Hi everyone, welcome to Gray Matter, the podcast from Gray Lock where we share stories from Cavani Builders and Business Leaders. I'm Heather Mack, head of editorial at Gray Lock.
Today, we have a special guest episode. Gray Lock General Partner Reid Hoffman has launched a new podcast called Possible, which looks at the future through a decidedly optimistic lens and what it will take to get there.
Hosted by Reid and Arya Finger, each episode features a visionary from a different field, such as media, climate science, criminal justice, and more. Also joining for each episode will be GPT-4, OpenAI's latest language model. GPT-4 will provide a companion story to serve as a jumping off point for each discussion, which will explore what could possibly go right if we as a society work together, deliver technology effectively.
Comedian, writer, and former Daily Show host Trevor Noah joined Reid and Arya for the inaugural episode, Possible. They discussed what a world would look like if every TV show could be perfectly tailored to each viewer's interest, knowledge level, and needs.
You can subscribe to Possible wherever you get your podcasts, and you can follow links on the show notes to read the transcript as well as the AI-generated story for this episode. With that, I'll turn it over to Possible.
"I think one of the most important discussions we should be having is around people, purpose, and the plans around what we're going to do when these technologies evolve, as opposed to thinking of the technologies as some sort of boogieman because the technology isn't."
Hi, I'm Reid Hoffman. And I'm Arya Finger. We want to know what happens if, in the future, everything breaks humanity's way. We're speaking with visionaries in every field, from climate science to criminal justice and from entertainment to education. These conversations also feature another kind of guest, GPT-4, OpenAI's latest and most powerful language model to date. Each episode will have a companion story, which we've generated with GPT-4 to spark discussion. You can find these stories down in the show notes. In each episode, we seek out the brightest version of the future and learn what it'll take to get there. This is Possible.
Welcome to the Possible Podcast. We are today going to be exploring a particular version of what's possible. What's possible in entertainment? What's possible in media? Although our illustrious guest is Trevinoa, who has hosted the Emmy and Peabody Award-winning Show The Daily Show from 2015 to 2022, he's the author of the New York Times Best Seller book, Born a Crime. He's been a comedian for over a decade. He speaks about seven languages and he calls New York City home, just like you, Arya. But with his breadth, I anticipate we're going everywhere.
As we always do on the Possible Podcast, we also share an AI story with Treffer about what the Daily Show could be reimagined with AI down the road. So get ready to hear him talk about whether he likes or dislikes the future that GPT-4 provides.
就像我们一直在《Possible Podcast》上做的那样,我们也与 Treffer 分享了一则关于《每日秀》如何在未来借助 AI 重新设计的故事。所以准备好听听他是否喜欢或不喜欢 GPT-4 所提供的未来。
I will also say, if you haven't read Born a Crime, I was gifted it for Christmas a few years ago and it's just so good. And you just hear his smarts and his brilliance on the Daily Show. It's no surprise when you hear about his background and everything that he's done. It'll be interesting to hear how he talks about grit and resilience and how do you build that for the future.
So Treffer, I cannot tell you how excited I am to see you and have a little bit of a chance to turn the microphone, having gone on your shows before. It's so welcome to Possible.
Thank you so much and good to see you again, good to chat to you again. I'm excited for the conversation.
非常感谢,并很高兴再次见到您,再次与您聊天感觉很好。我期待这次交谈。
So Treffer, I'm excited because Read and I have a little East Coast West Coast battle, me being a New Yorker and him being a West Coaster. So when you hosted the Grammys and you talked about LA, maybe not being the greatest city in the world, I'm just going to pretend that you think New York is actually the greatest city in the world. Oh, that's funny.
I love how everyone thinks it's in relation to their city. Yes. Yeah, I'm always intrigued by how everyone thinks their city is the best city. Here's the thing I always ask New Yorkers, I go, if New York is the greatest city in the world, why does everyone have to leave it every weekend if they get a chance?
Everyone's quick to say greatest city. I feel like everyone has to say greatest city for and then have the input that, that, that, that, you know, what is the specifier that makes it the greatest city for something? And then I'll agree with you. All right. So greatest city for non-stop New York. I'm in. All right. I'll take it.
I know actually from various contexts, you actually work on technological, technological projects. Yeah. I'm thinking from, you know, thinking about what it were, where it plays in the future and everything else. And you voiced the artificial intelligence system in Black Panther. Is the topic of AI something that you were following intensely and was there anything that you were thinking about when you were doing the, you know, kind of Wakanda forever, AI voice about what role AI will be playing in the kind of future?
In many ways like when I, when I would talk to Ryan Kugler, the director of Black Panther, I would always ask him what he envisioned his AI to be because I think everyone has a different idea of what AI is, you know, and I've come to realize some of the conversations people have about AI are endearing but misguided often, you know. So some people will talk about AI, but really they're just talking about like simple machine learning.
People are talking about AI and they're just talking about processing a very simple command and, and I think AI the way I understand it is a computer model that's getting to a place where it understands or it, or it processes logic in a way that a human would be familiar with, you know.
And so when I was thinking of that for the, you know, for the Black Panther role, it's an AI that is intelligent but at the same time still at the mercy of the people who have created it. So, you know, and I think that's what we would hope AI will become is a tool that we're using but then somehow interacts with us in a, in an almost personal way which, which will be interesting for us to try and, I think, grapple with because then we're going to ask ourselves questions of sentience and we're going to ask ourselves questions of, you know, you know, life and what isn't and what is personality and yeah, I, so, so, so definitely for that, for that role, it was interesting thinking of an AI that is for all intents and purposes, feeling but is still not.
I do think that right now actually an AI were more, more, more like tools than with beings and that's the tool being question is one of the central ones at the beginning to kind of start in the dialogue, you know, it open AI, we have this GPD4 that will be coming out later, but I have access to it.
I actually, in fact, generated some light bulb jokes because I personally have an affectation for light bulb jokes because I think there are a form of cultural haiku, they're very short form, you know, kind of lens into kind of like, you know, reflecting a bias or reflecting a, you know, a meme or something else.
We're going to read you a couple of the light bulb jokes about Trevor Noah, the GPD4 generated and we'd love you to reflect and what that means on GPD4 sense of humor, what you would improve, you know, that kind of stuff. So I'll kick it off and then we'll trade.
How many Trevor Noah's does it take to change a light bulb? None. He just shines a smile and brightens the room.
需要几个特雷弗·诺亚来换灯泡?不需要,他只需微笑,照亮整个房间。
All right, we started with the easy ones. We started with the kind ones. Okay. Wow, that's that's chat GPT my mom. I like that. Exactly. It'll get a little bit yes, it's official mom tellage.
Yeah, the prompt was in the style of Trevor Noah's mom give us a yes, that's what that seems like. All right.
对的,提示风格就像是Trevor Noah的妈妈让我们回答“是的”,这就是它的意思。好的。
So the next one, how many Trevor Noah's does it take to change a light bulb? One, but he has to do it in six different accents and explain the cultural context of each one.
Oh, I like that. Okay. I like that. And you can tell GPD4 does have some knowledge of you and we, when we asked these questions. So now we're getting into a little bit more of like the knowledge of you on the daily show. Okay.
How many Trevor Noah's does it take to change a light bulb? Two, one to change it and one to roast Donald Trump for not knowing how to do it.
需要几个特雷弗·诺亚来换灯泡呢?两个,一个换灯泡,一个为唐纳德·特朗普不会换灯泡而猛批他。
Oh, okay. All right. So that jokes a little simple, but I'll take it. Yes. No intelligence there. All right.
哦,好的。没问题。那个笑话有点简单,但我还是接受了。是的,没有智力含量。行。
Joke number four. How many Trevor Noah's does it take to change a light bulb? One, but he has to wait for John Stewart to retire first. That's funny. Yes. That's funny.
See, that's a great joke. That's actually a very nice light bulb joke. I'm good. We have similar judgments.
你瞧,那个笑话真的很棒,这是一个非常好的灯泡笑话。我很好,我们的判断很相似。
So what do you think about GPD4 and in this little microcosm? Does it have a sense of humor? So I will start with the second question first.
你认为GPD4和这个小世界怎么样呢?它有幽默感吗?那我先回答第二个问题。
Does it have a sense of humor? I don't know the answer to that question and I don't think any of us knows the answer to that question.
它有幽默感吗?我不知道那个问题的答案,我认为我们中没有人知道那个问题的答案。
Does it understand what a sense of humor may be? I think the answer is yes. It is able to learn how we use language to create what we call a sense of humor. So understanding is maybe that's one of the most difficult questions to ask about AI I find because we don't know what understanding even is.
You know, and I know you've done a lot of work in this read, but one of the most fascinating stories in AI I came across was, so you know this, I've been working with Microsoft for years.
I've been lucky enough to consult with them and it started in hardware and then we work in philanthropy together and then spilled over into AI and everything else. So I'd go to Redmond and I'd work at the campus and I'd travel around the world with Brad Smith and sometimes we'd be at events with Satya and Panna and the team out there.
我很幸运能与他们进行咨询。一开始是在硬件方面合作,后来我们一起从事慈善事业,然后又涉及到人工智能和其他方面。所以我会去 Redmond 总部工作,与 Brad Smith 一起周游世界,有时与 Satya、Panna 和团队一起参加活动。
And one of the more fascinating stories I came across involving AI was there was a model that they were trying to train and this model had an almost perfect track record picking between pictures of men and women, men and women, it was really simple in what it was trying to do.
我遇到的一则非常有趣的 AI 故事是,他们试图训练一个模型,这个模型几乎完美地分辨男女的照片,非常简单直接。
What it failed at consistently was picking out black women from the men and women sample if it was black people and try as they try as they may they they could not get this AI to get it right and they they kept on loading more images, more images, more images, training, a training, a training at more images, they're like, is it a bias? Is it this? What is happening? What is happening?
It kept on mislabeling black women as men. And this is one of the most fascinating stories of what what they did essentially was they sent the AI to Africa. I think it was to one of the centers in Kenya that that that Microsoft has and they I mean it sounds like a really like ludicrous story when you go like, we sent the AI to Africa to learn.
And essentially what they did was they started training the model out there and over time the model a got exponentially faster at understanding the difference between black men and black women. But the reason was most interesting.
They realized that the AI never knew what a man or a woman was. All it had drawn was a correlation between people who were makeup and people who don't wear makeup. And it had decided that that was man and that was woman.
And so the programmers and everyone using the AI had assumed that the AI understood what a man was and what a woman was and didn't understand why it didn't understand it. And only came to realize when it went to Africa that the AI was using makeup and because black people and black women in particular have been underserved in the makeup industry, they don't wear as much makeup.
And so they generally don't have makeup on in pictures and they don't have makeup that's prominent. And so the AI never knew it never understood man or woman.
所以,他们通常在照片中不化妆,也没有突出的化妆品。所以,人工智能从未知道,从未理解男人或女人。
It just went ah red lips blush on cheeks blue eyeshadow woman. And that was it.
她只是涂了红唇、脸颊微红和蓝色眼影,就这样了。
And so I think whenever we have these conversations about that about understanding, I think we are still at the very basic stages of understanding what understanding even is and then trying to draw all those those correlations between all the different data points of what a thing is thinking or not thinking or is it just inferring from an idea? You know what I mean?
Yeah, 100%. One of the things that I think about this great kind of 2023 being this year of large language models and in acceleration, a variety of AI things as we're now actually going to get much more sophisticated.
We kind of apply this human metaphor, understand speaks has a sense of humor and we kind of do it poorly when we get to animals because we presume that they're less intelligent because they don't really have that same model and yet they do have a model of the world and they do have some feelings and all the rest.
And we do it really crazily when it gets to like my car, you know, it's feeling bad today. You know, or or something like that. Now we have to be much more sophisticated and understand what understanding is that it isn't just the question of, you know, like, well, does it understand the way Trevor does or the way Aria does or the way Reed does?
It's like, okay, what is that notion of understanding and how does it apply here and how does it apply here? Right.
就像是,你知道,理解的概念是什么、在这里它如何应用、以及在这里如何应用?对的。
I completely agree. Yeah. So answer the second question you had, what do I think of chat GPT, you know, and GPT four, which I've tested a little bit, it's one of the biggest leaps in technology and in the evolution of how we do things that we have experienced in decades.
I always think back to major moments in time. What was it like when the steam engine was created? What was it like when, you know, the telephone was created? What was it like all these moments where all of a sudden you were able to do in ways that you never imagined possible? That's where we are with chat GPT and I think in the same way I'm cautious, you know, I try and I try and tell people to be cautious about thinking about how bad it can be.
I'm also cautious to think about how good it can be. I go, we genuinely don't know. It could be one of the biggest leaps forward in helping us understand how thinking even works in a strange way. From what I've seen, like it's problem solving, you've seen it solve problems that haven't even existed. It's ability to try and understand logic using, you know, natural language. It's a brilliant, brilliant tool.
Well, to your point, it's limited on the data that it's trained on. Yeah. And I do appreciate, I feel like right now in the AI discussion, it's like you either have people on Twitter saying that the robots are coming for us or you have people saying it's amazing. Don't worry. You know, these aren't the droids you're looking for.
And so I loved your, you know, woman versus man, Microsoft story, they had to go retrain the data. Do you see that as an unhopeful story because, you know, this is often created by white men. And so there's limitations, whether it's bias, you know, anti-women bias, etc. Or do you see that as a hopeful story where actually once we find out what's wrong, we can sort of fix the model. Like how do you see that in the evolution of AI?
I'm eternally an optimist in this space. And, you know, you can probably play this recording back when the earth is burning and the robots put us into prisons. But for me, it's a hopeful story because let me ask you this, if you have an AI model that you realize is biased, you are able to find and correct that bias in a time that is almost impossible to recreate in a human being.
在这个领域我一直都是个乐观主义者。你知道的,即使当地球正在燃烧,机器人把我们关进监狱时,你也可以回放这个录音。但对我而言,这是一个充满希望的故事。因为,假设你有一个 AI 模型,你意识到它存在偏见,那么你能够在几乎不可能在人类身上重现的时间内找到并纠正这种偏见。
You know, so I think about how biased the world is that we live in and how impossible it is. It's almost impossible to change those biases that people hold. So if you say judges are sentencing people from poorer backgrounds and, you know, people of color and black people are getting higher sentencing from a judge, how do you now go and undo that? And so that's why people talk about dismantling a system and recreating a new one, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera.
But I argue in the world of AI and in these models, you can actually create a system where you're constantly refining it and it does not have any ego attached to its decisions all the way processes information. And so I think for me, that's more hopeful. I think the ability to change your mind is something that most human beings struggle with. Myself included.
Like I always ask myself the question, I go, what if I'm wrong? If I'm wrong right now, what if I'm wrong? You know, that's, I'm always playing that in my head because I always have to think about the possibility that I could be wrong because everything I learned in life is because I was wrong. Somebody had to teach me something else. And, and with AI, I don't think we have that limitation, you know, yes, we have to be aware. But the fact that we're having the conversations means we're at least aware and it means when we discover it, just like we do with every other technology, you know, you discover, oh, this car, you know, the brakes, well, yeah, they have a recall and they go like, all right, let's fix the brakes.
Now you have over the air updates gone are the days of getting a cartridge from Nintendo and that's the game and it's done. Now you get a game and in the first week, you've got your first patch on the first day often. I think that's hopeful because, um, because you would want a system that is constantly changeable and a system where you're constantly trying to, you know, you try to resolve all of those, those bugs along the way.
I mean, you hit on an issue I cared deeply about and if we could just like send patches to the criminal justice system and make it not just for the military, exactly. That's what we, that's what we should be doing. A thousand percent.
One of, I watched your interview with Miramarati on the Daily Show and, um, you know, one of the things that I, you know, because she shares a lot of beliefs we work together on the open AI content. She shares a, you know, kind of this, this view of actually, in fact, of amplification and she was talking about that with you with Dolly and other things.
Um, I didn't quite get from the show how it sat with you. Like do you think, um, AI is going to be a really useful tool in augmenting writers and artists? Uh, will there be some replacement? You know, how, how, when you were having that dialogue, you were doing a very good job of, as you do, of bringing her out, but I was curious about what your reflections within your industry are of what the next, you know, year and three years of this will look like in terms of producing, uh, perspective, you know, news, entertainments.
Right. Right. Right. Yeah. So, so here's the, here's the, the, the biggest thing I've enjoyed, but in a, in a, in a, in like a cramajony kind of way in this conversation.
对的。对的。对的。是的。所以,我在这次谈话中最享受的事情,是在一种混杂的方式中体验到的。
I found it particularly interesting that everybody says the phrase, or not everybody, but a lot of people will use the phrase, AI is going to replace these jobs. These jobs are going to be taken away by AI. It is going to, unlike people, I think everybody needs to take a step back and realize, you're, you're not afraid of AI. You're afraid of the companies and the employers who are going to look for any excuse to get rid of somebody and replace that person with either AI or with one person who can do multiple jobs.
You know, in the same way, you know, it took what 20 odd people to, you know, farm a piece of land, then the tractor was invented and then those 20 people immediately became obsolete. And one person was, was, was pulling this, was driving this tractor that was pulling the plow. I think one of the, one of the most important discussions we should be having is around people, purpose and the plans around what we're going to do when these technologies evolve as opposed to thinking of the technologies as some sort of boogie man because the technology isn't. The boogie man is capitalism.
That's the truth. So you have to figure out how you manage in a world where some people's purpose may change and be moved around. And I think to be honest, you see a lot of classes in this conversation because when these conversations center around manufacturing jobs or mining, you'll see a lot of people saying like, look, you've got to re-skill. You've got to re-tool. That's what happens. At the end of the day, you know, it's like mining won't be around forever. You've got to learn about green energy. That's just life. And then now AI comes and it's threatening more white collar jobs and all of a sudden those same people are like, you, you can't just have this technology that's, there are writers in the, in Hollywood that are going to be out of jobs. There are, there are journalists that are, is it going to write articles for them? We can't just allow this. And it's like, oh, now, first of all, you see what it's like to have a technology that may replace you and you understand how callous a lot of your comments have been.
But also, I think it gets everybody, it should push everybody to the real conversation which is what are we trying to do? One of the most wonderful quotes I ever heard was, I think it was Sweden's, either was like Minister of Finance or somebody high up in Sweden's government. And he said, in Sweden, they don't care about protecting jobs. They care about protecting workers. The people aren't the jobs. And so in Sweden, what they say is, hey, we're just going to make sure that you are always fine. Your job can go away and your job can disappear, but you don't disappear with it.
And I think, I think a lot of the fear that we're experiencing, especially in America, is in and around the fact that so many people's livelihoods are tied to their jobs. So if you don't have a job, you don't have healthcare. If you don't have a job, you, you, you don't have a credit report. If you don't have a job, you don't have access to, if you don't have a job, you don't have a job. If you don't have a job, sometimes you don't even exist. Like, what do you do is more important than who you are?
And so I think in and around AI, the reason I'm an optimist is because I go, we can create this tool, but it is forcing us to have a larger conversation around what is the job, what isn't the job. So you know, when you ask me what I think of it, I think it's a fantastic tool. You know, it's the same way I remember when Windows 3.1 launched in my life. I was like, this is the greatest thing I've ever experienced ever. I don't want to type DIR slash page. I'm done with that. You know what I mean? I don't want to be going through every single file and searching for a folder and typing every command prompt out there. I don't want to do that. The graphical user interface changed everything.
因此,在人工智能领域,我是一个乐观主义者,因为我认为我们可以创造这个工具,但这迫使我们围绕什么是工作,什么不是工作进行更大的讨论。所以,你知道,当你问我对它的看法时,我认为这是一个很棒的工具。你知道,就像我记得当 Windows 3.1 在我的生活中推出时。我觉得这是我经历过的最伟大的事情。我不想打 DIR 线 page。我不想再这样做了。你知道我说的是什么吧?我不想去查找每一个文件和查找一个文件夹并且输入每一个命令提示符。我不想这样做。图形用户界面改变了一切。
And I think this is in many ways different type of graphical user interface where it's going to enable us to either program faster or to write quicker or to summarize information in a way that we never have before. And in doing that, we can do more.
The question is, how do we protect people from the inevitable conclusion of capitalism, which is a company is going to try to make as much profit as possible because of a thing called quarterly earnings, which I hate.
By the way, this isn't really our subject here and we will get to a funny GPT-4 thing as part of it. But I do think it's important for me to say, when I was an undergraduate, I was kind of like very opposed to the kind of philosophy of capitalism.
I would say it's a great technology and a bad philosophy, a little bit of the meaning of life. I've now kind of come to the view that it's kind of like, look, what we've been doing is the technologies we've been modifying at all kinds of ways. And a lot of where we've gotten to, and among some circles, it's fashionable to be critical of capitalism is like, well, actually a lot of the progress we've made since the middle ages in terms of manufacturing and much of all comes through capitalism and does come through mechanisms like quarterly profits, which has some negative side effects too and can be, but we've also gotten a tremendous amount out of it.
So I tend to be the, how do we mod it? Or if someone has a better idea than it, entirely, like how do we have a new idea? But it's like, we've gotten a lot of good things about it. So I tend to be a modified capitalism person.
Oh yeah, but I think if you look at it, there's no denying it comes with, many things come with good, but like I learned working with my mom in the garden, which I hated, every single plant given the opportunity will try to destroy every other plant in its ecosystem if it's not meant to be part of it.
And I think we shouldn't take that for granted in terms of like how, to your point, capitalism has been designed in the way we think of it now. Like what is it actually trying to do? Everything is good, but everything taken into an extreme will have disastrous effects. You know, so fasting is good for you. Fasting perpetually is starvation. You know, so drinking is good for you. Drinking perpetually is drowning. I think the same thing goes for this.
We have to ask ourselves the question, if we're going to exist in a society where people's livelihoods, literally their livelihoods are dependent on a thing called job, what happens if job no longer exists and what if job is replaced by AI or robot or machine or anything?
And so I think when we look at AI, I think we will yield better results if people aren't spending half their energy worried that this thing is coming to get them and can spend all of their energy working on using it for what it can be used for. And so I think that's what we need to be thinking about now with AI is, okay, how does this make people's jobs as opposed to take people's jobs?
And then for me, which is my passion, I go to, well, maybe it means it's not an eight-hour workday anymore. It's a four-hour workday, you know? And then I mean, I know I'm delusional in saying that because it'll never happen, but that's honestly my dream is that people will use these tools and then we just have more time in life.
Trevor, let's pull that thread for a moment. So this is your dream, like one of your big ideas.
特雷弗,我们来稍微探讨一下这个想法吧。这是你的梦想,就像你的某个大想法一样。
Genuinely. Yeah. So, what is it like to be a person who's been working for us today, paint the picture in 20 years?
真的嗎?那麼,像一個今天在我們這裡工作的人,在 20 年後的樣子是怎樣呢?請描述一下。
Think about it, Arya, what are we trying to do? You know, everyone thinks the week. So during the pandemic, I realized how many of our ideas are actually just constructs that we've created.
Monday through Friday. Yeah, the week is so confident. We're so confident that a weekend is two days and then you work for five. Everyone goes like, this makes complete sense.
Totally. But then you go, then you just read a little bit and you realize, oh, wait, the weekend was invented because labor unions at some point said it is not sustainable to work every single day of the week. And they had to force, it's a force manufacturing plants and factories to give workers time off. And then they imagine that the weekend was invented as we know it.
And so when you see these discussions now with the pandemic, people being like, should we do a four day work week? And what do they find? Productivity doesn't actually drop. And you're like, huh? And I will challenge anyone, anyone listening to this podcast right now.
Tell me how much time you spend in an office where you're not working. Just be honest. But the time you walk in, to the time you turn on your computer, then you walk over to the coffee machine and then you waste time. Then you chat to people, you catch up with them and with their, about their lives, talk about something. Then you talk about scheduling and meeting. You don't need to schedule the meeting. You get to the meeting. You talk about what your kid did at school and a funny story. They chat about something that happened at the Teachers Association. You talk about your gripes in the neighborhood.
The trash didn't get picked up. You have a bit of a meeting. Then you schedule another meet. No one's working at work. We're all lying. No one has a working at work. Most people are not working at work, especially in office jobs. And so I think if we have an honest conversation, we can get to a place where we go, you know it. We don't all need to be in work for as long as we think we do.
And I almost feel like we get out of the world of saying people are paid for their time, but they're paid for their productivity in a larger sense. And then you go like, yeah, how many hours a week do you work? It depends on how long it takes for me to get my job done. And with AI, it doesn't take that long. And I'm an AI technician, you know? And that's what it should be.
I mean, I love it about office workers because I'm always like, take any office worker and let them be a teacher for just one week where they actually have to work all day long. And they'll be like, where was my coffee break? Yes, exactly. I'm with you.
To transition a little bit, you know, we talked about how AI could be a tool for the future of the entertainment industry. We shared with you a story that was written by GPT-4. And so if you hate it, I didn't write it. That's fine. You're only hurting GPT-4's feelings. And it posited a future where there was the AI, Lee show.
嗯,稍微转换一下话题,你知道我们之前讨论了 AI 在娱乐产业中的未来可能会成为一个什么样的工具。我们与你分享了由 GPT-4 写成的一篇故事。如果你不喜欢,那没关系,这不是我写的。你只会伤害到 GPT-4 的感情。这篇故事描绘了一个未来,有一个名叫 AI Lee 的节目。
Okay. So, in 2033 where the AI was customizing the show to who was watching. If the person was 70, it was explaining what TikTok was. If the person was 40, it was talking to them about LeBron just, you know, getting over the scoring title. Like, what do you think about this story or how would you use AI in the next, you know, 5, 10 years to create a better entertainment show, to create a better media show, to create something in your industry?
So there were two parts of the story that I really enjoyed. The idea of creating a show for every individual person that catered to them is I think one of the most exciting advances in technology and in entertainment we could possibly pursue because while it is normal for us to like learn together, grow together, go together, et cetera, you can't deny that means a lot of people get left behind because of a standardized anything.
So, imagine if you had a news show that catered to your level of knowledge about the subject matter and knew how to filter out what you already know and what you should know and what you don't know and what you need to know, that would be amazing. I can't, I think that would be phenomenal.
The one downside though is I think we should never take for granted what we lose in society, the more niche and individualized our experiences become. I think it's important for us to remember how much being a part of a society comes from having a shared experience of what reality is. That's why I'm a big fan of cultural touchstone moments.
I love big events like the World Cup, the Super Bowl. Yeah, like any of these things that everybody is watching, like a space, like a moon launch, a moon landing, all of these big moments because what they do is they just make everybody agree on reality for a moment. Where were you the moment that's such a powerful tool that we take for granted and that we're losing in a world that becomes more individualized.
So it is good. Yeah, now we can watch whatever TV show we can listen to whatever song, but it also means there's few of us humming at the same frequencies. There's few of us laughing at the same moments. So while it's good and amazing, I think for learning especially, I think there's also an element of bringing it all together that would also be crucial and maybe it could do that.
Maybe at the end of the day, read what's just something, you watch something, I watch something, and it makes sure that we all know that LeBron James has now surpassed the all-time scoring record, but the way in which we learned it was completely different. And then maybe that could be what sort of brings us back together.
And that's kind of the thing that I'm hopeful for. And by the way, to your earlier work comments, which I basically completely agree, it's like, how do we use this tool? How do we do it?
I think there's a whole bunch of human work that we essentially have almost infinite demand on.
我认为有很多人类工作,我们基本上有几乎无限的需求。
I'll use a parallel from LinkedIn, which is, you know, when we start LinkedIn, it feels that, oh, this is going to like put recruiters out of work because it'll amplify the ability for recruiters so much that you'll have one versus 10. And what I've seen over the last 20 years is we have eventing the same number or more recruiters. And because we have kind of infinite demand for it.
It's not every job, like we don't have infinite demand for tractor drivers, right? You know, there's places where that 20 becomes one. But I think that kind of amplification, and I think that AI in the media space can be used to build bridges. And build bridges also to share truth.
Like obviously everyone's worried about the misinformation and can be used that way and how groups politicize. But I think it can also be how do we use it to find a common truth, partially through common events as well. And I think that's one of the things that we should be asking for the creators of AI to be paying attention to and to doing. And I think that's one of the reasons why the public dialogue about it is so important.
Right. I think it can be achieved. You know, I always think of Wikipedia as a great example. Every time people talk about misinformation and society being bad and what I disagree. I disagree because I look at Wikipedia as a perfect example of what naturally happens when there isn't an external factor pushing the platform to make decisions that are sub-optimal for the facts that it is trying to push out.
And because of Wikipedia's business model, it's accurate. And you would think, think of the internet, think of the world we live in, think of what we think of ourselves as people. You would think Wikipedia would be trash and everything would be a lie and everything would be a scam and it's not. People pride themselves on being really good at putting out good information. The community prides itself on self-policing, on self-regulating.
And what you end up with is one of the most accurate sources of information you'll ever come across. And it's also balanced.
你最终得到的是最准确的信息来源之一,并且还是平衡的。
You know, so you'll go into Wikipedia article and you can type anything. Vaccines and it'll say to you, now some people have thought this and it has been disproven by this and these are the studies and this is the that and this is, and it's there. It's all laid out for you.
And so I think we should never take for granted. That's why I keep going back to the capitalism of it all because I go to speak about AI in a vacuum is ignorant in my opinion because AI is not existing in a vacuum.
Let's go one other, you know, kind of non-AI angle of technology because you have this broad technology interest and AI is obviously one of the ways. There's all of this other sort of things, ARVR, you know, even, you know, holograms, you know, Star Trek, a smell of vision, you know, like all of this stuff.
Is there anything that either AI combining with that or other things that you see coming that you think will be particularly useful for the kind of the society, social media, you didn't media?
你觉得将来有没有任何人工智能结合其他技术或事物可以为社交媒体或其他媒体带来特别有用的东西?
Oh, definitely, definitely. I think there are many places where I'm excited to see AI contribute beyond creative expression, idea generation and information gathering. I think one of the more exciting aspects of AI for me right now is seeing what it will be able to do in terms of being an assistant.
I think people take for granted how wonderful and powerful AI could be as an assistant for everyone in everything, you know, your grandmother using it to tell her about her medication, but really break it down. So your child using it to ask a question to further understand what the homework assignment is actually about as opposed to just sitting at home blank and not understanding.
Somebody at work asking for a piece of clarification with some of the materials that they may be using, you know, in, I don't know, everything from building a power plant to compiling an Excel spreadsheet, whatever it is, I think those areas are really exciting.
So in the world of like AR and VR, I mean, we don't know. I've often thought like I'm a gamer. I love gaming. I love thinking about how AI could combine with gaming.
I think of worlds that we already experienced in video games. And now imagine if, imagine if AI is generating all of the conversations that every character in Grand Theft Auto is having as you're walking through the street, all these NPCs, in these non playable characters, you're walking around and they're all having real conversation that are being generated in the possibilities almost endless.
And then you think of, you know, small things like training. You're training to be a doctor, an engineer, a pilot, you know, a mechanic, whatever it is. Imagine a world where your instructor is AI. You're wearing goggles that are showing you what you're going to be doing.
You're able to stand in front of a Rolls Royce engine on a Boeing 787 or whatever plane it's on and you're able to meticulously work on it and work to the level of skill that you need to to be able to get that job in a way that you wouldn't have before.
You couldn't have flown to the right academy. You wouldn't have been able to live where you needed to live. You wouldn't have afforded accommodation on campus. And yet now you could do all of this and your instructor moves at the pace that you need them to move at.
As opposed to moving at the pace that they have to because of, you know, the hour hands on a clock. And I think all of those applications are really, really, really fascinating because it can become everybody's personal professor.
Where you can say, Professor, I don't understand that could you repeat that? Could you go back? Could you slow down? Could you elaborate? Could you break it down? Could you give it to me in an analogy?
Could you, whatever it might be, it means that you almost have an infinite capacity for learning and applying that knowledge. And I, yeah, every, every avenue I see it used in, I find particularly fascinating.
I love that so much. Read actually wrote an article called a co-pilot for every profession that was similar sort of in vain to what you're talking about.
Like, everyone thinks about like, oh, but isn't a real life teacher better than an AI tutor? And it's like, well, if you're a kid at home to your point, like sitting after school for three hours of no adult, like, oh my God. Like an AI tutor is so much better.
And so the possibilities are endless. Like one thing we talked about was, you know, truth, information, you talked about how social media hits the, the capital is in profit motive has sort of disrupted that cycle.
Like do you have any, any hopes for how to make the social media atmosphere better? How to, not necessarily with AI with anything, how to make the disinformation cycle better?
I mean, this is something you, you know, you talked about on the daily show for the, the last six years. Like, how do we fix that part of society? Or are we hopeless?
Well, I don't think we're hopeless. I think we're misguided. In my opinion, trying to fix disinformation is trying to undo humans. I am yet to discover a period in time when there wasn't disinformation.
You know, it's literally as old as time. Go read the Bible as people lying and telling stories in the, in the Bible. And I think of it that way I go like instead of trying to fix disinformation, first of all, we try and understand why people do it, why they don't do it.
You know, we'll always study that forever. What, what I look at with social media rather is how do we protect ourselves from something spreading as quickly as it does? So it's the same reason we don't allow people to own bombs.
You know, unfortunately, in society, most humans don't want to hurt other humans, most humans. But for those outliers, we don't want them to have an outsizability to inflict harm upon others. And so we try and limit their access to these weapons or to these, you know, these tools of destruction.
I think the same goes for social media. The one downside of social media is it's designed to create engagement. And I think sometimes when we block ourselves when we talk about it being good or bad, it's not good or bad. It's just it is designed to maximize engagement.
Unfortunately for humans, and maybe this is because of our reptilian brain or whatever, we engage with danger and we engage with what we don't agree with and we weigh more than things. If you read a tweet that you like, someone tweets something out there, they go like, nothing better than the first day of spring.
You just read it and you're like, yeah, keep it moving. Happy, happy, keep it moving. You might not like it. You might not retweet it. You might not anything. But if somebody writes there they go, spring is the worst season ever invented. I wish it was winter perpetually, you would go, all right, I need to engage with this psychopath and it's on. That's engagement.
And so unfortunately what happens is because the model needs engagement to remain profitable, it then has to encourage the thing that is not best for us and that is conflict. So how would we change that? I honestly don't know.
I mean, I look at what's interesting is like, look at how China has handled their social media and don't get me wrong, I'm not saying we should move to China's model. But there are a few interesting elements in how they've decided what you can and cannot do for the health of a community.
You know, you cannot just inundate people with TikTok videos that like, you know, basically mush their brains. They are TikTok and yet here they are saying, no, this is how we think TikTok should be applied to our country and how kids should use TikTok and what should be on TikTok and how many hours of TikTok, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera.
I don't think that's meritless. You know, I'm not saying we should move to a Chinese clamp down system, but I don't think it's meritless. The same way at some point the US government said, hey, vape pens, actually what's happening here? The same way, you know, the US government decides how much alcohol can be in a bottle of alcohol. The same, we decide all these things.
We decide oftentimes what is best for the health of human beings. And I think it should be no different with social media. There has to be some sort of reckoning and some sort of conversation around. Can it just be unbridled? Can you just use it infinitely? Can it just spew as much hatred at you as possible?
When I open my phone, I'm just going to see every racist incident that's happened in the last 15 years and there's no context as to when or how or if it happened, that to me is, I don't think that's good. It's not healthy. It's not sustainable.
To be honest with you, I do think social media companies should be held responsible for what is not put on their platforms, but for what is pushed on their platforms. That's amplified. Yeah. And I think a lot of social media companies have tried to duck and dive and be like, oh no, we're just a public messaging board. We're a public square. We don't want to decide what people say or don't say.
It's like, hey, okay. But if that's the truth and if that were true, there's no public square that amplifies somebody's speech on their behalf. If read goes and stands in a public square and says something, the public square doesn't send that to me at home. And so I think there's a level of culpability that social media companies wish to avoid. And I think at some point, like I think of the most dystopian version of this is like, I can see a world where somebody, and I think there may be a case that's heading up either to the Supreme Court or somewhere where somebody's going to do something.
And it's going to be something terrible. And their defense is going to be that they thought they were acting either in self-defense or protecting their country or whatever it may be because of the reality that they were presented with by social media. And I think it is then going to be an interesting case study in how much does social media play a role in determining what people do or don't do because if you are watching, let's put it this way, if you are watching the local news and or even the news like the national news and someone like Lester Holt came on and said breaking news, America is being invaded right now.
There are aliens out, everyone get outside and take your pots and pans, fight, fight with all your might and you walked outside and you saw aliens or you saw what they said were aliens. They said they're going to be dressed like this and this is fight with all your might and the president put out an address and said, there's aliens. Because we've got to fight these aliens, you would do it most likely, right? You'd either lock yourself in your house or you'd go outside and you'd fight the aliens.
And then the next day someone comes and goes, actually that was all fake. Yeah, it was actually just like it was a fake news report. We don't know what happened. Are you liable for all the aliens that you've killed that weren't aliens? What do you do now? You're like, oh, they were actually humans. Are you fully liable or aren't you? We want to make sure we capture a few rapid fire questions and I will open with, is there a movie song or book that fills you with optimism for the future?
So a book, one of my favorite stories is by Rolle-Dahl. It's, I think it's the wonderful story of Henry Sugar. I love that story. That's six more. Yeah. It's a wonderful story because it's a story of a man who has everything in life wants to get more of everything in life. And on that journey discovers that he was trying to fill a bucket full of holes essentially which was himself. And on this journey of trying to become like the richest, the everything is the everything he discovers that he doesn't need all of what he was chasing.
And he actually pairs down his life and he becomes more philanthropic and he gives away more and he, yeah, and he just, but it's a beautiful story about what, you know, what people can be and what we shouldn't forget we're actually trying to do. It's a really wonderful story because it reminds me if we can find ways to tap into what we actually need in society and we can find a cleaner path to getting there.
Rapid Fire number two, where do you see progress in society that makes you hopeful or that inspires you? Like what good is going on that you feel really good about?
Oh, everywhere, everywhere. You know, I, I think one of the downsides of a, you know, nonstop 24 hour news, both on television and online has made people a lot more cynical than I think we should be, you know, because news has to be bad in order for you to find it interesting, you know, in order for it to, you know, generate that engagement we talk about. And what that means, unfortunately, is you can live in a space where you only think bad is happening.
And I'm not saying bad isn't happening, but it is not happening at the rates and the scale that most people think it is. You know, I'll ask people questions, you know, someone will be like, oh, this city is not safe. And I'll go like, oh, what makes you say that? Oh, you know, crime has gone up and it's just dangerous now. And I go, okay, have you been in danger? No, but have your friends been in it? No, but I heard of and I saw and I'm like, where?
And the truth is it's just how it's told to us, you know, it's that great quote for the great majority of mankind are more concerned by things that seem than by those that are. And so what makes me hopeful is the things that actually are standards of living increasing across the globe. Yes, we'll have moments where we're we're we backslide. We've always got to fight against those, but just like a drought in, you know, in the Sarangetti, there will be moments of that in life, unfortunately.
And what we're always trying to do is immunize ourselves from the effects of those backsliding moments and hedge our ourselves. But we shouldn't forget that we're constantly moving forward in all areas. You know, I look at how tech, a world where it was once so homogenous and blindly homogenous has become completely comfortable having conversations now about like, all right, but what about what about women in the space and what about people of color in the space and how are we making this more equitable?
People don't people take for granted how not just unheard of but impossible those conversations were a few decades ago. And now people just have them. I think that's fantastic. I think that's a wonderful place to see technology moving forward.
I think in order to be a technologist, in order to be somebody who loves creating technology and working on designing a future, you have to be an optimist because you have to believe the future you're designing for will exist or you have to believe that what you're creating will contribute to that future. So as somebody who loves working on technology and working in technology, I, yeah, I can't help but be an optimist. And it's not even like I made myself that way. I am that way. And that's probably why I gravitate towards the world of tech.
Is there a particular technology that you're watching to help us regain optimism or to shape to make sure we don't because we are collapsing into pessimism in various ways? Is there anything that you're particularly paying attention to there for for reconnecting us intellectually and emotionally with, you know, and I'm on a broader societal basis with possibilities for optimism?
Although it has many downsides, I have, I have been really intrigued with how TikTok operates and look, it's still relatively young versus the other social media platforms. And so I don't know what it will evolve into. It may go downhill. I don't know. But there's something wonderful in how they've managed to not just curate and create positive worlds for people, but they've also found a really interesting way to introduce new ideas to people and sort of poke holes in their bubbles.
And I look at how much joy people have. That's oftentimes how I measure things. You know, I don't know if you remember there was a period, do you remember the period in life when everyone would say, have you seen this YouTube video? Oh, Charlie bit my finger. Have you seen this YouTube video, the cat playing piano? Have you, oh, I watched this YouTube video the other day, this YouTube video? Those are magical moments. Now YouTube has become a lot more long form and people don't really go to it for that type of information or content, but that's beautiful.
That's really, really cool. And I think TikTok is in that infancy right now. I think most social media platforms actually start there fun enough. You know, I remember I was on Twitter when it was all about jokes. All people made with jokes and it was fun and it was cool and it was reckless as well. But that's what it was. And now it's become a lot more serious and a lot more, you know, angry and a lot more determined. But I think TikTok is in that space right now and so I'm always excited to see where these, where these technologies are going to go.
How do they connect people? How do they inform people? How do they bring them joy? The person who always smiled to you and be like, oh, what's this TikTok? The other day, oh, have you seen that TikTok way? That's wonderful. I don't think we should ever take for granted how powerful joy can be.
Well, Trevor, you set us up really well to the final question we ask everyone, which is, leave us a final thought. What is possible to achieve if everything broke humanity's way? Like if everything went right, if we achieved the possible, what does that look like for us? What is that future? What is the first step to get there?
This is going to sound weird. I hope we don't ever get there. I have recently been reading a lot about how we see the world and how puzzles and challenge and difficulty are the reason we survive as a species. And not unlike any other species, I wonder what would happen to us if we have no challenge and everything does fall our way.
Does it mean we become less resilient? Does it mean we become less resistant to what may impact us? Does it mean we don't survive pandemics? Does it mean we, because once something pops into our world that's an outlier, that doesn't go our way, does that wipe us out? You know, do we become such a fragile species that we don't know how to deal with adversity? I don't know the answer to these questions.
I keep talking to people much smarter than me to try and figure it out. And I like thinking about it myself. I hope we get to a place where everybody finds a solution to an almost artificial scarcity that we've created in some aspects of what we do. And we sort of come to exist more as opposed to just living to do.
I sort of can't articulate it, but I think about how important it is to have art, like a sculpture, a beautiful building, a painting, music. I take all of these things for granted. You don't see them schools, you see them getting cut from curriculums. And I understand why people go like, well, I'm not going to pay so my kids learn how to play the clarinet. You're kidding me a recorder? That's what's the point of that? You can't get a job. Yeah, but it's more than just about jobs.
And so if everything fell our way, I would hope we live in a world where not everything is about do, but everything could be about be. And so then a teacher, a painter, an architect, an engineer, a pilot, a comedian, everyone could just find their purpose and meaning in a way that doesn't threaten their livelihood. Because I think if we completely lose that, then we just become like a worker species that has no flame, no personality, no creativity. And so I, yeah, I hope everything falls in our way in that direction. We got to keep that grit and keep that joy, for sure.
And on that note, we look forward to having you voice the AI on a future Star Trek episode. And Trevor as a friend and as an amazing humanist, thank you very much for joining us on Possible. Thank you so much.
That was so fun to hear from Trevor Noah. Rita, I'd love to hear from you. Like what was the most surprising thing about the interview? You know Trevor, he's a friend. What surprised you?
Actually, what surprised me was the depth of the optimism. In part because obviously when you, we watch him interviewing in the Daily Show and doing his comedy routines, it tends to be the what's absurd or broken or shining a light on something in order to make a difference in it. And so you don't see the very broad and deep what it's time to be alive. Oh my God, there's so many things as possible. It's so important to get to that future.
It's so important to do that. But of course, it's important to bring humanity along with us and to have human concerns and to not just be including, of course, a bunch of fairly bold proposals, which you know might end up, that would obviously be a spectacular utopia.
What I loved that is not quite the same but related is this conversation about joy and that the importance of joy and that he's clearly a very serious person. He wants to improve the world. He sees the dangers and discrimination and wants to make the world a better place.
But a lot of people like that are too sober that they can't recognize the importance of joy. And I think one of the places where this could come together is even if you don't have a four hour work week, a four hour work day, you still have work the same number of hours. But you're working a better job. You're working a job that brings you more joy. You're not, to your point, doing drudgery in the field. You're not having a terrible checkout job that you don't really care about because AI has taken some of that away and you've been able to find a new job. It's sort of more centers squarely with your purpose that you find more joy in.
And so I just found that sort of reaching for that better future, we can also include joy. You just have to be a productivity and they often go together because the more joyful you find something the harder you're going to work and perhaps the more you're going to want to work, which certainly resonates with me.
Completely agree. And one of the things that we always love about talking about Trevor is he actually exemplifies that joy, you know, and having that humanity, having that look what matters, you look money is how we create an infrastructure that we all live in. But it's the joy and meaning of our lives and how we add into each other's lives that actually is a real goal was I thought the perfect expression of the kind of humanism, very technologically, you know, aware and using technology to amplify humanity.
I think another thing that I really liked about the conversation was we sort of talked about the jobs issue head on as it relates to AI. So obviously that's a big criticism. And Trevor shared that great quote from Sweden where they said, we're not going to make sure your job's okay. We're going to make sure you're okay. And I think he made a great point hilariously, you know, that 10 years ago, the sort of cultural elite in the United States, weren't worried about the coal miners jobs going the way.
We're not worried about factory automation, but all of a sudden when AI is coming for the journalists or, you know, the white collar workers, there's real concern, you know, and while being hilarious about it, he made a great point. It's like let's look at our own classism as we're embarking on impeding technology in the next generation. Why do we care so more about these white collar jobs than we did the blue collar jobs? And obviously I think you and I both agree that again, let's make sure the people are okay, not the jobs. And that's the only way you can, you know, go forward and make progress.
Yeah, exactly. You know, what was your piece of information or a Trevor Noah perspective? You know, we're going to arrange so much more broadly than obviously just the media side. But was there anything in addition to kind of his quotes and his metaphors that you that really resonated with you?
I just think he's such an insightful guy. So even in thinking about his rapid fire answers, he picked the story of Henry Sugar that I remember reading when I was 10. It's such a simple story about like what we should all aspire to in life. And Trevor got it right that, you know, we all think about the means to the end.
And it's like, no, no, no, no, what's the end? What are we here for? Like this is so dorky. But over the past 24 hours, I've been ruminating on the famed Cheryl Crow quote. It's not about getting what you want. It's about wanting what you got. And I think Trevor sort of embodied that. He's like, look, slow down everyone. Why are we talking about all these things? Like, let's stroll it back. Let's talk about what's really important. And let's center that in our lives.
I've watched all of his specials. But I hope at the one day to be in the audience. Right. You and me both. Read one thing I wanted to ask you about is he did, you know, he did talk about capitalism. Obviously, you are someone who believes in capitalism as a way to create the greatest good. Like, did you agree with Trevor? Disagree. What would you add to the discussion?
The nuance that I brought up a little bit in the discussion is that, you know, I am 100 percent good if we have a better idea than capitalism. On the vast majority of critics, like they just go, capitalism bad. And you're like, well, that's like saying, cars bad or airplanes bad or, you know, industrialized economies bad and so forth.
And you're like, they generate all of this really amazing things that are a central part of the vast majority of people who engage with them's lives and those people don't want to give them up for very good reasons. And there's part of how they do it. Capitalism is part of how we've gotten to the massive jump in, you know, kind of GDV per person and in prosperity. And so if there's a better, I'm game for it, but just yelling, whining, you know, being, you know, mystery negative, Mrs. Negative on this stuff doesn't, doesn't, doesn't appeal to me at all because I think it's just destructive and adds no positive, nothing useful to the conversation whatsoever.
So that's the reason I kind of push back a little bit. I was saying, I'm cautious now on being a decatalyst. Now anyone who's got a brain and eyes and a heart can see that what we've done with capitalism over the centuries has been, um, tune it. Like we go, well, this child labor thing. Let's fix that. You know, uh, oh, externality is impacting the environment. Well, let's start fixing that. Right. Yeah.
And then it's so it's really important like, so for example, you say, well, you're going to have criticism. It's great. What would you either, what would be your whole cloth new system? And why do you think that could be very dangerous shift to? It's very, you know, we need a lot of stability, stable infrastructure or what's the, what's the tune you would do?
And so the question around is to say, well, yeah, if we took the meaning of life to only be money, your bank balance, your quarterly profit, et cetera, et cetera, with some people who do, that's obviously very demeaning to what we can be as humanity, to what joy could be. Um, and whichever way you do that, of joy, spirituality, meaningfulness, you know, whatever kind of particular lens on this, this, this elevation of being human, um, is, is operating within the technology of the capitalist system.
And the technology of the money system is a very good thing. And so it's important to say, okay, yes, problems. And great, what might we do to make it better? Yeah. I think as with most things, and with what I appreciate about Trevor, it's all about nuance.
And when we talk about capitalism, the people who try to impede it or impede progress, we would prefer to make the pie as big as possible and then worry about giving it up later. And I think for me, the problem in the United States, at least in several places around the world, is we haven't, we haven't fixed the living it up yet. We haven't created the right social safety nets.
We haven't made sure that every child gets a great education or that everyone has health care in the United States, you know, a country that should be rich enough to provide everyone that. So I definitely agree with you that people who are throwing stones at capitalism without providing solutions is just silly. And let's work together to figure out what are those tweaks, what are those tunes, like exactly what you're talking about to use our heart to, you know, fix it to build toward the possible future that we want.
So hopefully, episodes of this pod are going to teach us something about how we can get to a better capitalism.
希望这个播客的剧集能够教导我们如何让资本主义变得更好,像本地人一样的方式表达。
Possible is produced by Wonder Media Network, hosted by me, Reid Hoffman and RA Finger. Our showrunner is Sean Young. Possible is produced by Edie Allard and Sarah Shleed. Jenny Kaplan is our executive producer and editor.
Possible是Wonder Media Network制作的,由我Reid Hoffman和RA Finger主持。我们的节目负责人是Sean Young。Edie Allard和Sarah Shleed制作了Possible。Jenny Kaplan是我们的执行制片人和编辑。
Special thanks to Chelsea Williamson, Jill Fritzzo, Stephen Fortelms, Jennifer Sandler. Maria Salihi, Sergio Yalamanchili, Sadis Epieva, Ian Alice, Greg Biotto, Ben Rellis, and the team at CityVox.
Thanks for listening to a special guest episode of possible on the Grey Matter Channel. You can subscribe to this new podcast from Reid Hoffman and RA Finger wherever you get your podcasts. The transcript and AI generated story are linked in the show notes for this episode.
感谢您收听可能性节目在灰质频道上的特别嘉宾片段。您可以在任何收听播客的平台上订阅 Reid Hoffman 和 RA Finger 的这个新播客。本集节目的文字稿和AI生成的故事已经在节目说明中链接了。
And if you are already subscribed to Grey Matter, you can also sign up wherever you get your podcasts. I'm Heather Mack, thanks for listening.