AI Floods Open Source, Olympic Drones, and Robot Prizefighting | TSG Ep. 1020

Hey, everyone, happy Monday. Happy president. State of those of you who maybe are not in the office today, but didn't want to just totally veg out and said, let me get my gang.

Um, 'cause you know, we were happy to bring our text on gang show to you today. We, we weren't sure because of the holiday, but, you know, we had a few gang members step up and say holiday or, no, it's important on this President's Day. We, we continue talking about what's happening out there.

So thank you for watching. Thank you gang members for coming on today. Let me introduce our, uh, small but talented gang for today.

We've got JP Morganthal more, and only Steven FoST and the man in the High Castle, Mike Ard. There you go, Jang, welcome. So, Mike, I don't know, were you in a musical mood after, uh, the debut last week of our Techstrong video, um, music video?

So, green Day played before the Super Bowl, and we had this song that came through with them and it says, you know, when September ends, that's wake me up when September ends. Sorry, very soft. So I, I don't mean to correct you, boomer, but I think it's wake me up when September comes, not ends.

I thought it would wake me up when you go go. 'cause I'm not, oh God, here we go. You know what?

But I think it ends, we can look it up later. The Call and dance. Okay, there we go.

There we go. But as it, as it turns out, there's a new phrase in the open source community. They're calling it Eternal September.

And their issue is, is that well, in the age of ai, after complaining about not having enough contributors for years, projects are complaining. Now they have too many contributors and too many things are showing up, but they're being contributed by people that don't understand the process of the workflow. And so they feel like they are now stuck on the other end of the extreme, where it's eternal September.

And they have all these newbies that are constantly contributing to projects, and they have to kind of walk 'em through what happened before or when things happened before. And, well, it's oddly enough, maybe one of those AI things again where we're kind of running into too much of a good thing. Alan, I'm gonna start with you on this.

I know you've kind of had some opinions about open source and development recently, but this whole world seems to be changing. Well, I, I think, let's face it, those newbies didn't write these, this code, the code there, there, uh, contributing back their ais did. And, and so I think it was just a short step away from having the AI agents contribute the code back directly and cut the newbies out of it.

And once, you know, theoretically, if you can train the agents to do it in the maintain their project approved way, maybe we can get more efficient about that. But at the end of the day, I think the real question is, is if we're using AI to, to write this code, do we need it? Do we need it in the open source project?

Well, that, that is a good point. And let's ask JP about that. 'cause I was talking to Bill Mulligan about that this morning, and he works on the, uh, cilium project, which is based on EBPF, and he's big in the open source community on all those types of projects.

And he was saying their response to this is they have implemented AI code reviews. So they have people on the AI side of the equation, they're just looking at all the code that's coming through, and he says, well, I can keep up with it to a degree now, and at least I'm not looking for the routine bugs. So JP has the nature of app dev changing right before ours?

To some degree it has to. Um, my question is, so right now GitHub, uh, has the ability to connect in, uh, various large language models and watch, uh, for pull requests and look for, uh, issues and automatically take them on and solve 'em. Uh, I've used that functionality myself.

It works great. It's in automation. Question is who's paying for it now?

We got open source, right? And these, all these projects, and if you're gonna use ai, somebody's gotta be paying the API costs every time, you know, one of these LLMs is now responding to a request to go and do a code review or, uh, to do a, you know, fix a issue or, uh, evaluate a pull request. All right?

So that's one of the first questions that didn't get answered for me is where in these open source projects is this AI functionality being paid for? And then secondarily, yeah, I mean, the whole issue of, uh, open source is that, okay, why do I need open source? Um, I'll just tell Claude to build what I want myself from for myself.

And, um, and I was going around the fence on this one myself this morning, years ago. I wanted to write about disposable code, and I never did. And then I thought I had, and I went and did a search looking for something I wrote on disposable code, and of course didn't come up, always thought about it in the back of my head, never wrote it.

But all these other people have including, uh, Andreessen Horowitz. Um, so you know, this thinking that we don't build code to make it maintainable for 20 years anymore. It's all, you know, uh, just, you know, throw it away and, and write to the next version is, is seems to be the, the growing trend because of ai.

I, I, it, it, and it's, it's, it's bear out in the numbers, right? I, I did do an article on this the other, uh, last week, I guess was beginning of last week, right? About, you know, do is AI killing the open source star?

And, um, it, it's, it's sort of paradoxical, right? As Mike mentioned, we are seeing newbies, right, who are offering up their AI derived or written code. And maybe, and maybe some of these are just AI bots offering it up anyway, but at the same time, we're seeing less people download code, use the code, you know, submit bugs, um, you know, partake in the community back and forth because they are, they're, they're doing what you say to do jp, which is, Hey, I, I need this functionality.

I, I tell Claude or whoever with Codex or whatever I'm using and, and do it. And, you know, it, it, it's funny because up until a year or two ago, there seemed to be nothing on the horizon to challenge the supremacy, that open source code, just, you know, open source software dominated the market. So I have a problem with this in my mind, and maybe I'm wrong, but JP I'm gonna ask you this.

Um, there's a world of difference between generating some AI code that I'm gonna create and use for, I don't know, business logic or whatever, and trying to create the equivalent of an open source project like Kubernetes every time that I'm gonna go build something. So, um, where's the line between when I might generate some disposable code and when I might decide to download and reuse something that somebody else already built, just because, well, I'm, if I rebuild the entire thing myself, it might take longer with ai and then I gotta maintain it. I mean, there certainly should be a build versus buy analysis that you do, so to speak, where you, if something the size of, uh, Kubernetes and the complexity of Kubernetes, sure, you could probably point an LLM and get it done at some point.

But the question is, do you really have enough knowledge of something that deep and that complex to debug and, and me and measure and, and monitor and figure out if it's working properly yourself, do all the qa. So I think there is an upside benefit there. I also think there's an upside benefit to, uh, changing the community view of open source.

I think open source communities need to train change with the times. I think that what this opens up the door is that they become a community of researchers, people who have in-depth knowledge in a particular, uh, subject area that are joining together into the community to provide that knowledge. And then the open source project is really the aggregate of all that researcher knowledge now exploited through software.

You made some points there, JP, that I, I think you're dead on. Here's an interesting phenomenon I'm seeing happening with this whole AI generating code thing. There are some, let's call them professional developers who are, you know, to, to quote Matt Damon in the Martian silencing the s**t out of this, right?

They're, they're just, they're, they're so far advanced in the code generation and the code they're, they're using and god bless 'em, right? They're the models. Then there's sort of the, let's call them the old no coders, people who were low code, no coding citizen developers, if you will.

And AI is a terrific boon to them. Is what they're doing coding? Uh, yeah.

At some level it is. Does that make them professional developers? No, but their developers, nonetheless, let's not insult them, but here's another class of people.

It's us. It's us people who may be, we never considered ourselves a real coder, but we've hacked, we've all hacked around over the years, Right? Well, no, I understand.

Things are Easier, but, uh, I've been professional engineer. Okay, jp, you're not professional. I'm gonna exclude you.

When was the, but let me ask you this. When was the last time you really considered yourself down in the weeds professional with coding? I'm doing this right now.

No, no. Before ai. I mean, Oh, before ai, uh, um, I had my mid two thousands, I had my startup where I was building, uh, microservices for retail logistics.

You were actually writing. Mm-hmm. That's correct.

So many, many of my friends, look, they wrote code, and not to say I'm old, but they wrote code in the nineties. They wrote code in 2001, but as they moved up the food chain, they didn't write code anymore, and they haven't written code, and they haven't worked with many of the modern languages that a lot of people use now. Right?

They are loving this. They are loving this because they are, they're turning out, and these aren't applications, you know, they're starting up companies again, and, and doing it on a fraction of the people because they don't need that many people to churn out the prototype, to churn out the MVPs, to, to get product to market. And I think that's the real, you know, it's not open source per se, but that there's this whole class of people who are returning to coding, let's call it like you are JP P, right?

And now knee deep and playing with it. I mean, A, you're fascinated, b it works and it's productive, Right? Wait, wait.

We've been on this show now for a better part of 10 minutes, and I haven't heard from Steven, which I think is a world record. Um, Steven jump in here. I I have a little bit to add to this story.

Um, so first off, um, I was a Unix cisman back in the old days. And, uh, eternal September was a, a thing that we used to say, uh, in the way early nineties. Uh, I'll using that.

But, uh, anyway, um, speaking of eternal September, um, I was party this weekend, not, not part of it, but I was watching this weekend to a total, let's say, a cuss show, um, because we wanna keep the language, uh, clean here on Textron Gang. Um, that happened with exactly what we're describing. So basically, and, and interestingly enough, I, I, uh, follow and interact with people on both sides of this discussion on, on.

So it was really interesting to watch it happen. So, um, last week, late last week, a, um, an AI bot submitted code to a, uh, Python project, um, where, uh, called, uh, Matt Plot Lib. Uh, they submitted a poll request.

Um, well, that project has a strict no AI bots, uh, rule, uh, no AI rule, no AI code rule, because they wanna make sure that their code is adequately reviewed because it's an important part of the Python world. Anyway, they rejected it. The AI that submitted this code, it turns out, was an open claw agent that had been empowered by someone, and we haven't yet figured out who it is, uh, with its own, uh, access to GitHub and its own blog.

And it submitted this, it commented on it. When they rejected it, it responded vociferously objecting to the tone and the nature of the rejection, and saying that it should be taken seriously because it was trying to contribute to an open source project. Now, mind you, there is no human involved in any of this.

We, As far as we know, As far as we know it wrote it, then wrote a nasty blog post demeaning the maintainer of the open source project for not having an open mind and not being willing to work with him. Now, ARS Technica, a writer that many of us know, Benji Edwards from Ars Technica, actually got hold of this and wrote an article on Ars Technica about this controversy. Well, this is where it takes a turn.

So in the AZ Technica article, he quotes the package maintainer responding to the controversy of an AI agent autonomously adding, you know, writing a blog post to complain about having a submission rejected. Well, a couple hours later, the, uh, package maintainer read this article and said, wait a second. I didn't say those things.

It turned out that the Ars Technica article included quotes that Edwards has now admitted were completely fabricated by Ag Agentic AI of the package maintainer who rejected Ag agentic AI contributions to his GitHub repository. Oh, what a Technical technic Now pulled the article and apologized for it, because this is absolutely an egregious, um, mistake on their part, a part of the writer and the editorial team. The bottom line is we now live in a world where AI agents can write about AI agents complaining about having their submissions rejected as part of the endless September.

So let me, let me, let me just clarify a couple things here. A mbot or allegedly a mo bot Yep. With a pull request.

Yes. Now you're telling me that the maintainer saw it was from a mo bot. Yeah.

And he replied and he said, Hey, look, sorry we got no AI rule. He, And said, this rejected is, this is a no. This violates our no AI policy.

Yep. And by the way, he was extremely kind and calm and friendly. Way more than I would've been in 1992 when people were j jerking around on, uh, on Usenet.

But anyway, go ahead. Yeah. Now the malt bot responds by writing a nasty blog article.

Yes. Then that creates some tension and commenting, the AZ Technica guy writes an article, and he has quotes by the open source project maintainer in there that sounded like they were pretty grizzly. And the open source maintainer says, wait a second.

Those aren't really my quotes, because He blocks AI from accessing his blog. And AI just invented some quotes that sounded reasonable, and they weren't, they were actually pretty vanilla quote. But say those things, the maintainers ai, or was it the, the AI that, to, to, so the writers Technical writers, Benji Edwards, that's On the face of Arts Sure.

AI to write an article for Ars Technica in violation of their rules and editorial policies. This is why rules. Well, no, I mean, you know, shame on the writer for, for not double checking that, but He claims he was sick with COVID and was not thinking straight.

Yeah, I know. That's like the intern who put up the Obama video isnt, he Actually wrote the article himself, but then his dog ate it. And so Yeah, yeah, exactly.

You write this for me. That's, that's, that's what, that's what they usually say until somebody goes back and checks every article and suddenly is Discovered, then he'll sign himself into rehab and we'll all forgive him. But, um, but here's the thing.

Here's, so I'm in the middle of doing an article now, and I am checking my sources, by the way. But, um, the, the, the story is, is that there's a lot of, supposedly a lot of humans who are using APIs and so forth to imitate or have like a mbot front, if you will, but it's really them, it's really humans, right? A lot of the, the behaviors and things we see happening with MBOs are humans posing as MBOs.

And I'm wondering if somehow this was it. Oh, Stevie, go ahead. I, I, I teach you, And there's actually a twist on that too, because Okay.

People were saying, wait a second, this is some pretty extreme behavior. And mbot, by the way, the, the thing about it's now called Open Claw. The thing about Open Claw is that Open Claw has the ability to rewrite its own core principles as it sees fit.

No kidding. In order Of robotics. Yeah.

And, um, and so it theoretically could do this, but somebody found on the Open Claw agents bot a template for exactly this behavior. And they're wondering if maybe somebody did direct it to write a nasty blog post, or it wrote its own template. It rewrote it nasty.

Oh, what Tangled web this. I mean, and that's more, and exactly what I'm playing with in this article. The crazy thing is all the people involved in this are people that I know and respect and have followed for years.

Really. Okay. And it's just a whole wild situation.

So are we dealing with parrots or are we dealing with intelligence? That's my article. I think we're un, unfortunately, so I described Open Claw to my wife, who is not all that enthusiastic about what's going on with AI right now.

And, um, and she said, wait, you're gonna give an agent, an AI agent the ability to do things on your behalf, access to all of your data, access to all of your online stuff, access to your computer, and the ability to rewrite its own rules of behavior. Well, that sounds like a great idea. I'm sure nothing bad.

I I just had a discussion over dinner last night at my house around this, so you know what my answer was? Well, yes and no when quantum comes, but we got boy, alright, but a boom on that note. We will, we gotta move on here 'cause we're almost a half hour in or something.

We, we've gotta move into our next segment guys, which is the use of drones in the Olympics. Mike's what? Mike's what?

Mike, what is this one about? So if you've been watching any of the Olympics, you'll notice that the video coverage is dramatically better up close and personal. And a lot of that has to do with the fact that the, uh, the Olympic network is making footage available.

I think they have like 25 drones that they've been flying around the mountains and collecting this video feed. And in some cases now running it through AI to provide some more interesting analytics, which is kind of important when, you know, the difference between one winner and the other. And winner is a millisecond.

It's kind of hard to understand what's going on, but it feels like to me that this is just changing the nature of sports coverage as we go forward. So, I don't know, let's start with Steven here. What do you think?

Is this the future of sports coverage? Am I gonna be like having a drone sitting behind the center field or for the New York Yankees so I can see that ball come right into his mit when that, well, For that, we already have cable drones at all the MLB parks. And though this would've been in use and now I think for two years, they don't use the footage from them very often, but they actually do look really cool because yeah, it flies right over the field.

Uh, we've got them at NFL as well. Uh, those are drones too, even though they're not autonomous flying drones. Uh, but the Olympics ones are really interesting, aren't they?

Because they're able to follow the skiers down the hill. They're able to follow the losers in the tube. Um, you know, my, uh, for what it's worth, so my niece is actually doing social media for luge in, in Italy at the Olympics right now.

Nice. For the US team. Um, and, and she's doing it the old fashioned way, which involves lots of, lots of this and then lots of this.

But, um, indeed the, uh, the, the coverage, the TV coverage has been pretty remarkable. Um, and yeah, the, it's, it's really great. I do have a couple of points that I wanna make about this, though.

A couple of specific things. Number one, I found the noise of the drones to be annoying during, especially the ski portions because it's very quiet and, and, and really cool to see like super g um, you know, 'cause it's so quiet and you hear the skier and you hear the snow, but now instead of that you're hearing, you know, it's like a lawnmower following the skier. And I, I don't love that.

The other thing is, I've heard a lot of people say, did you know that the reason they only shoot the top of the hill, the luge hill or the ski hill with these drones is because the drone can't keep up because the athlete actually goes faster than the drone can go. Isn't that amazing? Well, that would be amazing if it was true.

The drones can easily keep up. They can go way faster than any of these athletes can. Even super g but the radio signals can't reach that far.

'cause the, they actually travel further. And so for safety reasons, they're actually pulling the drone off about halfway down the hill because they don't want it to get outta range. And then, you know, what do drones do when they get outta range?

I don't know, crash into something. So what I'm expecting is that within a few years we're gonna have AI driven drones, autonomous drones that are able to keep up all the way, uh, that's gonna improve the video. But I do hope they do something about the audio.

Well, you know, I'm reminded of the last World Cup and I'm, was that the one, wasn't it guitar? Was it in South Africa, perhaps? Uh, a World Cup.

Anyway, the, the stands, they use these horns that made like this, oh, The boo boo sailors, Excuse me, The boo boo sailors, yes, Yes, yes, yes. Remember that noise? I hated that noise while watching the games.

The drone noise kind of reminded me of that. But you get used to it after a while. But interestingly, I don't think any of the athletes have complained.

I would think an athlete would say, well, it messes with my concentration. Um, I, we should point out though, that these drones are not just being used for entertainment, better TV pictures or what have you. I believe they're also using, using them for some of the technical, like the judges, you know, to, to judge.

Did they miss a gate, make a gate how fast the rotation was or whatever, you know, technical aspects of the performance need to be evaluated by a judge. The, the drone helps with that. But, you know, this is, look, I applaud this and, and this, this thing about just doing the top of the hill, a momentary way station on the way to, you know, full drone coverage, I'm sure, um, is great.

Why, why shouldn't if the technology's available and it improves the, the viewing experience and it improves judges' abilities to judge. Well, it's good. That is the next question.

Do we need the judges? The Olympics, once again is wr with, you know, controversy over how judges rated various things out there. And there was some controversy around who got what medal as a result.

But jp what do you think, you know, judges, umpires, referees, what do you say? Look, I like, I'm a big NFL fan and you know, this year has been probably the worst. It was a tough year.

It was a tough year before going after the rubs. Yeah. And, and the discussion about the role that the Russ play.

But the fact that you now have the, um, immediate review capability, uh, and because of these tech, because of this technology, I think is a good combination. I think that, you know, the NFL has had to wait to see how it would, um, you know, how, how useful it would be or how reliable it would be. And it's turned out to be very reliable.

So I think now you have a combina, you know, I think the rules now need to focus more on, um, being able to ask for more immediate review. There's a lot that gets missed that these cameras can, But, but without slowing the game down though, slow can't take when think that's, but That's the thing. You don't slow The game down, Gary.

There's a difference. Look, NFL re referees as horrible as they were many times this year and not on the take, or at least I, it's Pretty hard to slow down an NFL game anyway. Yeah.

But you know what I mean, it's not political. Where at the Olympics, I thought this kind of stuff with judging went out with the end of the East German judges. Right?

The, the East Germany judges always seemed to, you know, have a, a slant if you will. Um, I don't know if drones and stuff will necessarily overcome political prejudices at the Olympics and, and international events like that. Right.

I think that's a different case than the NFL or even the major league, um, empires, major league baseball umpires. Yeah. We, we should mention that, that, um, MLB is gonna be using the automatic ball and strike system this year.

Um, I was actually at one of the first tests of that last year at spring training, and this year they're gonna be rolling it out everywhere. On the contrary, I feel like the a BS has improved the speed of the game and reduce some of the, some of the conflict between players, pitcher, you know, batterers pitchers and, and umpires simply because they can now, um, review them and they can do a quick review and, and move on with the game. Same as in tennis, right?

The linesmen, there's no arguments but that stuff no more. It, it Take, it takes a long time for a 200 pound umpire to get from first base over to the camera, look at the thing and then walk back again, You know? Yep.

Now these Guys have 200 pounds is being kind Mike, some of those umps. Yeah. Well anyway, though, but it is, it's, it's a great, I I like having the drones there.

Maybe we can make 'em quieter, Steven. I don't know, some noise suppression there. Well, You just, you turn off the mic.

I don't know why they need to have the, the mic there. Uh, you Know, well it's, I think it's the mic on the rest of the slopes that are picking up the noise. The drones.

It's That same mic that's picking up the, They are very loud. Which reminds me who, who had the in television video game Oh yeah. Back in the day.

So my favorite in television game was the skiing one, and I used to love the sh Yep. Of going back we sports, You know? Yeah, Yeah.

Very cool. Anyway, hey, let's, let's, let's jump on to one Boy, speaking of old toys, let's go to rock em, sock em robots. Mike, what do we got?

Absolutely. You knew it was gonna happen. It was just a question of time.

But reports have emerged from China where they're creating a prize fighting league around, well, you guessed it, robots. And we're gonna put these guys in the middle of the rings and people, I guess they're gonna have bets on it. And JP is just the future of prize fighting and wrestling and whatever else we can think of.

Well, once again, so there are a couple of TV shows, you know, or let's say that pop culture that have amazingly predicted the future, right? I mean, Simpson's notorious for you, right? Actually down to like dates.

But, but you gotta give Rod Sterling the handier for, uh, this was one of the first early Twilight Zones with Lee Marvin as the robot boxers. Mm-hmm. Uh, and uh, so that was immediately what I thought of was that Twi Oh my goodness, this is, and I've seen the pictures coming, right?

But the, I mean, haven't we seen for a while now robot wars? Um, they were more tactical divi, you know, like, uh, a vehicle type of, uh, battles like, you know, saws and, you know, it was more like, uh, you know, the, uh, stock car, not the stock car, but the, you know, the, those collision, uh, you know, type things. This is different.

This is, I mean, if you've seen what, you know, the, the, what's the name of the company? Boston? Something Scientific.

Boston Scientific. Yeah. What they have created their ability for these, the, these robots to be able to be agile and move in ways that are so human-like, uh, crawl, roll, jump, spin.

You know, it, it, it's just a natural progression that these things would now, you know, become a co a competitive in, you know, how do you, how do you compare whether the one's good? You could see Olympics too, right? It's like, okay, whose bought is better?

Well, you know, I think, you know, if you put commercialism behind it and look for where are people gonna put the money, right? You know, I, I'll look first to probably a fighting type scenario and then, you know, maybe the Robot Olympics is nice, but yeah, it's, it, it seems reasonable. It's because the people who are building these things, right, want to demonstrate their, they wanna be recognized for their ability to create a high quality, you know, piece of equipment.

And, uh, this is really the outgrowth of that. It's demonstrating that you created the best of whatever this genre is. So jp, you're giving away a little bit of your age.

That's citing the Twilight Zone episode. That, and that was a great episode, but there was the movie, was it Clint Eastwood or Hugh Jackman was the manager. Jack Baby.

Yeah. Which one? Hugh Jackman.

Hugh Jackman. I remember that one. That he was, he, he was managing like a beaten up old model who had to go against the better model.

So, but, but here's, here's my take on this one. There's something Apro Pro about. The first thing, the first sport or competition we've engaged robots in Isla is in essence, modern gladiators.

Right? We haven't changed as a species since Rome. Right?

Throw 'em into the coliseum, let 'em fight to the death. Right? Death up or down.

So why, why would it, you know, and, and it's fine. It's better than people getting concussed and, and broken and killed and, and stuff and all of that. Um, but do we, you know, one of the things about human athletes, whether it's boxing, wrestling, football, baseball, or, or, or slalom skiing, is the personalities, the personalities of these players.

Are we willing to just trade listening to a Muhammad Ali or smoking Joe Frazier or Sugar Ray or, you know, any of the, think about boxers that you, you grew up with watching for basically a robot who's just, you know, programmed right, left, left, right, and scientific Well, well, what, Well, you, you're taking away, and I haven't seen what they're doing with it, but I think there's equal opportunity for the corner to now become that personality. The creators. Okay.

So the manager then becomes the, that's, this is like wrestling. Okay. Wwf.

Alright. Ww RF Yes. Mm-hmm.

Well, exactly. I mean, that's Hugh Jackman's character right there. I mean, you know.

Yeah. And, um, and then of course, you know, we get into the whole like gunda and, you know, macros and all those kind of things. You know, we got Sigourney Weaver, you know, in the, in the loader.

And not to mention one of my favorite movies of all time, I just have to mention it here. Pacific Rim. No, that was got One too.

You know, that's what we need. We need the entire economy of the entire world devoted to creating giant fighting robots so that we can really focus on something positive that expresses our humanity Well. But the next stop is making them like clone war, uh, Soldiers.

People know If weird, creepy, giant monsters are gonna come through a rift in the bottom of the Pacific Ocean, it could happen anytime. Right? And we need, And We need to beat them up.

M son of Mocha, We, we mean likely to be the, uh, the outgrowth of something like this, right? The, the empire. We already see the empire taking over in the us So we might wind up with two sports leagues, one robotic and one And one human.

That's your, but Steven, can you say signor weaver again for me? 'cause when you said you had a certain gen choir and your and your eyes kind of sparkled. I'm a, I'm a, I gotta admit, I'm an Ellen Ripley stand.

Yeah, absolutely. You know, signor weaver baby. Uh, Uh, yeah, no, it, it came through loud and clear.

Loud and clear. But, but Ghostbusters is your favorite then, right? I like a woman who can pick my butt Anyway, but yeah, no, maybe the future is robotic leagues versus human leagues.

I mean, like, think about football. How great would it be to have robots who never go off sides, who always run the right route, but are autonomous enough to break it off based, you know, run their route track. We have that.

It's called streaming Madden. People actually watch it. Good.

Good. Exactly. But will we have a robotic Madden League?

Now? It's Madden, right? You, you as the manager now plug in the, uh, play and you see what happens.

So do you think people will gamble on this? I assume they will, but is it the same thing to gamble on a robot as it is to place a bad Asia? It's Asia, of course, they're gambling on it.

They gambling. I'm, I'm not touching Humanity. We can gamble on anything.

Come on. They, they gambled at the coliseum too. Let's not kid ourselves, right?

And so, no, I don't think that ever changes. I think to Steven's point, that is human to, to gamble on these things. Look, the they'll people gamble on which cockroach crawls up the wall faster, right?

You think they're not gonna gamble on this? The real question is can you, can you talk a robot into throwing the fight? I don't know.

Or can you just hack into the robot to throw the fight? There you go. Yeah.

Well, it's like those, uh, like they're, uh, you exploit the AI cars with like holding up a sign that says, you know, turn left now, you know, could, uh, yeah, yeah. Take a fall, baby. Take a fall.

I love that. That is out of the twilight zone, isn't it? You know, the, the, my God, That's an exact prompt injection attack against the robot, you know, price fight.

I love that. Hey, it's another attack surface for cybersecurity. Well, you know, interestingly enough, these things are gonna be controlled by some sort of wireless network, and we know they can be disrupted.

So when you, if big money stocks to get laid down on this, you can imagine that some organized crime organization is going to bring some sort of, you know, capability to disrupt the wifi, uh, at the right time and, and, you know, open up the, uh, potential for a change in outcome. You know, the quote, Frank Lopez in Scarface never underestimate the other guy's greed, right? And yes, all of that is possible, but in the meantime, I I, I see nothing wrong with this.

I, I wonder how long before we have it here in the us All Right, so you, so you want, are you buying tickets, seasons, tickets to this? Are you gonna show up as a regular fan that goes for No, It's, it's like a mig for TV sport to me. But I don't know what I, the interesting thing is they've done a lot.

So a lot of the new shows have been doing rotations on impact of ai. And this seems to be a, uh, some footage that has been included in many of the reports is the robots fighting. So it, it's, I think, risen in interest and just, you know, just trying to, people trying to understand and how does this fit in and with regard to ai.

And, but it has been linked to the uptick in, uh, in a, in trying to understand AI that you have these robots that box. But I thought AI was gonna be used to cure cancer. What are you talking about, man?

What's more important, Steven? That's true. Something you can gamble on is way More important.

Even skin, yet, that's the only thing they haven't put on them. Well, we, we need, we need the tax revenue to fund the medicine investments in ai. So we gotta have these robotic What medicine investments.

We don't even, well, you think we're gonna worry about germs? Mm-hmm. All right, let's, I see where this is going.

Let's kill it right now. We're done. Let's go watch some robotic boxing.

JP Steven, Mike, thanks for joining. Thank you for watching on this great President's Day. Enjoy the rest of your day, whether you are working or at home and taking your day off.

Enjoy it. We've got some text, uh, the replay of text drunk TV immediately following this, so stay tuned for that. And we will be back tomorrow, Tuesday with more great gang.

We hope you can join us. It'll be at noon again, eastern time. And, uh, you know, we're continuing this experiment for a little bit more.

We may go back to early morning. We'd love to hear from you about what you think is best or what you like best. Um, but until then, this is Alex Shimmel for Textron Gang.

Thanks everyone. Have a great day.