TopPodcast.com
Menu
  • Home
  • Top Charts
  • Top Networks
  • Top Apps
  • Top Independents
  • Top Podfluencers
  • Top Picks
    • Top Business Podcasts
    • Top True Crime Podcasts
    • Top Finance Podcasts
    • Top Comedy Podcasts
    • Top Music Podcasts
    • Top Womens Podcasts
    • Top Kids Podcasts
    • Top Sports Podcasts
    • Top News Podcasts
    • Top Tech Podcasts
    • Top Crypto Podcasts
    • Top Entrepreneurial Podcasts
    • Top Fantasy Sports Podcasts
    • Top Political Podcasts
    • Top Science Podcasts
    • Top Self Help Podcasts
    • Top Sports Betting Podcasts
    • Top Stocks Podcasts
  • Podcast News
  • About Us
  • Podcast Advertising
  • Contact
Not in our directory?
Add Show Here
Podcast Equipment
Center

toppodcastlogoOur TOPPODCAST Picks

  • Comedy
  • Crypto
  • Sports
  • News
  • Politics
  • True Crime
  • Business
  • Finance

Follow Us

toppodcastlogoStay Connected

    View Top 200 Chart
    Back to Rankings Page
    Technology

    Blood in the Machine

    A show about AI, labor, and power. Veteran tech journalist Brian Merchant chronicles the growing backlash and resistance to Silicon Valley and big tech.

    www.bloodinthemachine.com

    Advertise
    • Apple Podcasts
    • Google Play
    • Spotify

    Latest Episodes:
    The Luddites take New York Jul 10, 2026
    Show notes

    The year has been marked by the rise of open, widespread, and increasingly spirited backlash to AI, data centers, and big tech. As such, the stage was well set for the Summer of Ludd, a series of protests, performances, talks, and meetups in New York City organized around the idea that we need to get people into the streets and break Silicon Valley’s grip over our lives. There were mock trials of big tech, plays staged detailing the Luddites’ true origin story, marches, and teach-ins. By just about any count, it was a smashing success; the event drew favorable coverage everywhere from the Washington Post to WIRED to the Economist. It was even, amusingly, transmuted into a clickbait MSN listicle produced to maximize on-screen engagement. I sadly couldn’t be there on the ground for the proceedings, so I did the next best thing: I invited the Luddite documentarian, organizer, and activist Amanda Hanna-McLeer, who was there for the festivities, and who directed the Luddite Recreations play that ran throughout the week in Tompkins Square Park, to give us the rundown. Hanna-McLeer has been documenting the youth-led Luddite movement for years now; as she explains, it started with the Luddite Clubs students formed to reject social media and organize offline activities in high schools and colleges across the nation. In many ways, the Summer of Ludd is a culmination of that movement thus far. It also, however, Hanna-McLeer notes, feels like the beginning of something else, something even bigger. We get into all of that: the size of the crowds, the enthusiasm among so many people have for logging off and plugging in, and how the people who encounter the new Luddites are increasingly open to movements that challenge big tech. One simple reflection of all this is the positive news coverage I mentioned above. I can comfortably say from my experience as a tech journalist, that even five to ten years ago, these kids and activists would have been mocked and scorned. Instead, most people immediately get where they’re coming from. Their message about fighting big tech, anyway, if not the gnome hats. Progress is progress. Events like the Summer of Ludd—which not only protest big tech but proactively envision an alternative, participatory future; one grounded in community, commonality, and sociality—are dovetailing with data center protests, AI-critical labor movements, and students (and everyone else!) roundly booing AI. It does feel like the ground is shifting in some real and interesting ways, and that new spaces are opening up. Here’s to hoping. Some related reading: Now for some other stories about our rapidly unfolding dystopia that caught my eye this week, and about those fighting to keep it at bay. BUT FIRST, before we move on: Today’s edition of BITM is sponsored by DeleteMe, whose mission is hunting down and, yes, deleting the data that brokers have hoovered up about you over the years and made available to their clients. DeleteMe is Wirecutter’s top-rated data removal service, and I’ve used it myself, to locate and eradicate scores of sites that were listing and selling personal info like my home address and phone number. If you’re interested in taking DeleteMe for a spin, sign up here and use the code LUDDITES for 20% off an annual subscription. OK! Onwards.A treasury report drafted by Trump officials outlines fears of the AI bubble burstingThis is a bit of news that seemed to glance the surface without breaking through. I didn’t see this too widely reported, but thought it was pretty telling nonetheless. The report isn’t public, but was obtained by journalists; including those at NOTUS, who report that This draft report inside the Treasury Department is set to warn of the risks posed by the artificial intelligence market, likening key aspects of it to the dotcom bubble that upended the U.S. economy when it burst in the early 2000s.Career Treasury analysts found that AI firms are more deeply entrenched in the U.S. economy than their dotcom predecessors and pose significant risk to the entire system if financial conditions change, productivity goals are missed or various choke points stymie growth.A downturn in the AI market would send shockwaves throughout the entire economic ecosystem, the analysts wrote.What’s so notable isn’t really the message, which should be pretty familiar to critics of the AI bubble by now, but the way that it breaks from the narrative put forward by the Trump administration, which is, to the public, endlessly optimistic about AI’s transformational power.Waymo called the police on teen riders who were playing with a toy gun and allegedly drinking The Waymo stopped, detained the kids until the cops could arrive on the scene, which they did, and then approached the vehicle with guns drawn. 404 Media reports:On Monday, the San Mateo Police Department posted on Facebook: “Parents do you know where your teens are? @waymo does!”The police department continued in the post: “Two 15 year olds up to trouble in a Waymo this afternoon were detained after Waymo reported they were drinking and shooting from the vehicle. After calling us and stopping the car, we were able to safely remove both subjects and determined they were shooting Orbeez from the car as they sipped on afternoon libations while being chauffeured around town in the driverless vehicle.”Pretty grim stuff! And your regular reminder that Waymos are continuously surveilling both the inside and the outside of their vehicles, collecting data that is recorded and made available to authorities, and now, apparently, proactively intervening when an automated system or someone at Google decides a criminal act has occurred—and putting teens at legitimate risk of being shot for being dumb teens. It seems only a matter of when, not if, we see an interaction like this that ends more tragically. Big data center resistance news:The largest-ever proposed data center, a 2,100 acre, 22 million square-foot facility slated for Prince William County in Virginia, has officially been cancelled. The project failed after receiving sustained pushback from a local historical society—it would have been built on top of a famous Civil War battlefield and the graves of all the soldiers killed there—and a local homeowner’s association.Meanwhile, all of Scotland is considering a “sweeping” data center moratorium. The Guardian reports:Last Sunday the Scottish National party (SNP)’s national council passed a motion to freeze all new datacentres in Scotland. That motion has been sent to the Scottish government to consider.It could apply to all datacentre projects that have not yet received planning permission…The move emerged as the Guardian on Monday revealed how the developer and the UK government misrepresented the technical feasibility of a massive datacentre hub in Scotland in the face of community fears that their land would be subsumed by the development, and promised jobs and investments would never materialise.This site, in Lanarkshire, was to be an “AI growth zone”, a key element of the government’s strategy to build national AI infrastructure in rural areas of Britain.The SNP’s resolution came amid signs of a wider upheaval in the UK’s AI strategy as Andy Burnham prepares to replace Keir Starmer in Downing Street. He is reportedly considering a review of several critical planks of Starmer’s technology policy.The Guardian previously reported that an “AI growth zone” in North Tyneside was more of a publicity stunt than a viable project, despite being supposedly backed by the maker of ChatGPT, OpenAI. Several other big UK AI projects have been found to be “phantom investments” after the government failed to audit investment numbers or jobs claims.And I was surprised I didn’t see this making more of the rounds:Apparently, Meta’s data centers contaminated Cheyenne, Wyoming’s wastewater system with a “rare bacterial contaminant” According to the Cowboy State Daily news:Cheyenne’s Board of Public Utilities isn’t accepting industrial wastewater associated with data center systems until further notice after a contractor for Meta Platforms contaminated the city’s wastewater system, prompting months of cleanup.The announcement was made by the Board of Public Utilities (BOPU) on Thursday in conjunction with naming the Meta company as the source of the initial contamination.It also comes more than four months after the Meta company — which is building a huge $800 million data center in south Cheyenne — disrupted the city’s reclaimed wastewater system with a rare bacterial contaminant.I’ll just leave that one there without further comment. Microsoft is cutting nearly 5,000 jobs, many of them at Xbox According to Reuters, Microsoft is cutting 4,800 jobs and overhauling its Xbox unit, and AI is once again at the forefront, in a bit of a different way. The “Chief People Officer” Amy Coleman told employees in a memo that “the roles eliminated today are not being replaced by AI [...] At the same time, ​what  is  true is that AI is changing how work gets done.” The comment reflects the changing attitudes around AI; a year ago, the market probably would have rewarded Microsoft for saying AI was behind the cuts. Now it’s more of a liability. For its part, the Communication Workers of America, the union that represents many of the Xbox workers, has vowed to fight:Claude Cummings Jr., President of CWA said “make no mistake – whether our members have a contract in hand, or are still at the bargaining table, CWA members at Xbox have the power and protection of union membership. When Microsoft decides to treat the workers who built Xbox as expendable, it should know who they’re dealing with. This is not just a fight with the thousands of workers across Xbox; it’s a fight with each and every member at CWA — hundreds of thousands of people strong.”Popular AI agents built by Anthropic and OpenAI can be easily exploited and turned against their users. My friends at AI Now have some startling new research on AI agents, and concluded that they should essentially, as it stands, never, ever be used in conjunction with critical digital infrastructure:AI Now’s latest research demonstrates a critical attack vector on popular AI agents, built by Anthropic and OpenAI, when used for defensive purposes that actually turn the agent against its user. Attackers can use these models’ existing weaknesses to execute malicious code on a system deploying an AI agent when used for often-advertised defensive purposes. Specifically, users relying on these agents to assess the security of open or third-party sources are instead exposed to the very risks these agents are meant to identify and defend against. This exploit is achievable through prompt injections, a common exploit tactic where attackers can manipulate large language AI models by “injecting” harmful instructions through the data or input they ingest.The full report, Friendly Fire, is by Heidy Khalaf and Boyan Milanov, and you can read it here.Alright, that’s about it for this week. Before I go, I will also recommend Ed Zitron’s piece on letting AI burn; as I mention in the pod this week, OpenAI and Sam Altman especially are already openly angling for a government bailout in the event of the AI bubble bursting. They want the Trump administration to take a 5% stake in the company, and are selling this as a way of spreading the “benefits” of AI. This is nonsense, and a self-serving hedge. Ed makes the case that the AI industry, which has garnered historic levels of investment for comparatively tiny revenue generation, must be allowed to fail in the event that its backing begins to unravel, which seems common sensical to me. Also recommended: Gaby Del Valle’s rather horrifying piece on ICE agents growing propensity for making house calls to their online critics. Also: Naomi Klein has a new newsletter, which will focus in part on tech, AI, and end times fascism. Check it out. OK OK OK. I know I promised more writing, and I have an essay drafted about the World Cup, VAR, automation and AI that I am very much looking forward to sharing here, but I didn’t want to overload the inboxes today, so look out for that soon. In general, it’s honestly just been a LOT to be in the very hot city, corralling the kids, and trying to get this podcast/video thing off the ground, so the next 2-3 weeks may simply be a bit less writing and focusing on getting the show in good shape (and actually going outside in this vibrant and delightful city). Hope that’s cool. Until next time, everyone—hammers up. Get full access to Blood in the Machine at www.bloodinthemachine.com/subscribe

    Full show notes at the publisher

    How and why to de-Google your life Jul 03, 2026
    Show notes

    While Google seems dead set on making their users hate their product, the courts in Europe are taking issue with their anti-competitive business practices. Meanwhile, the Summer of Ludd kicks off in New York and a new dating survey finds: It’s sexy to be a luddite. Plus, my good friend and fellow tech journalist Paris Marx joins us to discuss the final boss of Google's enshittification: Search going full AI mode. Paris has long advocated for getting off US tech, and he’ll share some of his best tips for de-googling your life.

    Paris's forthcoming book is Hyperscale, his podcast is Tech Won't Save Us, and his guide for getting off US tech is here.

    Articles mentioned in this episode: Swedish court orders Google to pay $1.5 billion to Klarna in antitrust damages - Reuters. Vancouver protesters call on federal government to halt plans for AI data centres - Global NewsCanada unveils AI strategy - Global News. The latest green flag? Not using AI - Mashable. Probe into 'subversive' anti-AI Singham network is 'enormous,' former Treasury advisor says - Fox News. Law enforcement tracking anti tech extremism - WIRED & The Intercept.

    Blood in the Machine is produced by Ryan Hodes, chief consultant is Kate Osborn, art is by Koren Shadmi, and the music is by Brian Merchant and Ryan Hall, engineered by Josh Q. Hammers up.


    Get full access to Blood in the Machine at www.bloodinthemachine.com/subscribe

    The AI industry is pouring hundreds of millions into US elections Jun 26, 2026
    Show notes

    The tech lobby spent $27 million on a single Congressional election in New York. OpenAI-backed Leading the Future spent $8 million on ads attacking Alex Bores, who vowed to rein in AI, in an effort to fire a warning shot—did it work? What does this mean for democracy? Meanwhile, a Michigan town takes on a nuclear AI data center, and a bipartisan effort to legislate against AI theft of artist’s work hits the Senate.

    Plus, I speak with technologist and journalist Molly White about her new project: Tech Influence Watch, which keeps tabs on the enormous sums the AI and crypto industries are spending to influence elections.

    Articles mentioned in this episode:

    Tech Influence Watch, Citation Needed

    “We Will Fight to Our Very Last Breath” 404 Media

    Google is investing $75 million in A24 as part of an AI filmmaking partnershipQuartz

    Children’s book illustrators start “We Are Better Than This” campaign to “stop the theft by big tech”

    Bipartisan members introduce new bill to protect creators from AI style theft Axios

    Big Tech won the race. But the AI fight is just beginning Politico

    Producer: Ryan Hodes.

    Executive producer: Kate Osborne

    Art by Koren Shadmi.

    Music by Brian Merchant and Ryan Hall, engineered by Josh Q.


    Get full access to Blood in the Machine at www.bloodinthemachine.com/subscribe

    How to dis-enshittify the world, with Cory Doctorow Nov 10, 2025
    Show notes

    Does Cory Doctorow even need an introduction at this point? If you spend any amount of time at all online, then you’ve encountered his work, his ideas, his words. But the ultra-prolific science fiction writer, digital rights activist, and coiner of the “Enshittification” verbiage that’s become universal shorthand for the degradation of the internet (and, to an extent, everything else), has been especially ubiquitous lately. His book-length treatment of the Enshittification thesis was just published by FSG last month, and he’s been on the press tour war path.

    And good! “Enshittification” is vintage Doctorow—it’s sharp, frisky, freewheeling, and erudite; call it elevated, book-length blogging, perhaps. It’s also going to be the book I recommend to folks interested in getting into Cory’s nonfiction work; it so ably ties together the many strands of his thought and his various crusades into a manifesto of sorts. And, naturally, it persuasively makes the case for how big tech and its monopolistic platforms have conquered the internet, systematically siphoned it of vitality and utility to placate shareholders, and left an enshittified husk of what the web, and the world, ought to be, in its wake.

    So naturally, I wanted to have Cory on Blood in the Machine: The Podcast to discuss it all. Cory has given approximately 4,000 interviews for this book and topic at this point (I recommend the New York Times mag profile for a look at his life and career, as well as his backyard, where he throws some great parties). So I thought I’d pick his brain specifically on how he thinks workers—tech workers and otherwise—can help turn the tides of enshittification. My instinct was to call this “deshittifying” the web, but Cory prefers “dis-enshittification”, which, fair enough. Regardless, we cover a lot of fertile ground, and field some good questions and comments from the chat (thanks to everyone who popped in when we were live).

    Cory and I don’t agree on everything—copyright law in particular is a point of contention—but there is a lot of food for thought here, if I do say so myself. We cover why tech workers are both woefully under-organized and potentially powerful vectors for change, AI, sectoral bargaining, and more. I always have a good time chatting with Cory; I hope you enjoy our conversation, too.

    Which reminds me: If you do enjoy chats and recordings like this, consider chipping in a few bucks a month so I can continue doing them. It takes time and energy to research and write these posts, to schedule interviews, and to find the adequate angle at which to prop up my phone on a stack of books on my desk so I can record the thing. Thanks to all those who already to pitch in; you make the whole BLOOD project possible.

    Man, this was a busy week. On top of my chat with Cory, I also joined host Alexis Madrigal and fellow tech writer Charlie Warzel on KQED’s Forum; you can listen to that here. I also joined Lauren Goode and Michael Calore on WIRED’s Uncanny Valley podcast, to discuss the AI bubble piece I wrote for the magazine last month. I also spoke with CBC’s Nora Young about the invisible labor that makes AI systems possible; that article is out here.

    Okay! That should bring us about up to speed. Hope everyone had a solid weekend and maybe even found a little respite. I, for one, I might add, had a fantastic weekend. The conference on New Luddism at Columbnia was a smashing success. I’ll have more to share soon, but the event brought together academics, journalists, labor organizers, policy heads, and student activists. I met so many folks doing great work in the space, the conversations were stimulating, and it was quite possible, for a few hours, to glimpse a future where our systems are no longer fueled by relentless worker exploitation and surveillance, or beholden to big tech and the oligarchs that operate it. I’ll write a longer debrief on all of the above soon, but for now: great stuff. A shout to the organizers for knocking it out of the park.

    On Saturday, Paris Marx, Edward Ongweso Jr, Jathan Sadowski and I held a Luddite Tribunal before an absolutely packed house at the Starr Bar in Brooklyn. More on that before long, too, but it was just such good fun. It was kind of like the conference, in fact, just with more hammers. Thanks so much to everyone who came out, joined the chaos, and brought tech to submit for judgement.

    I’ve got a lot of things cooking for this week, so I’ll end here for now. More soon, thanks for reading—and hammers up.


    Get full access to Blood in the Machine at www.bloodinthemachine.com/subscribe

    Understanding the tech oligarchy and its gilded rage with Jacob Silverman Oct 31, 2025
    Show notes

    Happy Halloween all. I got into the spirit by catching up with the horror flicks I’d been sleeping on (28 Years Later was surprisingly good) and, more importantly, chatting with the great tech journalist Jacob Silverman, author of GILDED RAGE: ELON MUSK AND THE RADICALIZATION OF SILICON VALLEY, a book about some very scary people who hold immense sway over our politics and our lives.

    Before we get into that, for anyone interested, I wanted to bump my list of best-ever ‘luddite horror’ films I wrote up last year. It was a fun one, I think:

    OK! Onwards.

    2025 has in many ways been the year of the tech oligarch. It marks the moment that many of Silicon Valley’s wealthiest and most powerful figures openly embraced an antidemocratic regime and publicly pledged support to authoritarianism. It feels like a lifetime ago, but I for one will not forget the image of tech CEOs like Mark Zuckerberg and Jeff Bezos standing in the front row and applauding at Donald Trump’s inauguration, or their multiple trips and photo ops at Mar-a-Lago, or Elon Musk’s central role in the early months of the administration.

    They’re still there, too, even if they aren’t making as many headlines. David Sacks, Elon Musk’s compatriot, is the White House’s AI and crypto czar. Executives from the VC firm Andreessen Horowitz, or a16z, are in advisory roles. JD Vance, whose mentor was Peter Thiel, owes his career to Valley operators. And not only are they in power, but they’re angry. They practice a politics of pitched persecution and extreme resentment that can be baffling to those of us who’d kill to simply not have to worry about paying the rent for a year. As Silverman puts it in his book, these tech titans “had the world at their fingertips and they couldn’t stand the touch.”

    So *why* are they so mad? What are these world-beating centibillionaires so furious about? Why is it that they “swung right” so hard in the 2020s, if that’s in fact what happened? How did we get here, in other words? And what can we do about it?

    Silverman’s book tackles all of the above and more. It argues that we shouldn’t view the tech billionaires as a collection of eccentric elites, but as a class; a group that, whether they publicly present as liberals or conservatives, share a distinct set of ambitions and goals: Slashing regulations and oversight, lowering taxes, extracting value from the state, and concentrating power.

    We get into all of the above in our conversation, which you can check out here or wherever you get your podcasts.

    This is officially the second installment of BLOOD IN THE MACHINE: The Podcast, after the inaugural episode with Karen Hao a bit back. There are still warts aplenty; for instance, I thought I would be able to edit the audio and video after I uploaded it, but no! Not allowed in Substack’s player. There’s only a weird “AI enhancement” option that is supposed to trim the dead air but instead cuts right to me talking about some technical difficulties. Alas! Future episodes will be seamlessly intro’d I’m sure—like the one next week with Cory Doctorow, which will be recorded on Tuesday, November 4th at 7 PM EST / 4 PM PST for those who’d like to join the live chat.

    Speaking of live chatting, thanks to everyone who joined the fray with Silverman, and to all those who left questions and thoughts in the comments, we had time to answer some at the end.

    Let me know what you think of this newish Blood in the Machine audio enterprise in the comments, and whether you’d like me to keep doing them. I’ll add the obligatory note here that it takes time and resources to plan and prep for such things, and I’d appreciate your support so I can continue doing them. Thanks as always to everyone who already chips in.

    Finally, I’ve been doing a bunch of Spanish and Italian language interviews since BLOOD: The Book just published in those languages, and I got one particularly fun request about Frankenstein—which figures into the book as BITM readers who’ve stuck with it till the end will know—in light of the release of the new Guillermo del Toro film. (Which I cannot wait to see, by the by.) A reporter from El Pais asked me the following, and I thought I’d share my answer here for anyone interested.

    EL PAIS: What is your interpretation of the novel Frankenstein in these times of AI, of the quest to prolong life, and in which powerful technologists such as Thiel, Musk, Sam Altman, Zuckerberg, and Bezos permeate every aspect of our working, social, and personal lives, as well as the future to come?

    ME: I could write a whole essay on this question!

    Frankenstein is just as relevant today as it ever was. A story about a careless founder recklessly unleashing a dangerous new technology without considering who might suffer as a result? I could just as easily be describing Sam Altman or Mark Zuckerberg as Victor Frankenstein.

    It’s a testament to Mary Shelley’s power of observation about how men attempt to harness technology for their own power and profit that her work is just as cutting in the age of AI as it was in the age of the automated loom.

    Scholars have read Shelley’s treatment of the monster—who is neglected, misunderstood, and intelligent—as a comment on the way that industrialists like Richard Arkright treated the working people of the day. That is, they were willing to make them suffer in their experiments with using technology, and vulnerable human workers, to maximize production and profit. Yet again, it’s scarcely different today: With AI, Altman, Zuckerberg, and Elon Musk are running large-scale experiments on society while aiming to deskill and immiserate workers. All with regard for little but how it grows their own power and lines their pockets. Some things never change.

    Pretty relevant to my chat with Mr. Silverman, if I do say so myself.

    OK! That’s it for today, thanks everyone. Once again: Happy Halloween, and hammers up.


    Get full access to Blood in the Machine at www.bloodinthemachine.com/subscribe

    Dismantling the Empire of AI with Karen Hao May 20, 2025
    Show notes

    Years before OpenAI became a household name, Karen Hao was one of the very first journalists to gain access to the company. What she saw when she did unsettled her. Despite a name that signaled transparency, executives were elusive, the culture secretive. Despite publicly heralding a mission to build AGI, or artificial general intelligence, company leadership couldn’t really say what that meant, or how they defined AGI at all. The seeds of a startup soon to be riven by infighting, rushing to be first to market with a commercial technology and a powerful narrative, and led by an apparently unscrupulous leader, were all right there. OpenAI deemed Hao’s resulting story so negative it refused to speak with her for three years. More people should have read it, probably. Since then, OpenAI has launched Dall-E and ChatGPT, amassed a world-historic war chest of venture capital, and set the standard for generative AI, the definitive technological product of the 2020s. And Hao has been in the trenches, following along, investigating the company every step of the way. The product of all that reportage, her new book, Empire of AI: Dreams and Nightmares in Sam Altman's OpenAI, is now officially out. It’s excellent. In fact, I would go so far as to say that if you were looking to understand modern Silicon Valley, the AI boom, and the impact of both on the wider world by reading just one book, that book should be Empire of AI. So, given that it could not be more in the Blood in the Machine wheelhouse, I invited Hao to join me for the first-ever BITM livestream, which we held yesterday afternoon, to discuss its themes and revelations. It went great, imo. I wasn’t sure how many folks would even drop by, as I’d never tried a livestream here before, but by the end there were hundreds of you in the room, leaving thoughtful comments and questions, stoking a great discussion.This is also the first BITM podcast, too—though perhaps I got a little overzealous; the audio quality isn’t always great, and if I want to get official about it, I think I’d have to edit a new intro, as I was kind of all over the place. We’ll figure this stuff out, eventually, so thanks for bearing with. But the conversation wound up being so good that in addition to reposting the video above, I transcribed it below, too, so you can read it as a Q+A. Forgive any typos. (I didn’t transcribe the audience Q+A portion.) As always, all of this work is made possible *100%* by paid supporters of this newsletter. If you value work like this—in-depth interviews with folks like Hao, who are fighting the good fight—please consider becoming a paid subscriber. Many human-generated thanks to all those who already do. BLOOD IN THE MACHINE: Okay, greetings and welcome to the very first Blood in the Machine Multimedia Spectacular, with Karen Hao. Karen is a tech journalist extraordinaire. She's been a reporter for the MIT Technology Review and the Wall Street Journal. And you currently write for the Atlantic, as well as other places. You lead the Pulitzer Center's AI Spotlight Series, where you train journalists around the world how to cover AI. And after reading this book, I'm so glad it is you doing the training and not certain other journalists in this ecosystem—we won't name names. So congratulations on all of that. Did I get it all? Did I get all the accolades?Karen Hao: Yes [laughs].Okay, perfect. But most importantly, for our purposes today, Karen has written this book, Empire of AI, Dreams and Nightmares in Sam Altman's Open AI. And it's out this week. And let me just say this bluntly. This is not the interview you want to come to for hardballs and gotchas on Karen, because I just absolutely love this book.I personally hoped somebody would write this book. I think it's just really just a real feat of reportage and cultural analysis and economic and social critique. It's a panoramic look, not just at the leading generative AI company, but at the last five to 10 years of some of the most important technological, economic, and cultural headwinds in all of tech, as well as how they're impacting, reshaping, and injuring communities around the world.But if you have time to read one book about AI and its global and political implications, then this is it. Honestly, this is it. And we'll dig into why in just a second.I can't recommend it enough Okay. End of effusive praise. Karen, thank you so much for joining.Thank you so much for having me, Brian. And it's an honor to be part of this first live stream. I religiously read all of your issues. And it is also so effective and inspirational for me to do the work that you're doing. So thank you.Well thank you. And I look forward to diving on in. So let us do so right now. And let's just start with with the title. Okay, we've got this is this book is called Empire of AI, not say, “OpenAI, the company that changed everything.” It is very explicitly, I think, this formation, which I think really does sort of put in context the entire story to come in quite a useful lens. So why is that? Why is it called Empire of AI? Why is this book about OpenAI beginning with this empire framing?Yeah, so the thing that I have come to realize over reporting on opening AI and AI for the last seven years is that we need to start using new language to really cap the full scope and magnitude of the economic and political power that these companies like OpenAI now have. And what I eventually concluded was the only real word that captures all of that is empire. These are new forms of empire, AI companies. And the reason is in the long history of European colonialism, empires of old several features to them. First was they laid claim to resources that were not their own and they would create rules that suggested that they were in fact their own.They exploited a lot of labor as in they didn't pay many workers or they paid them very, very well for the labor that would fortify the empire. They competed with one another in this kind of moralistic way where the British Empire say they were better than the French Empire, or the Dutch Empire would say they were better than the British Empire, and all of this competition was ultimately accelerated the extraction, the exploitation, because their empire alone had to be the one at the head of the race leading the world towards modernity and progress.So the last future of empire is that they all have civilizing missions and they, whether it was rhetoric or whether they truly believed, they would fly this banner of we are plundering the world because this is the price of bringing everyone to the future. And empires of AI have all of these features. They are also laying claim to resources that are not their own, like the data and the work of artists, writers, creators. And they also design rules to suggest that actually it is their own.Oh, it's all just on the internet. And copyright law is fair use. And they also exploit a lot of labor around the world, in that they do not pay very well the contractors that are literally working for the companies to clean up their models and to do all the labeling and the preparation of the data that goes into their model.And they are ultimately creating labor automating technology. So they're exploiting labor on the other end of the AI development process as well in the deployment of these models, where OpenAI literally defines AGI as highly autonomous technology. As systems that outperform humans' most economically valuable work. So their technologies are suppressing the ability of workers to mobilize and demand more rights. And they do it in this aggressive race where they're saying, there's a bad guy, we're the good guy, so let us continue to race ahead and be number one.And one of the things that I mentioned in the book is empires of old were extremely violent and we do not have that kind of overt violence with empires of AI today but we need to understand that modern day empires will look different than empires of old because there has been 150 years of human rights progress and so modern day empires they will take that playbook and move it into what would be acceptable today but one of the things that I don't put in the book itself, but I started using as an analogy is, if you think about the British East India Company, they were originally a company that was engaging in mutually beneficial economic activity in India.And at some point there was a flip that switched where they gained enough economic and political leverage that they were able to start acting in their self-interest with absolutely no consequence. And that's when they dramatically evolved to imperial power.And they did this with the backing of the British crown. They did it with the resources of the British crown, with the license of the British crown. And we are now at a moment, like I froze this manuscript in early January. And then the Trump administration came into power. And we are literally now seeing the same inflection point happening where these companies already have such profound power and are more powerful than most governments around the world.And previously, really the only government didn't necessarily have complete power over was the U.S. government. And now we've reached that point where the Trump administration is fully backing these companies, allowing them to do whatever they want, completely frictionless. And so we have also gotten to the point now where companies have turned into imperial powers where they can do anything in their self-interest with no material consequence.Yeah. Well said. And what more profound an example of these sort of imperial tendencies that you're talking about than for your book to drop the same week that there's literally a bill getting pushed through reconciliation that says ‘states can't write any more laws about AI. We're going to ban lawmaking around AI. This is too important.’ It really fits into that definition that you were talking about quite well, where they'll justify it. They have these litany of justifications of, ‘well, it's too complex. We want to legislate at a federal level,’ which they’re not going to do, of course. But it's just an excuse, again, as you said, for this to sort of transmute more fully into empire.And then part two is last week they were in Saudi Arabia with just with literal empires, right? Just making billion-dollar deals at the same time that they're working to sort of gut any ability of states to sort of engage in the democratic process when it comes to AI. What do you make of all of that?I mean, and was it last week or the week before, that OpenAI also announced OpenAI for countries and explicitly said in that announcement, we want to build democratic AI rails for other countries to build on.So we are the provider of democracy around the world. And if you sign up to our program, we will, once again, bring you into the future with all of the wonderful social norms, mores of, the United States of America and I mean it's it's all it's it's exactly what you said, like these are all illustrations of the ultimate game that they're playing, which is they are not here to bring democracy they are not bring modernity to everyone.They are here to accrue power and to continue accumulating economic and political leverage all around the world, not just in the U.S., such that when, you know, they're trying to put pedals to the metal while Trump is in office and trying to reach escape philosophy so that when he's no longer in office, if it switches back to a Democratic government—to the Democratic Party—and there are different people with different ideas in the White House that might not be so permissive and enabling of their visions. They want to reach a point where it doesn't matter anymore. They want to feel, make everyone feel that there's an inevitability.The data is already built. The infrastructure is already laid. You cannot reverse that. And so you just have to continue on what seems like an inevitable path.Yeah, it's truly remarkable. And one way that I think about what's happening with AI is as an amplification of things that have been tried before. You know, with the model of something like Uber, trying to do state capture at the municipal level to ram through its taxi law overrides and try to get exemptions and to try to expand—and not being profitable for a long time and just relying on reams of investment until you can scale. And OpenAI, to me, seems to be saying that we're going to do all of that and more. Like: Can we just blow this all the way up?I think that it's such a smart observation and framing mechanism to drive this book, which really is not just analysis. It is a narrative history. And that's what I love so much about this book, is that it is structured in the way—it's almost kind of, sneaky—in the way that a lot of ‘tech books’ are, where it’s like, okay, we're going to read about Sam Altman and OpenAI’s founding, and you're not heavy handed—you read their actions and about what's going on. And they speaks for themselves. And you can make your own judgments in a lot of cases.But I think we need to sort of zoom back and look at sort of who is at the center of all of this, at the man who sort of fancies himself the emperor. This new, aspiring smol bean emperor, maybe is a way to describe him. But it's Sam Altman, of course. So you can't write a book about OpenAI without talking about Sam Altman.And I think that your treatment of him is—I know he tweeted sort of suggestively a couple of weeks ago about like, he's like, there're two great books coming out about OpenAI that are really fair, implying that there's another one that you shouldn't listen to, which to me is the best endorsement you could hope to get, right? Like Sam Altman saying, stay away from this book because somebody's dug a little too deeply.But you were one of the first journalists to be invited onto OpenAI's premises before ChatGPT became a phenomenon, a global phenomenon, before this ever-expanding and ever-accelerating funding boom going on with AI. You were at MIT Tech Review at the time, and you were doing a company profile. So let's look back at that era and like, what were your impressions then?Because they invited you in or they agreed to do a profile—what was that like?Yeah. So I went to embed in the company in August, 2019 and just a little bit of history of what opening I was like then, because it really was not at all kind of in the public consciousness. It was founded in late 2015 as a nonprofit. And in 2019, there were there were a couple of things that happened. One was or actually even starting in 2018.The first thing was it was originally co-founded by Elon Musk and Sam Altman. Elon Musk leaves in 2018. And then at the start of 2019, OpenAI, as a nonprofit who said that they would give away all of their research and open source it for the public good, suddenly withholds a piece of research. And at that time, it was the model GPT-2, so two generations before ChatGPT.Then Sam Altman, or then there's a weird conversion where the nonprofit suddenly has a for-profit nested inside it. OpenAI calls it a capped profit. It's an invented term that they make up to describe a for-profit that has, where investors only get a certain amount of the returns. So there's a ceiling on the returns that they have. And then Sam Altman becomes the CEO of this new capped profit entity. And there was just a lot of activity happening where as a reporter that was covering the cutting edge AI research at MIT Tech Review, I had already kind of had my eyes on OpenAI as a nonprofit and the fact that they had put a stake in the ground sa…

    Full show notes at the publisher

    Previous 1 2

    Related Podcasts

    Reply All

    1

    Reply All Games & Hobbies
    Inside VR & AR

    2

    Inside VR & AR Gadgets
    Note to Self

    3

    Note to Self News
    BrainStuff

    4

    BrainStuff Natural Sciences
    This Week in Tech (Audio)

    5

    This Week in Tech (Audio) News
    Hands-On Tech (Audio)

    6

    Hands-On Tech (Audio) Technology
    footer-logo

    Contact Us

    Toll Free: 844-670-7747

    Links

    • Home
    • Top Charts
    • Networks
    • Apps
    • Independents Podcasts
    • Podcast Advertising
    • Podcast News
    • Contact Us
    • About Us
    • Analytics & Insights

    Stay Connected

      Privacy, Terms of Use & Our Code of Ethics Protecting Content Creators Copyrights