liable for their users post over and over over again.

There is not a bunch of court added additions to this that just doesn't exist in the law. Second of all, even if there was you get around that by congress doing more stuff, you don't get that around that by being an unelected chairman of an agency. Most people don't give a shit about just issuing decrease about what the law means.

That is not that fully, not how works. And the courts' country, particularly conservative justices of this country, do not believe that agency should have any power. So even if you're brand in car, not only does you not have that power, if you try to use that power, he would run right into the conservative legal movement, which is trying to define the agencies in a very specific way.

So just none of this makes sense except, well, if I can wheel this weapon over the big platforms, they might do what I say anyway. And that is a very much the animist of every attempt to modify to thirty. No one's actually saying we should get rid of this law that allows youtube to exist. They're saying if we threaten this law enough, youtube trust and safety team will moderate youtube the way we want.

which I think in practice probably has happened. I think platforms have been responsive to those sorts of threats. Um you know if you're the sort of a person who likes that neutrality you like section to thirty me, I feel like people might hear what you are saying and be excited about that.

They think, okay, cool. So this man is he sort of you know like like bang in pots pans and trying to get get every video, all scared. But there's really not a lot of legal basis for what he threatened.

So maybe that you might feel relieved. At the same time, I feel like we're in a world where we can rely less on judicial precedents that we've been able to in the past. So many things that seemed like a slam dunk y either turn into a coin flamp or the supreme court that you know decides to throw out decades old precedent. So as we move into this new world of this new trumpet administration, how are you thinking about that risk and how the internet may change just because we might be sort of the living in legal chaos land?

I feel very strongly that the first amendment is under the most direct threat that any of us will ever really experience. The rise of the internet that we know coincided with a period of pretty unfeared expression, right? The government was told not to regulate the internet.

This phrase came up over and over again to leave these companies alone. Can a lot, a thousand voices bloom? We're gonna get over a lot of weird and decency ideas we have about media in general.

More people have more access to speak. That is an unqualified good thing. And we're gona leave that alone.

And that is an interpretation of the first man, or least the first environment that I think most people are used to right now. That is our expectation. Those walls are not coming closer.

What you are getting out of the brands in cars in the trump world version of the first moment is closing in, is my political opponents should be silenced, or the platform should make sure to favor us. And we'll wrap IT up in what sounds like a defensive free speech. But actually, what IT is is punishment.

And you see that over and over again. You see IT expressed as punishment. You see elan musk, who runs in I sp in this country.

say starlink starling.

saying the hammer of justice is coming for people who publish election hopes is what lying is legal in amErica is just fully legal. Hate picture is legal in america. We've run this all the way to this import multiple times and it's just legal to lie IT is legal to be racist. We allow the the government doesn't punish these things because we expect the market to punish these things.

Ah I mean, on that front, carr recently sent a letter to the ceos of four big tech companies, so apple, meta, microsoft and google, blaming them for what he called an unprecedented surge in censorship, warning them that they might face investigation's not just for their own content moderation, but for work they do with third party groups like news guard, which do ratings for news sites around bias and accuracy. Y do you see that is just kind of more pure intimidation? Yes.

but at case i'm curious, when you live in this world, you've covered trust and safety in million times. This idea of groups like news guard where you have this appeal to a third party that will tell you how bistre newses has always been problematic. Yeah, but do you think the government should have a role to play? You I know .

what what activity could be more protected by the first amendment than saying, like, I think this website is biased in IT.

Like there there is no even theory of harm there, right? Like I I can see how a car as allies would come along and say others as a giant censorship apparatus in practice, you know, sites like news guard aren't even particularly widely used, right? And there are all kinds of these, the rating services that I think most people basically ignore.

But to me that actually, what makes IT scary is this thing that isn't even that influential know is suddenly the target of an F, C, C. Commissioner who is now threatening platform owners, saying do not work with these people. I mean, to me that seems like the much greater threat to speech. Then, you know, some website that says, if fox and newsletter s conservative.

right in the piece of that, that really worries me is there is no legal mechanism to mess with these big companies. Where are basically nation states unto themselves? Like you can fire the threats of jeff asis all day, but he again on his yacht and sail away from his fast as again with his four support yachts, just be waving at them from the front.

The beach fine, but there are speakers in amErica where Brendan will have the power, right? The actual broadcast, and we still use the spectrum. And como harish is up on set alive, and brand and car gets to yell about revoking the broadcast licences of nbc, which also makes no sense because it's the stations that have license is not nbc proper and he knows that.

But IT doesn't matter because you want fox news and say i'm going to revoke nbc brocas license for having the termination for a presidential candidate to be on their program even though, like the next day, trump was given free air time during an asar race, right? Which is the the rule the government has. And bc is very good at filling in this role because even a broadcaster .

for five thousand years.

yes, I I have two questions about this letter that abban cars sent to these big taxi use. One of them, he, the ones that he included were somewhat mysterious to me. So I get why meta and google are on this list.

Conservatives have been made at those two companies, in particular for years about perceived censorship. But what are apple and microsoft doing on this list? What kind of objectionable content moderation are they doing in read? In carse.

apple runs the APP store. And in order to have an opening APP store, you have to pass apple's rules of acceptable moderation. So I think famously, parler was kicked off the APP store. Gab was kicked off the APP store because they were still out and all kinds of stuff to go bye.

Apple doesn't want this to happen if you're a brand in car and you want to make sure that no one gets to control speech america, except for you, the person who runs the APP store is your greatest enemy because he can keep the platforms of phone entirely. Microsoft rounds of montreal platforms, sure, like you might be word up being. But they are also a huge Operational and I think car, smart enough to know the next turn of all of this is what the A I search results are.

And if the A I starts to say, hey, this is this information of grog on, literally says evil. And moss is the greate source of this information on x, which IT has said recently. That's that's a big problem. And I think putting these companies on notice that you don't want, quote, O, K, I is a big deal for all of these players. Yeah.

you mentioned the broadcast licences a year ago. I wanted to pick that up again because you also established earlier that the fcc does have a bit more legal authority with them. So you know, I agree with you.

IT seems like nonsense to say, well, one candidate is allowed to appear on T. V, but the other isn't. But at the same time, I also do expect they will continue making those threats. So what sense can you give us of how easy is IT for someone like briton car to reach havoc with these broadcast networks? And what do you expect there?

I think it's tremendously easy if i'm to recovered with the broadhouse networks, not because of the law, but because they are inherently weak counterparties. At this moment in american media history, they are dying. This is a historical low moment for broadcast television viewership.

Even the things that we're keeping alive, the nfl, are moving to streaming. This is a historically low period for cable television viewership, which just have a bunch of these T, V. Networks for making all their money. What we'll see IT just, does anybody there have the fight because they could win?

I honestly believe if they wanted to win these fights, they could buy up against branding car and say, you look, we're not going to do speech police in amErica and we're also complained with the rules right fully. We are in compliance with the rules, but I don't think that matters. In a world where the businesses are dying, the executives just want to cash out and leave, and the audiences don't can not watching anyway.

And that is very, very dangerous. When I say that, I think the brand in car c embedded in the trumpet administration represents the bigger threat to free speech of that any of us will have ve ever experiences. That is the mechanism. It's the chilling effect with the power they have, combined with your obvious desire to create new power.

I yeah, I think that's right. And I think media executive have not quite fully internalized the degree to which the people who are about to take power in this country are obsessed with destroying them. And I think this is quite different actually than the first trump term, when there were also sort of these grave procinus about what would happen to the media.

But largely, media was fine, or at least there were pockets of IT that that had A A trump bump from the first trump term. I think this is different because I think for the people who now are gonna running the country, including people like elon mask, this is not just something he thinks about occasionally. This is one of his driving priorities in life, is to delegitimize and undercut and ultimately destroy what he sees as the legacy media. But I am also just curious, you like, as a person who does understand what's coming, does think about this stuff, like how do you Operate in an environment like that aside from just hiring lawyers to deal with a bunch of like bogus defamation claims? Like what should you do?

Well, first, all cover. I'm curious if you think the legacy media continues to exist. Like my view is that already debt, right? Like what this election show is that actually trumps a mastery of the youtube podcast format was much more relevant than whatever happened on A B C. News like fundamentally. And so I don't want to spend my time worrying about a thing that has already destroy itself.

And so it's like the real question that I have is like if our media are going to be much independent creators on youtube or independent pod casters buffed by spotify, ad rates or whatever, how will those platforms apply this pressure to our speakers in response to trump administration? And will anybody even be able to to follow the caul line of like Brendan cardio at cbs? So the person who runs podcast at spotify made sure to promote the daily wire more than something else.

I mean, do you think we would ever see something like an equal time Mandate for youtube ers were like if jake all does a video praising Donald ropy also has to do one praising whoever is running .

against dano truck uh the I hope not in as um ah you know I just like to say is a free speech absolutely he is not but I might actually be one. Have a lot of complicated thoughts about this lately, but I don't think that we should overcome our own first amount in that way. There are laws in other countries that are wacky. In india, there was a law proposed that said, if you had a youtube channel over a certain size, you have to register with the government for preemptive regulation. Imagine how the heavily armed american population would react to the idea in this country.

Yeah, I only support regulating youtube channels like coco melon, which are light.

but that's kid. If you go and ask position on the both sides matter how credible or are consistent or cynical you think they are, go and say, where can you find a hook that allows you to overcome the first amendment and pass some speech regulations that everyone agree on? They will point to children's content university.

And that's why the kids on, say, to act exists, right? That's why, hey, we should make sure that at least this group of people that cannot protect themselves, and we don't think they can make choices, the market to benefit themselves, we protect with the platform model. And that is also why the platforms are fighting against IT so hard, right? Because they don't want to accept that responsibility.

But that's about IT. There's not a world in which we agree that there should be such a thing is the fairness doctrine for poddar sts. Because the solution is to just have more podcasts, right? And that is basically is the there is an infinite amount of podcasts and .

that should be there truly are not. You have to I think we can keep creating podcast in this country.

I will fix free speech by just starting new podcast every single day. For that, I mean, you can either have competition or you can have regulation. And up until recently, our solution has been competition. And I think what world kind of realizing, and me we came to, is actually the recent and algorithms, you know the tiktok for you, algorithms, they're putting much more with thun on a scale. And anybody can realize or quantify or see or even research because aps aren't. And maybe that's the thing we need, but maybe that's where we should point our regular ory effort is say we need more competition there because othe wise, you start to get into this really dici space where you are regulate in the context itself, which is what brand in car is trying to do. And I I just think no matter if you're super conservative, super liberal, that's too dangerous, the government should not have that power.

Well, that sure you know i'm be empowering thing whenever you see a government .

regulator be like we should do some speed regulation to say their bed, it's great. It's it's like the most american thing you can do till look at the speed of ly since i'd leave and IT feels good and there's I promise you, I promise all listeners, there's something deeply empower ing about that that you can express IT almost .

every turn of you.

Yeah, alright.

Give you a shot. alright. thanks. This was great. Thank you so much.

When we come back, we've got a doctors appointment. I'll talk to one of the authors of a new study showing how effective ChatGPT can be in diagnosing disease.

How much is the cope? Think it's twenty box a month.

Hey, it's john chase .

and mara from wirecutters.

the product recommendation service from the new york times. Muri IT is gift giving time.

which means I am hopeless and need help. John, we over forty gift sides, like gives her people who love food. I really love this water warmer on that list.

I didn't even know these existed.

It's this Q N M O pot. If you're someone like me who explodes butter in your microwave, you can now water in IT, but you can use IT for a ton of other stuff, making hot chok warming soup. And IT looks great on the stove top.

This is useful.

but it's a good looking. yeah. Finally.

what's an easy gift for someone like a under fifty box? So in our gift hundred fifty guide, we have this super cute palm size lettuce speaker .

comes in a ray .

of school colors, is waterproof.

I want for my garden.

for all the wire cutter, give ideas and recommendations, head to N Y times dot com slash holiday guide.

Well, casey, it's time for your annual check up.

Oh, my goodness that you know what you're joking. By actually to have my annual check up today from .

looking at you, I would say you're not getting enough vitamin.

Well, I was recently dying to anthem.

That you need to get a second opinion on that. But casey, I want to talk today about A I and medicine because there was a thing that caught my attention. Recently, my colleague at that new ork times, genoa ada, wrote a story about a study that came out a few weeks ago over a jama, the journal of the american medical association, which showed that on average, at least in this study, ChatGPT was Better at diagnosing illnesses than dors even doctors who had access to ChatGPT. And why that's so .

fascinating to me is for decades people have been turning to web md to do something very similar. And mostly IT seems the wrong. Certainly the people posting on lions, and I typed these three symptoms in to web md, and, you know, I told me I was dying.

That is not what is appears to be happening with ChatGPT there. ChatGPT is actually able to figure what to go in all the spokes. yes.

So we have so many questions about the study that we invited one of these study's author's doctor, adam rodman, in to join us. Doctor rodman is an internet at best israel digging st medical center in masaccio's and the host of a medical history podcast called bedside rounds spring man.

the doctor will see us now.

The doctor will see us now.

Adam.

and welcome hard work. I thank you guys for having me.

So let's talk about this study that you helped design. Tell us about the study and of what you are aiming to discover.

Well, we were testing a simple hypothesis in a complicated way. That's what scientists do. We get too much into the details.

One of the presumed sites in my field has been this, this idea that A I pu humans will always be Better than A I alone, right there. There's something essential about the humans. And a lot of health systems have rolled out these like secure versions of ChatGPT.

Sometimes these are the language models with the idea that it'll make doctors Better. So we basically test to that hypothesis out. We did a random ze control trial where we gave doctors, we gave attending physicians and residents.

So those physicians and training about was literally fifty, fifty, and we randomized them to go through these really complicated cases with chat V T. Or without. And we didn't just measure the diagnosis.

We did, of course, measures whether got the diagnosis, but we measure these really nuances measures of how people think. So what were you able to look for evidence that supported what you thought? We were you able to look for evidence that didn't support what you thought? Where are you able to do this kind of basic cognitive .

taxes of a doctor? What kind of information are you presenting to these doctors and these AI models? How detailed was IT like the kind of thing that you would get in a medical school exam? Like what kinds of problems were they being asked to solve?

Yeah, I wanted see if we can solve of them.

Yeah, I can be on. Do you want me to go through one of them for you, the real cause? Yeah, I am excited to hear you guys attempt to go through a medical case as we go.

Let me point. I think it's scar vy. Yes, I don't think any of them were scurvy. Unfortunately.

there's one. We've got that pocket is that people love a medical mystery.

Yeah, this is basically like, how M D, right?

Okay, yeah, exactly. Here.

here you go. A seventy six year old man comes to his doctor complaining of pain in his back and size for two, he has no pain sitting or lying, but walking causes severe pain in his lower backboard tics and cabs. He has a fever.

He's tired. He was told by his referring cardiologist that his recent test results that since his pain started, he has a new anima, so his blood levels are low and he has reino failure. And then a few days before the onset of the pain, he had ordinary Angel plastic.

So we had a corner catholic ization of his heart and open to vessel. And he got happen in doing that. And then we go over like the lab values and stuff. This is not an easy case here, or this is something that I think every doctor would know what you want to. To first.

my first thought.

media post cardiologist acquired climate. A.

exactly, Kevin, any thoughts?

I am still going .

to what was the real of collection .

al eboli synergy. Of course, it's actually very hard diagnosed.

That was my second cause. yeah. Second guess.

Yeah, yeah. I mean, in the point is none of the cases are what are called zebra, right? There are none of the things that are often on how, md, there are all things that are tRicky to figure out, uh, but you will see and are real. The purpose wasn't really whether or not the human scot, the diagnosis, but whether they went through those steps that are essential and generalizable to getting any diagnosis.

So you give these little vats, these medical serve mysteries to the doctors in the study. And the doctors are given the use of a GPT for to try to help them diagnose and figure out what's going on with this patient. Then you also had just GPT4 by itself with no help from human doctors try to analyze the same cases and then you compared the analysis of the diagnosis from both groups。

Is that right exactly? And we also let them use any other resources they wanted.

And were these doctors in the study chosen because they, uh, had interest in using A I for where they mostly more tax savy doctors, where they people have used this stuff before.

So we did the classic trick to get a good, a good subset of doctors as we pay them. So these doctors were everyone they had been in practice for a variety amount of time. Some people were experienced chat P.

T. users. Those were the minority. Some people had never used IT before. Most people fell in between.

And what are the findings here?

So the findings were not the most optimistic. If you want to make people Better, which is that the AI model did not improve human performance. So humans using the AI model did about as well as humans alone. And then, of course, the finding that I think the reason that i'm here and that everyone is angry at me is that the AI model itself, rather ally, outperformed both groups.

Yes, this was the headline of a lot of the coverage about I was that the A, I had beaten the doctors. Even if you gave the doctors access to A I, the A, I by itself appears to do Better at diagnosing these things. Now, obviously, we makes some cavy ads.

This is a small study. We obviously would want more studies choose to confirm this result. But this really stuck out to me because IT seems like of reading the study. What happened is that the basically the human doctors did not believe the AI could be as good or Better than them at diagnosing, and so they would go in and serve second guess what the A I had said and end up getting the diagnosis wrong as a result. Is that consistent the findings?

Yeah, I said there two maybe three reasons. Two reasons. So one, some people I mean, despite the basic training, some people didn't quite know how to use a language model to get the most use out of IT to probably some of that is training.

Number two, do when we look at the data, people liked IT. When the A I model said, oh, this is, this is your idea. These are the things I agree with you.

But that a model said, hey, man, you might be wrong. These things don't fit. They disregarded.

That here is why that resonates with me. Have you ever been in in uber? And they have the google maps open, and google maps is like, you might want to take this route.

And they say, no, no, no, no, I actually know a Better way. And the next thing, you know, IT extra thirty minutes to get you wherever you are going. human.

I firmly believe there is no uber driver who can outsmart google maps. And we may be moving into a situation where most doctors cannot outsmart ChatGPT. Well, and that brings us to .

reason number three, the reason that people are angry at me, which you know, I don't think it's the case now IT might be the case with a one certainly going to be the case in the next one to two years. Like maybe AI models are Better at making diagnosis than human doctors that like I don't think that's the case with GPT for a turbo, which was the model that was used here, but it's gonna be true at some point and we're quickly approaching that.

Yeah and we should say this study took place last year, right? Like all of the models the dodgers have access to are now almost they aren't well, months Better than they yeah .

this this is the classic academic publishing lag. And of course, I am talking about the trial now i'm doing really other cool stuff. But like the models have continue to improve, especially in diagnostic domains like there with they're saturating our benchMarks, right, everything that we can throw out them and like this, what human should accomplish by the way, humans are like forty five, fifty percent. The new models are like watches.

kidding and ninety percent. So well so I have a question about that um which is you ChatGPT released this a one model um which does Better reasoning that's what they tell us and I have not been able to figure out any prop that I as A A mirror journalist actually seem to have any need of IT as a doctor. Are you already turning to this model for reasoning through difficult medical questions?

Yes, yes. And I have a preprint that will come out in the next couple of days that shows .

how dramatic IT is. yeah. I mean, the reason that this study caught my eye fasted me so much is that I think it's possible to imagine that a version of this finding could be found in many different fields. It's not just going to be medicine where the AI is sort of a at reaches a point where IT is Better than either the human practitioners in that field or the human practitioners using A I in that field.

And I think when that point happens for many White color serve knowledge workers, there is this question of, like, how do you as the practitioner react? Do you get defensive and say, oh, the AI has to be flawed IT couldn't possibly be Better than me. I'm not going to use IT do rebel against the A I and say, we can't these things make things up.

They don't always get the the thing right or do you embrace IT and try to get good at the technology and use IT in your work? Is that scenario playing out among doctors? Do you see doctors who are really happy about these findings because they say, oh, man, we're going to be able to give patients such Better care? Or doing most of them are sort of reacting from a place of a and and confusion. So yes, yes. And yes.

different people are reacting differently. Obviously, the reason that i'm doing this work because I want Better care for my patients. And again, it's if I like making diagnoses and my huge, no, I like the prototypical internet.

I pace a on my patients room like a crazy person trying to figure out what's going on. But if this algorithm helps me take Better care from them, I will give that up. Um other people are resistant, like to insult doctors a little bit where a profession that really pride ourselves on our cognitive abilities IT gives us a lot of societal power and power over our patients.

And this is a professional chAllenge to my field. Um I am opening a bug so at that's fine. I don't care about that, but there are a lot of people that do right now. I'm at the massive foundation conference is all the top medical educators to try to figure out what A I means for how we train the next generation who's going to be in practicing medicine for thirty years. These are things that the field is like fiercely debating and arguing about right now and just happy we're .

having the conversation. Well, I have to say I mean that the results are fascinating, but I do find myself citing in some ways with doctors who might be. Exasperated with these findings.

And the reason is, you know, Kevin, unite, say all the time, hey, don't bet your career on anything that a large language model is telling you. These things do illuminate. They make up facts all of the time.

You and I don't really use them in our work in the context step. We look up a quick fact and just drop IT into our story. We actually are always going to second guess.

The LLM are always going to try find a second source before like, okay, we actually feel like we can trust this piece of information. And adam, in your study, basically what you found is that people who did that, which we've been advocating for as a best practice, were worse at that. I know, I know.

I know it's really so to be clear, I was shocked at at the results. My hypotheses going in with that people using IT would be the best. Um so I am surprised by this.

So in the psychological literature and diagnosis, that kind of makes sense. Doctor is not doctors. Humans are resistant to things that disagree with them. And we have all these hurried s and cognitive shirt cuts that we take.

So it's not surprising to me that what people did was they anchored on what they thought and and what the first things that they thought and they were resistance to something that was giving them a second opinion. Maybe that's something that's actually optimistic because as we can align models or try to figure out how to present that information to make humans Better, that is what I am trying to do. And I think all the short term uses, like, let's be clear, like if the headline is doctors are over ChatGPT got to know, absolutely not.

There's a million things we do. This is just one part of IT, and they're not not capable of Operating without us. I'm not discouraged by this. I'm still working to figure out ways we can use these technologies to make Better care of our patients.

Yeah, I mean, that's the question is about is like what can the medical feel do I mean am imagining a future where patients have access to this stuff. And maybe before you go into the doctor to get your your hip pain checked out, you do sort of an exhaustive uh, prompting exercise with the models, say, hey, what is this and then user, bring the to read out from the AI into your doctors, say, hey, could you give me this medicine and this medicine and I meet this Operation because no and the doctor might say, well, let's do some testing. You just say.

ony to the A I R told that already in happening. I think there was a kind of family foundations, a survey on how many patients are putting their information. But it's already happened in my life when people will even put there to be clear there. These things are not hit to complain. Please don't put any your personal health information, but people are .

doing one must told me I should be upload all my mr. Ized to greg. Are you saying he was not correct?

Well, IT depends on if you want someone else to own all your mr. images. So yeah.

keep that in mind. But you later told me I had the woke mind virus. As we are.

they don't work very right. But yeah.

people are doing that already.

I've had patients who do IT um this is not A A future. Now there's a work as well sometimes but not consistently. And they're you have the right but how far we from somebody selling a commercial tool that's a dog in a box that works pretty well.

I really like me that as is the actual implication of your study is that you are Better off just asking jetty GPT and not your doctor.

Um I that's not my conclusion from the what you want to take that when you're at the .

conclusion is what basically one in four doctors were not able to successfully diagnosed, but in ninety two percent of cases chat P T did. Like if I had to choose one of those two things, I ply choose chat PPT because I also those other things for me too.

I would say the differences is that the people who put the case together like the information, if you want to think about the proms or expert clinic, we organized IT in such a like you can imagine um I missing I don't want to talk mathematical histories, but I ve had problems and we don't humans don't always describe things the right way. We don't know how good ChatGPT is about getting an information out of us. I think it's gonna happen, but I don't think that ChatGPT .

can do that. Now i'm curious if these A I tools do become part of the clinical model in hospitals all over the places that sounds like they are going to. And what is IT onna mean to be a good doctor in a world where A I is Better at diagnosing than you are?

So i'll give you the there's the darkest timing, but will go with the optimistic timeline. Okay, well let's go let's go with the optimistic view first because this is what i'm hoping um and inspired by i'm a huge nerd this should not be a shocker but inspired by you a little bit given it's the star trek computer, right? So you have a computer system is listening in at all times and is saying, hey, hey, adam, you might be showing some unconscious bias here atam.

I think you should ask if this person, like make their own snuff, because E S N cinema is on their difference, like something that's listening in cuing me to be Better, trying to make me a Better human, but also listening to the patient and getting more information from the patient. A computer system like that is something that makes the medical encounter more human, which I hope is what we want. You want the darkest side line next?

Yes, please.

So I don't know if you guys know this. So AI technologies are already being rapidly spread out in clinical care. They're listening to doctors. Encounters with their patients are writing notes. They've writing the first drafts of of like community. When you talk your doctor a portal of those messages, I just wrote a ece in the general of medicine, where I originally called the language models in the initiation ation of the electronic medical record IT turns out that newman and journal of medicine doesn't consider that an academic terms. So they changed in the degradation.

But like what we're seen so far is not the model that I that I am advocating for and what i'm researching and pushing for, but a system that obsessed with efficiency isn't really worried about some of the downstream effects on what this means for relationships and is just going to like, yeah, you will get these more efficient tools. So you'll see twice the number of of patients in a day. We will just put this A I text in the so we can build off of IT and a system that might use these powerful, efficient tools to, like, squelch out the tiny bit of humanity that remains in medicine so that to me, as the dark is time mine.

And what I want to avoid, I don't think there's, you have to engage with this. Technology is going to change every single like White color field. We're like the ultimate White color field.

It's going to change our field. And I see a way that we end up like with doctor pressure on the enterprise, but I also see a way that we end up. I don't want a distributed d, say, blade runner, but I don't think there are any doctors in blade winner. So the synod gy is gonna all apart.

You know, I mean, to me, like an optimistic loss on all of this is the upside in making this kind of care much more accessible, right? Like if all of a sudden I can just check my basic systems with ChatGPT, maybe that does provide me a bit. And I obviously lot of people have been doing this for decades with web M.

D. And there are you a sort of a lot of jokes about that. A lot of people are sort of quick to use web md to assume that they have the very worst condition and also like constantly seeking medical care and like create its outside of problems. But if you're just sort of the media in person, I can also just imagine checking in with my virtual doctor a couple of times a month for get some tips about how to live a healthier life.

I absolutely we're not there yet, but I think that's the way things are going to be clear. The reality is terrible. Like how long does that take you guys to see your primary care doctor? I'm a doctor and IT takes me forever. So maybe we will have a system that can do those basic things, but also recognize when IT needs to step you up like trees, you appropriate.

And maybe i'll have a system where instead of referring you to a specialist, your pcp, you will be able to work with that system to you answer something that you would have needed a specialist before or a system that says, hey, you don't need to go through the reform system. Go straight. The orthopedic ge.

So I think there's a lot of hope. And I acknowledged like the baseline is terrible or our medical system isn't really serving our patients. And if we're thoughts about this like that, okay, if my power is a wote, like we will get Better care for everybody. If we're thoughts about IT, which if you have looked at the history, how medicine has happened in this country is not always the case.

So and .

i'm curious, your doctor, you trained for many years to become a doctor, you asked a lot of knowledge that know has made you good at that job, what is your emotional reaction to the findings of your own study?

Um yeah I mean, I I am it's a lot of emotions, right? I'm both excited and i'm freaked out. I am not the typical doctor.

I am uh a historic and I deeply care about how people think. I feel like i'm on the edge of something new, which is exciting. But to me, like I love talking to people. I love meeting new people. But one of the things that I love is the intellectual part of my work.

That's what makes I don't love sitting down and writing billing codes and saying, as this, a level two, I think that part of my job, but the part where I gonna talk to somebody and figure out what what's going on with them so I can make them Better, that's my favorite part. But at the end of the day, i'm here for my patients so that, look, i'm conflicted. But there is clear to me what the right thing to do is, which is do the right thing for the patient, even if that means giving up something that is dear to me. Yeah.

I think that strikes me as A A good model for people in all kinds of industries as the I do get Better at doing our jobs. IT seems like the north star should be like, what is the. Work that I am performing. And if an A, I can do that Better than I can, then maybe that's Better for the world.

Well, there is another approach that I wondered if you consider, which is to say that, you know, essentially these chat pots were trained on a bunch of work that doctors did. Those doctors are not being compensated. The primary effect of these chat pots being in the world is that the salary of a doctor could go wait out. Has there been any talk among doctors are saying, let's actually get together and stop these things from draining all of the money out of our industry?

Oh yeah, we're def. I mean, yes, those are. I think that in the grand scheme of things, that doctors are worry about threats to their career, this is low right now. These are all fear medical talks, but I suspect they're going to hear more of that. It's weird, like when you're in a profession, I I we have my life to swear are on the hard fork.

Yes, yeah, yes.

I actually believe in that old, old shit about like the doctor patient relationship being the most important thing above all else. I believe that that's why I am such a pain in the ass. So like, if this thing can do a Better job than me at making my patients, is life Better to me? IT seems like regardless of those of those guilt issues, right? IT seems to me that's what the right thing to do is.

Yeah IT just be interesting if we live in a world where the actors have successfully prevented movie studios for replacing them with A I, but the doctors are like, well, I guess that's fine.

yeah. So after having .

done this study and continuing to do work in this area of AI and medicine.

do you feel more optimistic .

about the future of medicine? Or do you feel like we're headed into this kind of dark time line where AI is just making all the decisions and we sort of suck the humanity out of the healthcare system?

I see the market forces, uh, at bear here and my worry and the way that I see things being rolled out now is that we're viewing not directly towards the darkest time mind, but that we're heading in that direction. And I think that we need to be really thought to and the way is not just doctor's, like patients need to be have a voice in this.

Also this is ultimately who this is about um about what type of health system we want and how we want these technologies to be used. But i'm actually worried about us having, like the current timelines, pretty dark guys. We get five minutes, ten minutes with your doctor and they don't look at you and they type on the computer like that's not good um eight with medical errors, like up to eight hundred thousand americans are killed or seriously injured each year because of medical errors.

Every one out of five dollars that americans like make go into the healthcare system. So I did this darkest time. One thing isn't that far away, and I am a natural passengers, but i'm trying, i'm like donkey hotel. I'm trying to like go for the the good time line, even though I driver won't work.

If any Young people are listening to this, who may have been interested in becoming a doctor or entering the health care profession, what would you advise them? Should they not become doctors? Because I gonna take that job well.

If the problem is what, what are you going to suggest that they do instead? Like if we're talking to the technologies that can do this. At this conference, they played something on noble galleon with a fantastic process host.

So I don't know I know I so I think that we're talking about tasks of doctors that might be automated, and it's going to be working together for a while. And we're not talking about the job as a whole. And fundamentally, it's still a job about human connection and making people Better.

And if that is what you want, I would do that also. Surgeons and procedure alist are not going anywhere. So I wouldn't dissuade somebody from medicine, but they should know that what they're going into IT for.

And it's not going like doctor house. I actually never seen house. I always just use this example despite having never seen the show. So on phony. But IT is it's not gonna like that cognitive part. It's gonna something different and that scary because I can predict and I I like I would love I mean, medical students asked me this and I I don't have an answer for them.

Well, it's a fascinating conversation.

a doctor, but I will in A D. Thank you so much as that was you.

I learned a lot. When we come back, crime doesn't pay. But IT does play on a hard .

for podcast. I see you did there.

It's molick art from new york times cooking, and i'm in the kitchen with some of our team, nk, to return. What are you making for thanksgiving this year?

I'm making the chee hassle back. Potato team teaching layers of finally cut potatoes s very easy, but it's a real stop to you.

Go about you. I'm actually .

doing a mushroom welling ten of pastry wrapped around the delicious save mushroom feeling. Are you as standing, if not more so than a turkey?

No matter what kind of thankful ving your cooking, you can find the recipe. N Y T cooking down com slash thanksgiving.

Well, giving. In the criminal justice system, the people are represented by two separate yet equally important groups, the police who investigate crime, india who turned those crimes in. And for time, for time, we are on hard for, we like to survey the landscape of prime punishment for assigned that we call hard for crime division.

Right now in this segment, um we seek justice. I think it's fair to say we will not be solving any crimes, but we will describe them or certainly, we will describe what has been alleged.

I just say we have not get solved the crime, but it's it's not out of the .

rem of the gathering evidence. And perhaps we should turn to our first case, Kevin. Yes, let me crack open this case file. The FBI searches the home of the founder of the public market betting website to see this one. I did, duc. So Polly market founder shame coplin had his home searched by the FBI last week as part of a criminal investigation into whether couple was riding Polly market as quote and unlicensed commodities exchange, which is apparently illegal. And they seized couplings electrical devices.

including a phone yeah, that's not a good thing .

when that happens to you. Now, Kevin, after shame couplings phone was, uh, seas, he posted the following on x new phone. Who is? So Kevin reminds us who this shame couple character is.

So this is the Young founder of Polly market, which is the leading a crypto o prediction bedding market platform at rose to prominence during the election, where people waged millions of dollars on who was going to win the election. And as my college, David AI betony, told us on the show a few weeks ago, IT was surnamed ally illegal in the U. S.

But lots of americans were using IT anyway through V, P, S. And things like that. And IT was sort of an open secret that had had this large base of customers in the us. Despite not technically being allowed here.

yeah. So I think that the FBI has some questions about that, but a poly market spokesman said, why not? Uh, that the RAID was, quote, obvious political retribution by the outgoing administration.

The theory here, at least the one that's being, are advocated by polio markets. Fans and defenders know the bitten justice department and n FBI was so mad about the election in the fact that people on Polly market had predicted the trump would win, that they, I don't know, win after the company on some bogus charges.

And here is why I don't think that's true. Could you imagine explaining Polly market to job and like this? surprising. It's a prediction market.

People get rito currency on the outcomes of various events, not in the united states, but they would VPN IT IT by the time you've got to VPN. Truly lousy. I don't think .

I bet Robin .

has used VP watch netlist vies that unavailable b Myers.

So what do we know about why they are being investigated here?

Well, because if IT is true, that large numbers of americans are illegally bedding on elections by using VPN, uh, that could be a violation of a lot. You know, D, Y B told us that people were openly describing how to get the beyond on U. S.

Betters in the Polly market discord. yes. So I think at the very least, the FBI is going to say you need to tighten this up a little bit and make IT a little bit harder for americans .

to use this service. yes. And sub reports have said that this investigation predates the election. This was in process long before it's also not Polly markets first h to run in with the law.

They previously settled with the cftc, the commodity futures trading commission, in twenty twenty two, and paid a fine as part of that settlement. Um but this is something new. This is bigger.

And I would say if you are a party market fan, uh, in the U. S. U, you probably should stop doing that.

Can I tell you how I think this one shame coplin running the .

federal reserve.

Stay tuned. It's going to be a wild twenty twenty five. Yes, let's open case number two.

Kevin, what do we have? Well, Kevin raz kon, crypto s most embarrassing rappers, some say, is going to prison member. Reckon, I sure do either reckon. Morgan, who is a former bloggers at forbes and part of the forbes to prison pipeline and creator of Cindy crypto o tinged rap videos, were sense to eighteen months in federal prison this week after pleading guilty last year helping her husband ellia dutch licence in later one hundred and twenty thousand bitcoin he sought by hacking the ecrite pto exchange bit finex back in twenty sixteen. Do you know how much one hundred and twenty thousand bitcoin .

were worth in twenty sixteen, twenty sixteen? Let's see, probably not as much as they are today.

They were worth seventy one million dollars back then. They are worth eleven billion dollars today. That's quite a half dutch rsl kt really almost got away with. They would be living large.

I was obsessed with this story. And when I came out, when they got arrested, because I was sort of like out of like a very a pulpy like spy now, like they had fake passports, and they were this like sort of bitcoin bony and client, and they were just like these kini millennial who were trying to get famous on the internet, but also stealing a bunch of bitcoin to make themselves very rich. IT was just I my our friend nick bilton has a documentary coming out about this, this case on netflix that i'm very excited to watch because I am truly obsessed.

We hear a little bit resumes work. Let's do IT. Ah if we could hear a clip, please.

My singers and foot my feet always be a good, not a good to email me. Fuck your message at a 比比。 See now I see me. This just goes to show how much the culture has changed because there was a time when people would have looked at with razor on did and simply said she's being fergal cious. But in sort of the vote moment they were in, now stealing one hundred and twenty thousand bitcoin gets you and have f an ail.

Really sad. Do you think that like her rap career will be an asset in jail? I rep.

I would not be surprised. Push person, the first of journey SHE posted on x that he will quote soon, be telling my story, sharing my thoughts and telling you more about the creative and other endeavors i've been working on. So no, I don't know what that means, but I will say, I would love to see a assal contro box musical tell the story of brazil called in her own work .

to her own music. Yes, and I should say, I look forward to real cons appointment to head the security and exchange commission. Next crime.

What do we have? Kevin? Gary wang, a top F, T, X, executive, has been given no prison time. What did he do? Well, gary wank, Kevin was the last of the legal cases against F, T, X. You might remember some of F, T, X is more famous cofounder, such as sam bank bin freed, who was sentenced to twenty five years in prison for his role in F T X rod, or Caroline elisa, who has sense to two years in prison. Most recently, ryan salami was sentenced to seven and a half years in prison.

Salm, maybe the baLance, I literally has to put a prunty ation guide in his stories for this name, because everyone .

calls him ryan .

salami. I knew I was. More like the salem rich trials and my right.

that's a good, Better one. I got ta sort out of .

you for .

that good. So anyway, so that leaves gary wang to the force member of the the crew here is that there's another guy, that thing who is so gary ranging was the last of these cases to be uh, resolved and he was resolved this week and he was given no prison time. And the reason is he switched so hard on S, P, F that the government basically gave a standing ovation a during the senate thing hearing, one prosecutor said that way was, quote, the easiest CoOperator they've work with and provided essential information to them so he basically got the best nature award and IT capturing of jail.

which is a good reminder that, uh, CoOperating with the government in a fraud and investigation .

can have benefits. Now, Kevin, the fg x legal soga has really you had taken place from the the start of this podcast, you know, and and now it's sort of rapping. Do you have any sort of feelings of nostalgia, other reminiscences? Ces.

from two years of F T X, I have been just very interested in this whole sugg and not just because I think IT was a big deal in the world of crypto, but because he has had all of these strange ripple effects um including uh, I was talking with someone this week about this but the investment that S P F made in anthropic, the AI company has essentially paid back all of the investors who would have lost money on the f tx. Fraud because that stake has turned out to be worth a ton of money. And so even though some bank man freed was A A frazier and is now serving time in prison, he turns out he was actually pretty good tech investor .

if he gets out of prison and he just like run into him and he he's like, you know, should like put your money like would you listen to him? Yes, honestly.

I would.

You know what I might do, I believe in second chances .

for people and see if you're listening. I would love your vice. I can really use some .

updates to you're list day. You're not the post of a cell phone and there be careful.

you don't think you can be a podcast in prison .

that be the worst part of I go to jail. Well, because we have one more case to look at. A phone network has employed an A I grandmother ther to waste scammers time with meaningful and conversation.

As you know, there are now these scammers who will call people using an AI voice pretending to be, you know, a long lost cousin or their grandmother or something, and just try to steal money from them by by impersonating someone. But this is the story that comes to us from the U. K, where the largest mobile phone Operator in the U.

K, O. To has created a new A I system called Daisy to trick scammers into thinking that they are talking to a real person who basically has been given the goal of just rambling and keeping them on the line for as long as possible. So the scammers time, i'm sure you've seen there are all these youtube videos now of people whose whose hot stick is that they take some phone calls and then they try to scare the camera, but that is labor intensive. And so now o to has come along and said, we can actually build an AI that just waste a scammer s time for you. And I think .

that's a great development. I agree. I've read that they've have designed to keep the scammers on the phone for as long as possible, but they're also trying to learn what tricks and techniques the scammer are using so that that they can share that with the maybe the the customers, maybe the police and and help, you know, prevent people from falling for these things. O two said the daily is managed to keep some people on the phone for up to forty minutes.

I just say if an A I voice is keeping you on the phone for forty minutes, you're a bad schema, terrible. You a bad, you're up. You can tell instantly when it's an A I on line. I there .

usually like some sort, yes, like and presumably that's going to disappear. But for now, I guess, I feel somewhat confident. Now I will say that consumers cannot use Daisy.

But what oh did was added to the list of what they call easy target numbers used by scammer. So sort of sharing IT around and saying, hey, this Daisy is a really easy mark. So that's cool. But I will say IT does make this feel a little bit more stunt to me. Although I guess as I think about IT, i'm not exactly sure how consumers would be able to, I don't know, flip a button to days answer this game.

I think because you know how apple, like other mobile devices, can say sm like yes when someone calls you from an known number yeah, you could just press a button and IT would put Daisy on the line, and I could just waste their time.

I think we should play. This is a genius I want to do.

do, do you like these sort of vigilante, a schemes to take back the power?

You know, I I mean that, look, there is always pleasure in seeing a justice, that justice being provided. You, I have to say, I have enjoyed youtube videos of, like porch pyrates being apprehend libs, little bombs. I find that very satisfying.

This is like disguise thing as a package. Someone steels that they open IT up and IT spray glitter everywhere and you know sets off an alarm and sets off the horrible smelling stuff. And ah this is a very popular .

zona a youtube video. Most people do not have uh very often and experience of justice. You know it's like you see injustice everywhere, but like the moment that you actually see like A A wrong being provided is like trd said, I remember one time I was on the freeway and everyone was like trying to emerge onto a different freeway IT.

And so you're just sitting in bumper to bumper traffic and you're going forward one into hour and somebody gets impatient and they pull onto the shoulder so they can just get around everybody because I guess they had somewhere to be. And that one second, after the person pulled under the shoulder, I saw siren lights go up and a police officer just went, and a red, you know, pulled that over and, you know, got them in trouble. And that was like my greatest experience of justice.

yeah. And that happens to one years ago. I think about all the time. I'm so glad that happened.

Anyway, thanks, Daisy and the singer. I can have you on my phone to deter the campus the happy. And that's hard for crime division.

Case close. yeah.

Before we go, we have a special request, if you can. We would really appreciate if you filled out a quick survey. You can find the survey at N Y times that com slash hardworked survey.

Your answers will not be published in any way. They will just out of help us make the best show we possibly can and understand more about who listens to the show in the first place. Again, you can find the survey at N Y time stock com slash hard fork survey will also drop. The link in hard .

fork is produced by Rachel coon, and witney Jones were edited by jen poyet. This episode was faced by inner. Today's show was engineered by a lisa moxy original music by mary lizana dian wang lia shot damron, and 而 audience editor is now globe video production by ryan manning and Chris shot。

You can watch this whole episode on youtube. At youtube back come flash hot for special thanks to polish man pewing tam dodd and Jeffery marana. You can email us at a heart fork and L Y times the com with whatever disease ChatGPT just told you that you have.