Intel’s $12B Lifeline, AI Red Teams & The Bot Power Surge | TSG Ep. 907

Who wants to be a chip trillionaire? Throw that company a lifeline. You're watching Textron.

Hi everyone. Happy Thursday. It's Alan Shimel for Textron Gang.

And man, are we glad you're here? 'cause we got a lot to talk about. You know, I was teasing in the thing about the lifeline, but we're throwing in tele lifeline.

Are they too big to fail? I don't know. Um, but we, we've been following this story.

We're gonna lead off with it, but we've got even more to talk about beyond that. Let me introduce you to our gang members for today. Number one, uh, out of course in Silicon Valley where he sees all that.

He sees, he's like on Pride Rock. John Swartz, uh, joining us, usually in New York. I assume she's there.

Terry Robinson. Terry, good to see you also in New York. Our favorite Yankee fan, Mike Ard, and a new member of the gang Today, though, as I was telling the group, he's an OG here at Techron.

com helped found Techstrong research. Our good friend Sanjeev Sharmer. Sanjeev, good to see you and welcome to Techstrong Gang.

Thank you, Alan. And thank you to the rest of, again, great to be here. Absolutely.

Um, I'm Sanjeev, usually first time guests, we have them. Say a little bit about yourself. I, I gave a little bit, but how would you describe your career path?

Well, yeah. Uh, you know, I started off as a developer. Uh, I used to work for the OG company when it came to development tools.

I used to work at Rational Software, uh, and, you know, so that we were the first developer platform company back in the nineties, right? And, uh, acquired by IBM, spent 15 years at IBM. Uh, I started with, uh, I was like the first DevOps CTO at IBM.

After that, I went, worked for a startup in Silicon Valley. And, uh, my last two tick, uh, kind of tours of beauty had been building internal developer platforms, uh, and vaguely AI enabled developer platforms. I first did that for Truist Financial, which is, you know, the bank created by the merger of SunTrust and bb and TI was, uh, there during the merger.

And the last gig was at Dell. Uh, I was leading the internal developer and engineering platform team at Dell. And now I have started my own own, uh, own, uh, you know, boutique consulting firm, helping companies scale their, uh, AI adoption.

Fantastic. Good stuff. Sanjeev is an accomplished person.

Always, always thinks so. Um, he might be outdone by his son, but we'll talk about that in another day. Uh, let, let's, Mike, are you, Are you saying that he is bringing some class to the joint, or what is that?

Well, Yeah, he, but Jeev definitely brings a little class to the joint. He does. He does.

He always a classy guy. It's not the IBM thing. Anyway, let's, let's, Mike, let's jump into this.

So one day we're fired, the Intel. CEO is being rode outta town on rails and tar and feathered the next day. He's my hero.

The day after this, the guys from Japan are in here and they can't bring enough money in their suitcases with them. I hope they declared it at customs. But wait, there's more.

Now the government wants to throw 'em a $10 billion, but the real thing is they, one of their ex CEOs says, Intel really needs $40 billion. What, what are we doing? Is this too big to fail?

Are we just burning this money? What are we doing? I can't make up my mind if this is a game show or a soap opera 'cause it seems to just keep going on and on and on.

Mm-hmm. But John, you're out in the valley. What are people saying out there?

This is your story. Yeah, I, so Intel is one of the great, uh, admired companies out here. It's, it's one of like a handful of companies that has greatly admired.

It's one of those companies that, that the late Steve Jobs that he admired, and he rarely said that. Um, so it is maybe too big to fail. It is as a great history.

It has a, not a great recent history, but there are a lot of travails and it's kind of up in the air. I think that the lifeline of a life support, so to speak, is looking better for the company. After SoftBank said they were gonna buy $2 billion in Intel stock.

And this, this rumor that the Trump administration is buying a 10% stake in the company, which is a bit bizarre. But the, this is where we are. I mean, one of the options that the government is looking at according to a Bloomberg report, would be to convert grants awarded under the Chips and Science Act into equity.

Um, we know this probably gonna happen because the Treasury Secretary Percent said any investment in Intel would be intended to help stabilize the company. Um, what I am interested in, and I, and I kind of want to ask you all, is this government stake, if it happens in Intel could serve as kind of a model for other investments by the administration. We already know that they struck this deal to get a cut of, of the revenue from Nvidia and a MD chip sales in China in exchange for, uh, resuming chip sales in that region.

It's, it's, it's, again, it's, it's, it's Trump, and I don't want this to be political, but is Trump kind of putting his tentacles and his administration's tentacles into all things tech, uh, in terms of, uh, ownership, in terms of swing, their influence in terms of telling them their policies? I, it, it is a soap opera, as Mike said. It also is a bit of a game show.

And I think out here, there is like this, this optimism, maybe this company that has been left for quasi dead, maybe still has a healthier pulse now of late than it did maybe a week ago. Yeah, I mean, I'm always for like reviving intel and whatever, but I do worry about that Trump aspect and him trying to exert his influence because not only do I usually not agree with what that influence is, but on, on top of that, it's so, well, what Could go wrong? I know what could wrong.

It's so nimsy pansy though. It switches from one minute to the next. It's, you know, uh, that's not stability.

And I mean, I think at this point, you know, Intel needs money and some stability. Well, well, Mike, that being said, that being said, there is a case to be made that when the government bails some company out, like they did during the, the auto The Great Recession. Yeah.

com bus, but the financial, great financial crisis. Right. Uh, the money, a lot of market cap was created because of that money.

And the government got nothing back. They just got paid back the loan with interest. If instead the government had taken a stake, say in Tesla or Ford or whichever company they and I, and I don't know which ones they, they definitely bailed out four, but I'm not sure of the other ones.

What would their market today? Right? Yeah.

But here, here's the thing. During the great recession, they actually did bail out the auto industry. And the bailout was they did take equity.

They took equity. But there was like some mechanism that when the equity hit a certain amount, uh, and when the equity hit a certain level on the stock market, when that company's stock where the government was able to get out with a reasonable profit, they, there was a mechanism, right? Like a time trading thing to sell out.

And the fact of the matter is, the government made out pretty handsomely investing in the banks that were too big to fail. And the car companies that were too big to fail during the recession. Here's the irony.

Who was the biggest critic of this? Who said the government should never do this, impeach them. It's socialism.

It's this, it's that one Donald J. Trump. That's Who it was.

Let's, let's, the bigger, let's be real. I'm sorry. Go ahead.

A bigger challenge here, so sorry Alan to speak over you, but the bigger challenge here is maybe Intel is a, is the right company to look after, but it's a slippery slope. 'cause then you start having this scenario where the cus where the government has to pick winners, right? Or does it, you know, bail out an entire industry, right?

Well, Not just pick winner Sanjeev, the government puts their finger on the scale and determines the winners. That's, that's the slow That's, that's, see, that's, yeah, that's what I'm worried. That's what I'm worried about is once they make their investment, how does their policies change to benefit this of company over everyone else Status?

Of course. Exactly. Look, here, here's the deal.

The fact in the matter is, we only have one company that has the ability today as we sit here today, to produce semi-state of the art semiconductors in the us. And that's what this is all about. We don't want to be dependent.

What happens if China attacks Taiwan or TSMC decides something else. We want, we want semiconductors made here in the US and right now, Intel. When, when you're talking at that level, we're not talking about calculator chips.

When you're talking about, you know, cutting edge stuff, it's intel, right? They called the the SoftBank guy who's only always too, only two, eager to please the, the administration. I think this is also part of a pressure campaign to to to, to quicken the pace of, oh, these off delayed, uh, this Ohio plants like to, to influence that.

Because Intel in a sense, uh, the CEO of Intel said, we're gonna, we're gonna delay that again. We're gonna cut back, if not eliminate other plant. Look, they the board there and the company has not, I think, decided, do they want to keep the so-called foundry business where they're a foundry for hire?

Or do they just gonna design their own chips until they make that decision? You're kind of in a no man's land. You're in a no man's land.

Now that being said, I'm not Donald Trump. I, I don't have necessarily, thank God, I don't have necessarily a problem investing in American companies. But I think you, what you have to do there is you gotta go in with a pretty rigid, if not rigid, a pretty defined process.

We're investing this money, we're getting X amount of equity. We will sell this equity when we can get EY amount of profit return on it, what it's gonna mean in terms of government contracts, what it's going to mean in terms of competitiveness in the market. You need to have these things laid out so that people don't feel that it's a rigged game.

And let me, Alan, I'm trying to remember what kind of socialism is it again, when the government takes over the industry and sets all the policies? I forgot, I think it was something in the, in the mid 1940s last, last century. Well, no, it actually started with Marx, you know, in angles back in the 18 hundreds.

But then in the 1917, we did have a rev revolution killed Azar in his ministers as M**k Jagger said. And uh, you know, they call it communism. But what's interesting, and again, I was a poli sci major, right?

If when you go around the horn all the way back to this side on fascism, it's the same thing. Both of those forms of governance have the government controlling the means of production, right? So take your pick.

And that that was the choice for many folks in Europe in the, in the late thirties, mid to late thirties. You could be a fascist ala Mussolini or Hitler, or you could be a communist like Uncle Joe. And that was the choice.

The one thing that that scares me is this possibility. I mean, I'm not saying this is gonna happen, but I'll just, let's go out on a limb. Like say a apple has problems in the AI age, right?

Things start accelerating this. Does Trump then become the Lord and the czar and king of determining Their faith? Well, here's the ultimate problem is you have a, I don't want to use the word maniac, but I'm trying to think of a nicer word.

It's app appropriate. Let's stick with maniac. You have a maniac trying to micromanage the US or the global tech market because he fancies himself smarter than the average bear and smarter than all of these other folks.

What, as I said to Terry earlier, what could go wrong And, and de boot and de boot buy stocks in these companies themselves, right? Yeah. Well, that's that.

They're, uh, John, has Nvidia had a reaction publicly to this? No, I think people are are they're, they're kind of waiting it out. I mean, yeah, the thing Vivia says one word, that 15% export lic goes, poof.

Come on. Yeah, this is, this is what happens When touch money. Hey, yeah, Vlad told him no email voting.

And this is how you do in oligarchy. I guess the best policy is just to stay out of his side or with that out outside his, You gotta do what he gotta, you go into this gilded office where he has this, I don't know if you guys have seen the picture of the 7 47 covering the ego and, and, and all of this like gold leaf painted stuff like it. I they need slip covers on there.

Mrs. Mci, my son, my friend, when I was a little boy, they had furniture and painting like this, but everything was covered in plastic. So you didn't, you got stuck to the couch when you sit down in the summer.

And could you imagine, could you let, let's Mike rescue us here. Take us away. I think, I think the, the last word on this is we have not seen the end of this drama.

There's $30 billion that's floating around out there that's allegedly needed. So that's gotta come from somewhere. And odds are good.

It's gonna come from private equity or somebody who feels better now that there's $10 billion to anchor intel. At least that's what I'm betting. Stay tuned.

We'll be back to have this conversation again and probably in the next three weeks. What do you say, John? I'd say within a two weeks.

Yeah. Two or three weeks. Can't wait.

Can't wait. All right, let's take a break. Let's take a break on Textron Gang.

Can we come back? Let's do, let's talk security or something. Yeah.

Uh, you're watching techron Gang, Discover Techron Group, the epicenter of tech innovation. We are your go-to for reaching IT leaders and practitioners worldwide. Our secret impactful content that sparks awareness, engagement, and top quality leads with us.

You'll access editorial websites, streaming videos, virtual events, custom content analyst research, and more. Join our satisfied clients. Let's revolutionize your tech journey.

Contact us today and tell your story to the world in the most powerful way with Textron Group. All right, folks, we're back. And Terry has a story up on Security Boulevard that you should check out, but it's about how Carnegie Mellon University has done some research and cobbled together a bunch of AI agents to go and attack systems.

They called it, um, uh, you read team exercise. Now, Terry, last time I checked the people who read anything to do with red team research most culturally are cyber criminals. So That's scary.

Um, yeah. So, so yeah, this one was met, uh, met with sort of mixed reviews, right? Um, so yeah, they've, uh, the, the researchers, uh, have, uh, you know, sort of proven that these long LA large language models can execute large and complex a attacks, right?

Which is not great for cybersecurity because the bad guys can, can do it as well. Um, one thing that they, they, well, a couple of things that they did. One is recreate the Equifax, uh, breach and the attack.

All the, so they gave it the environment, all the merits and statistics and everything, and, um, and they were able to fully execute that attack mirror it, um, which they were quite excited about. But then a lot of the security people were like, oh, no. Um, I think that, I kind of agree here with, uh, Margaret Cunningham who said that, you know, they didn't, this time they didn't teach like the LLMs to be smarter, right?

Which is typically, uh, the tactic that's used. Um, they gave it better tools, clearer instructions, and a structured environment so it could, you know, perform very well. Um, but yeah, it's not, it's not good for, it's not, I mean, it's a good thing in, in, in, in a way.

I mean, certainly cyber, uh, professionals can, uh, learn from this, use it, you know, whatever, but the bad guys are probably gonna get the most traction out of it, at least for the time being. 'cause they're very hard. It's very hard to defend against this Same gene.

What's your take on this? Because, you know, at least in my experience with cybersecurity or Wag one's told me, you know, if you can imagine it, somebody's trying it. So this is it.

Yeah. I, I I, I, I would go beyond that. And if you, if you are thinking about it now, the probably thought about it three weeks ago, right?

Because that's all they think about, right? We are thinking about defending our infrastructure, defending our, our data. They're thinking about, you know, where are the, where are the holes in the, in the system?

And now they can have agents doing it, thousands of agents doing it, you know, running experiments, you know, 24 hours a day. So I think, uh, we are entering, just like we are entering a sea change in a paradigm shift in how software development is done, how, you know, infrastructure management is done, how AIOps is done. The same way, how we going to defend, uh, against these cyber criminals will also need to change.

We need to not rely, uh, you know, a lot of the, the, the research recently, and you guys are more in depth in cybersecurity than I am, was going towards behavior, right? Or is this a typical behavior or abnormal behavior? Let's try to spot that, that won't work because, you know, these agents do not mimic human behavior.

They can be told not to mimic human behavior. They can be told to mimic, you know, machine behavior and make it look like it's a perfectly legitimate process trying to, you know, work its way around the system. So I think a, a new new paradigm shift is definitely needed on how we are going to protect our systems against these, uh, these attacks.

And, uh, you know, compute is getting cheaper by the day, right? All those GPUs, which are now being replaced by, you know, H one hundreds and GB three hundreds, all those GPUs are rarely cheap on the market, right? If you go to some of these GPU rental as a service companies, you can rank them for less than the cost of power, uh, because their value has already been recovered.

How do we know they're not cyber criminals using those to deploy their, their agents at scale? So I, I think there's a lot to be thought through here. Yeah, I mean, that's, Ms.

Ms. Cunningham also, you know, was calling for this sort of shift toward behavioral analytics. Um, so the models could infer, you know, from the sequences of actions, not just a signature or an anomaly or whatever.

Um, and I also, and maybe this hearkens back to our other conversation and not having a lot of trust in government, um, a lot of the security people that I talked to said, well, you know, this is academia business and, and government need to collaborate. So what is collaboration? We've written a lot about that recently.

What does collaboration look like under this administration? Because so much of the cyber stuff has been a bit decimated or, uh, taken apart and redistributed. Um, I had a, a, a talk with, uh, the CEO of, uh, Bugcrowd yesterday.

Um, he was here in New York, and I met up with him and, and you know, we were talking about, you know, csa, I mean, they've done a lot of work with CSA and always thought that they did really, uh, good things, but you can't really depend on that kind of collaboration as much anymore. No, That was, you were with Casey, Jerry, Casey Elli, Uh, no, Dave, uh, Gary. So, Okay.

Yeah, Casey's the founder. I don't know if he's still CEOI Know I, I talked to Casey quite a bit, but, um, Dave was in town and it was great to, you know, sit down with him. So Let me, let me weigh in here.

From a cybersecurity perspective, You know, I remember when Fuzzing first came out, right? And the bad guys. Fuzzing was great for security researchers.

Fuzzing was great for AppSec teams. It allowed us to kind of just really put these apps through their paces before we released them. And then even after we released them to, to find bugs, of course, the bad guys got a hold of fuzzing and untold amounts of zero day, uh, zero day vulnerabilities were born via fuzzing.

This is fuzzing to the umpteenth degree because it, it's using AI to basically take fuzzing and do more complex tasks, new, more complex attacks. So it's, it's certainly a dangerous thing and it's certainly wrought with, you know, money for the bad guys. But there's another angle here that we're not touching on.

The AppSec industry is scared to death of this because if developers and internal teams can run their own red team exercise without going to the cobalts, the white hats and all of these companies that have hung their hat on coming in and doing a red team for you, who needs them? Right? Who needs them?

I was a black hat a couple weeks ago. I brought this very scenario up to one of the companies that are, you know, crowdsourcing, uh, pen test, right? If my AI could, could do that pen test for me, right?

And it's a nothing thing to set up. Why do I need you? Isn't that Sanjeev?

Yeah. Isn't that like, I mean, that should be expected, right? I hope those companies aren't looking at, you know, sitting around waiting for this to happen and are already figuring out what to do next.

I mean, we saw this happen with data labeling, right? I mean, few years ago you had, you know, uh, sweat shops full of people around developing nations doing data labeling today. I don't need them.

I can do data labeling, have my LLM do data labeling, right? So same way, uh, you know, I'm sure, I hope these companies are already figuring out how they can move from being the brute force red team team to being the ones who architect a red team scenario and then have agents do it well to, I think that's the path for them. To me, it's like, you could take a page out of Uber, right?

So if you, listen, if you talk to people who were involved with Uber early on, the plan was always to get to autonomous vehicles and get rid of these drivers who take 30% of the revenue right off the top, right? If you have autonomous cars, I don't care to pay the driver. And so Uber was always, you know, though, they pivoted to using drivers.

The plan was to have autonomous vehicles and it, it's coming, right? Waymo and, and Tesla and everyone, it's the same thing with these pen test companies. Instead of paying pentesters, they could just push a button and have digital workers do the pen test, you know, and, and, and keep a, all of a sudden it becomes a lot more profitable.

Now, I had, as I said, I had this conversation, a black hat that will work for 60, maybe 70% of your garden variety pen test. You're still going to need to call in, you know, the cracker Jack Guy for that top 30%. The question is, how do you, how do you recognize who your top people are and how do you keep them well fed when 60 to 70% of the work is being done by digital workers, but it's, it's gonna turn absec on its head.

So what would also essentially turn the cost of launching a cyber attack well, is approaching what near zero. I mean, we used to say we're gonna disrupt the economic model for these guys. It looks like that's pretty much out the window.

They, you look, they they have, they have crypto anyway, what difference it make? Alright, so, so Sanji, what's your best advice to folks then about this? Do I, uh, spin up my own DevSecOps team and start creating a subset red team to Alan's point?

Or how do I proceed? Uh, Again, I, uh, well, you know, that's again, the build versus by question, right? Uh, you know, my philosophy, and if I'm talking to anybody, I was asking for this advice, I would always say, you got to decide what's adding to your ip, right?

It's the classic, uh, phrase. I don't know who said it first. If you're a beer company, focus on what makes your beer taste better.

So is it better for you to build your own red team, which knows your environment in and out your way? Your data is where all the skeletons are buried. Or is it better to outsource that and focus your resources and on building your own ip?

I think it'll be a company by company decision to do that. What'll happen is, as Alan said, those red teamers will get replaced by a very senior architect who can think very creatively, who's actually programming these agents to actually go execute the, the, the, the cyber attacks. That's what's going to happen.

Instead of having an army of sweatshirt of people or, you know, trying to, you know, uh, brute force it, uh, we'll get these very senior people who know how this works. They're the ones programming the agents and monitoring the agents and letting them prove the proverbial will go to town on somebody's data. Uh, whether they do it in-house or outside will depend upon what their core business is.

Terry, we'll just evolve into, you know, my agents can beat up your agents. 'cause the security people will have agents, the bad guys will have agents, and we'll just battle it out till every, if somebody cries uncle. Yeah.

Well, and my money is almost always on the bad guys on this. Again, you know, for the same reasons. This is what they do, you know, and, um, this is their whole sort of life is doing this stuff.

And, uh, and that's not the same for, you know, defenders. So I don't mean to be, you know, miss Debbie Downer or whatever, but I also think in just listening to Sanjeev, that there are gonna be a lot of, uh, Ingo egos that get punctured. Oh, There will be.

Yeah. A lot of the, you know, because some of the red team guys are the biggest, baddest cowboys in the west, right? And, uh, yeah, It's like synonym, wildcatters for the oil, uh, thing.

Those guys cowboy around. So. All right.

Hey, let's take a break. We're gonna come back for our C block here. com is the leading resource for news analysis and education on challenges facing the cybersecurity industry.

com covers all aspects of cybersecurity, including data security, DevSecOps, cloud security, application security, network security, security threats, and more. com has the largest selection of security content featuring breaking news, blog posts, podcasts, and more. com to learn more.

com. Home of security bloggers network. Hey, guys, we're back in.

There's a new report out from the folks at Fastly that's keeping track of the rise of AI bots. These are the things that LLMs are sending out to pull data from various websites. And boy, there's a lot more of 'em lately, and they come in two flavors.

One's a crawler, which is used for training, and the other is a fetcher, which is used by, say, an AI agent to go pull some requests that some end user actually made. Uh, right now there's a lot more crawlers than fetcher, but the fetcher are rising because we're gonna see a lot more AI agents and people who are running websites are getting at least some of them a little annoyed because, well, they gotta throw a more CPU and processing horsepower at all these AI agents that don't necessarily drive revenue for them. Alan, we run a couple of websites.

I know you're familiar with the issue, but what's your take on what's going on here? Do we block the bots or we just suck this up as the new cost of doing business? Well, and Mike, you know this too, as, as chief content officer, we, we've had a bots problem at, at Techstrong for years, right?

And the problem is separating, you know, the good bots from the bad bots, right? If you want, if you wanna be in Google search, you gotta let the Google Spider work, right? And it's the same thing when, you know, they're estimating maybe 26% and rising quickly of searches today are being done on ai, you know, chat, GPT, cloud, et cetera, are being done on AI versus on Google, though Google itself with Gemini.

But, you know, 26% of search are AI search versus traditional Google search. Do you wanna block the bots that may account for a quarter of all of your organic search traffic coming to you? None of us can afford that, but I think there's another issue here.

You you mentioned about the different kinds of bots. I don't mind them indexing the bots that are going to index to make my stuff visible in a search. I do mind the bots that are sucking in the information so that they can train their LLMs on it and their never ending quest to get more data to train bigger LLMs for the next version of their ai.

If they're doing that, someone should pay me. Mm-hmm. That's my feeling.

All right. So is there gonna be like a, uh, how would, how would that work? I, I don't think they can negotiate with every individual publisher.

So should there be this kind of big kitty and everybody gets a cut, or how does, what's I, I think what you do is you, you responsible AI companies have to identify the bot that is sucking data versus this spidering bot for search. And then by default, you shut down the sucking data bot until you pay a toll, and then, and then you could let 'em have at it, Right? Responsible AI company.

Is that a new oxymoron? I've never heard of, and You could wish right? Percentage lawsuits going on right now between New York Times and OpenAI, I believe, and a couple of others where they are talking about, you know, should there be a licensing deal?

Well, they, there have been several licensing deals with open ai, but of course, you do a deal with open ai. What about anthropic? What about Gemini?

What about, uh, what's Elon's one, the X, I'm XA Irock ROC ai. Well, then, then the question arise is what about deeps seek, what about all the ones which are, you know, outside the realm of, you know, uh, us copyright control also, right? I mean, uh, uh, again, it's a, it's, it's, it's going to be very difficult to manage and control unless we come up with some very Strong law.

I only know one man who could solve this problem. He's busy right now, though. Um, yeah, you know, I'm sorry.

Say, I think a little bit of a dim view of this as somebody who's been a writer all of her life and, you know, uh, do have we ever gotten compensated, you know, for no being out there? No. Yeah.

And I, and I think this has been a problem, Terry, right? I mean, you know, we, our books get copyright, uh, you know, copyright violated. You can download, download PDFs or books, right?

Right. The day they come out, movies have had this problem, right? Uh, right.

So I don't think the problem is new. It's just the scale at which it happens now because of bots Exactly. The scale and the speed now for which it's gonna, yeah.

But I think the, the, the looking at the positive, the positive is going to be the bots who come in now perform actions on your websites and buy content or buy, you know, acquire or pay for their things on behalf of other humans, right? And I think that those, you don't wanna block those out also by worrying about the ones which are scraping for, for LLM data. So I think there's a, there's a, there's a choice that needs to be made to say, I still want my bots to come and subscribe to my webinar or register for my event, or, you know, make a travel booking, which is the proverbial example.

It's like the hello world of the AI agents, right? Is can you make a travel booking? But you know, I am, we are doing that, I'm doing that.

I have the comment browser from perplexity, and I ask it to go do things for me all the time, you know, and it updates my calendar, it's replies to emails, Really? So I, I haven't gotten my hands on that yet, but is it, is it good? Sanjeev Comment?

It's excellent. I mean, it's the best 20 bucks a month I spend, uh, I can tell you on technology, right? Uh, because it's, uh, uh, when it's doing deep research, I ask, send it a good query.

It's going to go 30, 40 websites. It'll go and research and tell you, you know, it hallucinates obviously like every ai. So you'll be very good at setting the proper context and really reading and understanding what it's, what it's saying.

But when it comes to doing activities, like I asked it to go find certain conferences, added it to my Google calendar. I haven't asked it to buy me the tickets to the conferences yet, but, uh, you know, it can, it can, I think that age is coming where agents will actually do stuff for us there. I think what content creators like us will also need to do is create a bot variant of interface, right?

So it's not going to our traditional website and loading webpages, but we have our own agent, which talks to that agent, and then send agent, agent to agent conversation. You Agent your mpc, my agent, you have your, have your agent call my agent. But, but wait, isn't there a big winner in all of this?

Aren't we all gonna need bigger servers? And I don't know, maybe Intel wins from all of this stuff. Oh, there you go.

Hey, Intel wins. That might be, that might be the end game of the White House, right? We're in, we're in like a profit sharing oath kind of thing, maybe here, right?

Mm-hmm. Yeah. Or, or, or maybe the government imposes, you know, a little surcharge and then we, you know, it just goes into the kitty and we're all contributing to the global economy.

I'm giving Michael Kit. Do you think, where do you think that kitty's gonna go to our economy? Where's that kitty Gonna go?

Yeah. Well, wasn't there an attempt back in the day to put a charge on every email being sent and all right, there, There was a thought about that from the internet providers and everything. That's great, because look, nothing's free.

Nothing's free. I mean, at one point, I know what a significant portion of the entire world's internet traffic was. Netflix, right?

Netflix wasn't, you know, you know, wasn't, uh, you know, uh, revenue sharing with, uh, of course they were paying for the, for the bandwidth, but they were revenue sharing with all the internet providers. So I think, I think there's a, there will be these scenarios where the companies that are being hit the most might not be the ones that profit later on from them, but the infrastructure has got to be built, right? I mean, uh, the, the somebody's got to pay for it.

And a new internet will, so, so to speak, will come up where it's these bots interacting with bots and doing stuff for us. I mean, that's the vision. That's the, that's the whole vision of where we want to be In the, in the immortal words of Michael Corleone.

Someone's got a answer for Santino Carlos. Um, all right. On that note, we're gonna, we're gonna pull the cord on this gang.

It's been rip roaring and we hope you've enjoyed it. We've got a full text, young TV lineup immediately following on this beautiful Thursday. We'll be back tomorrow for our Friday weekly wrap up gang story.

We've got some interesting things to talk about, including cso, Paola, it's something I really want to talk about. We'll, we'll talk about it then. But until then, on behalf of Mike Sanjeev, John and Terry, enjoy everyone.

We're outta here.