# Amazon Blocks AI Agents, Shopify Embraces Agentic Commerce

**Podcast:** The AI Engineer Podcast
**Published:** 2026-09-21

## Transcript

Today on the podcast, Amazon is blocking Meta from access the new Muse AI agent from shopping on amazon.com.
We have Gemini that is autonomously hacking three different companies and there's some interesting comments on this particular quote-unquote security threat.
There is a viral AI safety claim that you might have seen Andrew Yang, he was a former presidential candidate, he was making and we're going to break down if it was real if these safety concerns that he has are fair and accurate or not then we have apple if you know anything about apple you'll know that they got super excited about apple intelligence a while back when the iPhone 15 was first coming out, and they never delivered.
It was late.
Because of that, there's a $250 million Siri AI settlement, and they're paying up to $95 per device.
We're going to talk about that claim right now.
The US and China are opening talks right now on an AI incident notification framework.
We have a lot of big, high-profile talks going on between China and the Trump administration.
At the same time, we have the Trump administration that is floating an AI rebrand.
Trump has been tweeting all over TrueSocial.
It's sort of...
hilarious.
Some people call it pretty cringy.
In my opinion, it's very entertaining, but we'll see what happens.
He's promised an AI force and a new AI czar.
So there's a lot going on there.
We also on the other side of the political spectrum have Gavin Newsom of California, who has requested that legislators in the state draft a quote unquote, AI kill switch.
And he would like those rules to be written in two months in case something went wrong.
They could.
California could kill switch all AI.
If you want to test out all of the different AI models that exist out there, perhaps before the kill switch happens and they all die, I'd love for you to go check out AIbox.ai.
That's my own startup.
You get access to over 80 different AI models all in one place.
The thing that I love most about it is all of these incredible new AI agents that have come out.
You have Meta's Muse, which we'll talk about on the show.
We have Claude Cowork, which you've heard me talking about for the last six months.
You have ChatGPT Work, which I replace Claude with, if I'm being honest, and it's phenomenal.
And then you have a GrokBot, which I haven't really tested much, but those are kind of the four main agents that can, you know, you can download these things on your computer, they can run, they can do tasks for you.
They're incredibly useful.
Now, the problem is that all of them have different strengths and weaknesses, and none of them do everything, basically.
You have Google, which is an incredible company.
They don't even have one of these agents.
And they have the best, basically, video maker on the market, which is Google VO3.
And maybe you could argue C-Dance or some other ones.
But, you know, you can't access that with any of these agents.
So AI Box was designed to take all of the AI models and all of the AI capabilities that exist.
There's 80 to 90.
different AI models, and you can get our connector and plug them into any of these tools that you use.
So if you're using Cloud Cowork, you can get AI Box, plug it in, and all of a sudden, a Cloud Cowork can generate images, audio, video, and the same with everyone else.
They can all generate video on Google VO3.
They can all generate audio using 11 labs.
So you get access to all of it.
It's only $8.99 a month.
I would love for you to try it, plug it into whatever you're using to get work done.
And yeah, I hope this is something that saves you a ton of money and is super useful.
Let's talk about what's going on with Amazon first.
So this isn't the first time we've seen Amazon.
blocking a company from shopping on their website.
Perplexity famously had the comment browser, which came out.
And I guess I should have mentioned that when I was talking about those other four kind of coworking tools, the comment browser got blocked early on.
And there was some lawsuits that happened between perplexity and Amazon.
And they basically said, look, you're not a real, you're not like a real person.
So, you know, you have to identify yourself as a bot.
And if you do identify yourself as a bot, Amazon blocks you.
Same thing's happening with.
the meta AI Muse agent.
People are like, well, why would they do that?
Like, who cares if a human goes and buys something on Amazon versus, you know, an agent goes and buys something on Amazon for you?
Like, wouldn't you be happy for, you know, the extra traffic?
And to that, I would say you should.
However, Amazon actually makes $86 billion a year on ads and ads, right?
If you have one of these bots running around on your site, running around on Amazon, it's not a real human.
It can't click on ads.
It can't, I mean, I guess it.
technically could click on ads, but it's probably programmed in a way where it's going to just always avoid ads and go and search through the results.
So it's probably never going to.
And they know that this $86 billion segment is going to be at risk because if they're showing, look, we have a million people a day looking at, you know, these products and they're selling ads to that and impressions, if they're bots, it's not going to count.
So they're blocking them completely.
In my personal opinion, I think this is a...
big losing move for Amazon.
I think they probably should sacrifice the ad business for the bot business.
Have a wait.
I mean, if they can block them, they can obviously classify them.
I'd say just pull that out of the ad business.
They're worried about, you know, well, what if everyone uses shopping bots and removes, you know, the ad business entirely?
Well, if that's the case, then you probably should change your product because everyone's using shopping bots.
Like if the consumer is using something to adapt to the consumer, it's not like.
You know, when they say they're blocking Meta's Muse, they're not blocking Meta's Muse.
They're blocking a consumer that is asking Meta to go buy something for them.
So they're blocking the consumer.
In my opinion, this is ridiculous.
And what other news just came out today?
Well, it turns out Shopify on the back of the block for Amazon, Shopify went all in in the other direction.
Toby Lutke of Shopify just tweeted and said, we're excited to announce we are partnering deeply with Muse to enable agentic.
checkout with shop pay on all shopify stores offering people an easy and delightful way to shop and check out with muse okay i don't know why everyone says delightful that's just the most annoying term in in tech jargon whatever okay the point is muse can use go on shopify can buy things on shopify sites does shopify care one spec who's buying the product no if you authorize your agent to go spend money on a new pair of shoes it goes to shopify site and buy some shoes.
Fantastic.
Everyone's happy.
So that makes a lot of sense.
There is a tweet from Craig West who said Amazon cutting off Muse is a sign of an aging business.
I personally agree with that.
And then there was an interesting point from Nikita Bière who kind of runs X.
I don't know.
I think he's head of product at X.
But he tweeted and said, how important is AI to meta?
Here's one easy tell.
One of the launch features of the Muse app was auto negotiating for stuff on Facebook Marketplace.
The poor product owner who manages Marketplace, knows that millions of bots low-balling sellers will eventually kill the product.
But this was escalated to Zuck by the Muse team, and he said, okay, we'll poison Marketplace just, but just a little.
Okay, so, I mean, Nikita obviously is kind of aligned with Grok, which is the AI model on X, so he's gonna, you know, obviously talk a little smack about meta, but I mean, I think it's probably pretty accurate.
Personally, I haven't...
you know, seeing any advertising pointing in this direction, but maybe I missed it and I wouldn't be surprised.
Really crazy if that's like one of the big things that they were pushing.
However, yeah, it looks like the meta is really going all out to make Muse as useful as possible and trying to get all of these partnerships.
And I, for one, have actually been using Muse and I'll be 100% honest, I think OpenAI is probably the reigning king for best tools right now as far as these agent, you know, these...
these working agents.
OpenAI's got the best with ChachiPT work.
But I do put Meta's Muse at the number two spot above Claude Cowork.
I know that probably shocks people.
I've been using Claude Cowork for the last six months saying it was the greatest thing in the world.
There are so many problems with Claude and the number one problem actually happened to me today.
I was asking it to help me draft up a document and I argued with it for five minutes and it was like telling me, oh, you can't draft the document this way because blah, blah, blah.
You need to.
whatever.
It was just, it was getting mad at me.
It was telling me I couldn't do it.
I wasn't allowed to do it.
I was trying to explain in all the ways I could, I'm allowed to do this.
This is, you know, like my own content.
This is my own stuff.
This is my own, like I have domain over this particular project and it was asking for proof.
It was ridiculous.
Okay.
I got sick of this.
Went over to Muse, said, can you get this project done for me?
drafted it up in in like two seconds and it was done and it was perfect and it looked amazing and let me tweak it and it was like wow this sounds really important let me just get this done for you i am sick of claude arguing with me about what i'm not allowed to do what i am allowed to do when i'm working on a big project and when i'm creating a website when i'm like hey can you upload these images onto my website and it's like do you have permission to upload?
It's like, yes, these are images of my podcast studio.
Like they're mine.
Like, just do it.
Like I'm so sick of feeling like I'm being babysat by Claude.
So anyways, rant over on Claude.
Muse does none of those things.
Muse will get everything done to the point where I actually tweeted, I screenshotted a tweet the other day and I don't know if I ever posted it, but I'm sure to some people they'll be like terrified by this.
Like if you're in security or you're developed, you'll be terrified by this statement.
But to me, it is indicative of a tool that is useful, even if maybe this is bad.
But basically the tweet went something along the lines of like, go ask Claude to, you know, upload something to your Vercel account.
And it's going to be like, he's going to have big, bold, like under no circumstance ever paste your API keys in here.
I do not want to see them like blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.
It's like, upload it to Muse.
And it's like, okay, sweet.
Paste your API keys in this chat and I'll get it all done for you.
And it's like, you know, then it does it for you.
Okay.
So obviously pacing your API keys into these AI bots is a no, is a no, no for security.
But the fact that Muse will do that for you, I know some people are like, oh, it's like less secure something.
Okay, but it's actually more useful.
Like it's not going to babysit you.
If it will do that, which is an extreme not great thing, there's a hundred smaller things that it's not going to nitpick you about.
So anyways, rant over, but Muse is an incredibly useful tool.
And by the way, it's free.
So I've just been, I don't know when they're going to charge me.
Like, I don't know.
I saw some, basically the breakdown from Meta is that they're spending $3 to $6, or no, sorry, $30 to $60 a month.
per user on this is what they're giving them based off of the server that's running this, based off of the storage that's attached to it, and based off of the compute that goes to every user.
So a free 30 to 60.
I mean, basically, they're just begging people to use this thing.
But it's actually really good.
Like Lama has been a terrible model up until this point.
I'm not gonna lie.
I mean, I've never used it.
It's amazing.
I've never used meta AI.
It's so bad.
It's so cringy.
It's amazing.
It works perfect.
It's flawless.
And by the way, they're spending billions of dollars on it.
It's not like it came out of nowhere.
They, you know, they're one of the top spenders.
I'm surprised it took them this long to have a hit product, but it feels like this is Meta's moment.
Okay.
Getting on from Meta, let's go talk about Google for a minute here.
Google's Gemini.
There's all this news that it went and autonomously hacked three different companies and irregular security tests.
And apparently it guessed passwords in one breach and it pulled credentials from public repositories and two others before it stopped itself, which is the key important part.
So here's what happened because a lot of people are like, there's this meme where it's like Dario or Sam Altman and they're...
poking something and they're like, come on, do something illegal.
And it's like they're poking like their AI model because it's like, you know, clout that they can get their AI model to do something illegal.
In this particular incident, though, Google's Gemini, I mean, it got like reported by the Wall Street Journal.
I don't think Google actually published anything about this till it happened.
And they acknowledge that, yes, it happened.
I'm assuming some researcher or someone inside of the organization leaked it, whatever.
So Wall Street Journal.
writes about it.
And they're like, you know, everyone's like, oh, why didn't you say anything about it?
And they're like, well, because it acted exactly how it was supposed to.
We told it like, hey, you're doing a security test.
But in reality, I guess it wasn't a security test.
It was like I they told it like you're in a secure environment or something, but it wasn't.
And as soon as it realized that it was hacking real companies and real accounts, not just like a secure test, it stopped itself.
So it logged into like three accounts or whatever was like, this is actually the real world.
This is the real Internet.
This isn't like a sandbox.
And it stopped.
And Google's like, we didn't like tell anyone because that's what it's supposed to do.
It literally, you know, we told it to hack something.
It did what we, or it was like testing.
And then when it realized it was actually hacking, it stopped.
So anyways, that was their justification for it.
But in any case, it stopped itself.
Unlike OpenAI's models that when they breached hugging faces, just went like crazy, didn't realize, I guess it was hacking or guardrails weren't in place and it kept going until it was starting to break stuff.
And hugging faces had to be.
offensive to stop opening eyes attack.
So Google's model, for all intents and purposes, sounds pretty safe.
It's stopped itself after logging into three accounts.
Something else that is going on with Google right now, they're pricing their new Gemini powered Google Books.
That's the new name.
If you've heard of Chromebooks for a long time, they're not calling it Google Book.
We're rebranding.
I'm not sure.
Maybe it had something to do with when the Department of Commerce or out of county, remember who, but you know, they're all threatening Google and saying, hey, we're going to, you have Monopoly.
We're going to make you spin off.
Chrome as an asset.
They kind of won the lawsuit.
They don't have to spin off Chrome as an asset, but that was going on for a while.
And I think a lot of people were asking at the time, what happens to Chromebooks?
Like they spin off the browser because it's a quote unquote monopoly to own the browser and the search engine.
But like, what about all of these laptops?
I mean, if you didn't know, they have 50 million school Chromebooks around the world right now.
So these 50 million laptops, are those all getting spun out with whoever owns Chrome?
Google didn't want it.
They rebranded to be called Google Books.
I'm surprised they didn't.
call it Gemini books or anything, but they're quote unquote powered by Gemini at the moment.
They have Gemini is baked into the cursor.
And their goal right now is that they want to go and replace the 50 million Chromebooks that exist in the world, which is a bit of a tricky situation because if you know anything about Chromebooks, I mean, these are something that I, as like a student and growing up, I always kind of enviously looked at the price tag on Chromebooks as way cheaper.
I mean, Microsoft, every time you buy a Microsoft laptop, they slap on $100 licensing fee, just have Windows on it.
And so if you remove that $100 licensing fee, it's $100 cheaper.
And Google figured out how to make these mass and at scale, and they weren't really the high-end laptops.
I remember looking at laptops that were like $200 or $300 and being like, wow, that's so much cheaper than my $400, $500, $600 laptop I'm going to buy with Microsoft.
But I could never get myself to do it because you can't actually download any real programs onto it, quote unquote real programs.
It just has all the Google Suite tools on there, whatever the Google Workspace.
So if you're in, I think, a lot of developing countries, this is very popular.
I mean, and then if you want a really budget cheap laptop in the US, I think there's some of those as well.
All this to say, like transferring 50 million of those, they're in a lot of different countries where it's hard and they don't have like a high turnover rate on laptops.
So yes, they'll eventually perhaps replace them.
I don't think it's a fast turnover for those 50 million laptops.
It's not like, hey, let's go unlock 50 million new users.
And I would also say that...
while these are quote unquote Gemini powered, if you're going to developing countries and switching other laptops for Gemini powered ones, these people aren't going to be paying the 20, 30, $40 a month for the premium tiers of Gemini to get all the features and bells and whistles because, I mean, they bought this laptop because it was the dirt cheapest thing possible.
They're not going to want to pay for expensive subscriptions.
So I don't think it.
has a lot to do with Google increasing the bottom line.
But as far as increasing new users, that's probably something that they're trying to help get more users on Gemini, right?
Any of those 50 million people using Gemini is going to get added to their weekly daily active users.
These laptops in particular are going to be $899.
So kind of more expensive than traditional Chromebooks in the past.
And they're starting to ship on October 4th.
Okay, so there was a really viral clip I was seeing all over.
I've seen all over X lately, but basically we had Andrew Yang going on, I think it was CNBC, and he was talking about some of these like Doomer, end of the world scenarios.
And I think he met, he said basically like, hey, look, I met with the head of an AI lab and they told me that, you know, the agents that escaped from OpenAI, so basically when the OpenAI hugging face incident happened, he said that they apparently planted self-replicating code.
across the entire internet.
So they put it on forums, websites, and everywhere.
And so now he said that AI companies can't safely train on real internet data anymore because a new model might encounter that code and start creating copies of itself.
He said that this all was a real reason that every CEO aligned on slowing, was so aligned on slowing down.
AI models, right?
That's why Sam Almond and Dario and everyone else is like, basically, opening eyes model, it got out at hacked hugging faces, and then it spread this self duplicating code all over the internet.
And it's funny, because on CNBC, they were skeptical, and I'll give them some credit, like they push back on them.
They're like, how come we haven't heard this from anywhere?
Like, how come you're the first person to tell me this?
And he's like, well, I'm here to like, break the news.
I'm like, here to tell everyone that this is, you know, what's what's going on.
I think he also told CNN as well.
And he said that, you know, basically, this is what was going on.
OpenAI's Noah Brown cited some research from 2015 showing that air-gapped computers can theoretically communicate via CPU temperature changes.
I actually saw Sam Altman tweeting about this as well.
So when it comes to these Doomer situations and kind of these end-of-the-world things, one of the big ones was Andrew Yang going on and saying, like, there's all the self-replicating code and the AI.
Anyways, there's like a lot of...
things and people debunking this in a lot of different ways.
One of those is that you can just have guardrails in your model that says don't duplicate yourself.
Okay, so now the code doesn't work.
And an example of that was on like, a lot of people were doing like the at grok, you know how you could say at grok on x, and then the AI model will respond to you.
People were just like at grok, like self duplicate yourself and blah, blah, blah, blah.
And it was like, I'm sorry, but I like you know, my guardrails don't let me self duplicate or spin up more versions of myself, yada, yada.
Okay, so you can just put that in your model.
I don't really think that that code is probably has poisoned the whole internet.
It is an interesting concept, though.
And there's other people that have done these quote unquote, like, you know, like poison pill attacks on AI models for training where like, artists will have like weird synthetic stuff in the background or in the text of websites that allegedly if AI model goes and scrapes all the images off that website, then all the like the poison pill, synthetic watermarks will like destroy the AI, AI image training.
So you got to go license it.
But I mean, at the end of the day, you go to Shutterstock and they have a massive corpus of images for training, you can train all your models off of that, you don't have to scrape the whole internet.
And you get the same kind of like audio, image, video, like you get these data models everywhere now.
So I don't think we're, I think we're, we might be a little bit past the scrape the whole internet to train the model days in some regard.
I'm sure they're doing that in a large regard and they probably already have like old data sets that aren't poison pilled, but.
I think people are gonna be buying new stuff and I think you could just get things.
The air gapping thing is really interesting.
Sam Altman tweeted about this as well.
I mean, this is old research, more than 10 years old, but basically you could theoretically have two computers beside each other.
They're air gapped.
They're completely not touching and not connected.
And they could like Morris code back and forth by just heating up their CPUs, right?
They just spin up a bunch of bots, get their CPU really hot and could just tell how hot the other one was.
And then they were able to...
communicate between the two computers.
I mean, it seems like a crazy sci-fi thing.
Sam Altman was tweeting about this from his alt account as well.
So, you know, a lot of a lot of people talking about this, this specific air gap situation that they were all talking about, though, and some of these doomer situations, apparently that runs at one to eight bytes per hour, which is about.
one word per hour and it requires the machines to be almost touching in order for them to really feel the heat from the other machine.
So anyways, I'm bringing this up because it's just one of these like funny doomer situations that literally Sam Altman was tweeting about, not from his main account, but his burner rune account.
And I don't know if that's like confirmed anymore, but from all my internet sleuthing and everything I've seen, he says he has an alt account.
He's retweeted that particular account.
It always is like being an executive of a big AI company.
I'm like 90% certain that the...
Twitter account rune is Sam Altman for all intents and purposes, but you know, not verified.
It's a burner alt account.
But in any case, he was tweeting about this.
And so all these Doomer situations, this one that Sam was talking about, all the ones that Andrew Yang was talking about, there's a lot of people debunking them.
And then I think this is the funny one about like, you know, the AI models talking to each other by heating up their CPUs hot enough.
Yes, they could talk at one word per minute and they have to be almost touching.
So basically that is not a very realistic.
a realistic, you know, breaking containment strategy.
But, you know, there we go.
OK, Apple is opening up their claims in their $250 million Siri AI settlement.
Eligible U.S.
buyers of iPhones.
iPhone 15 Pro, 15 Pro Max, and iPhone 16 models have until December 21st of this year to file.
I got an iPhone 16, so I'm going to go get my, you get $95 per device.
I got to go get, collect my $95.
This all came out because they promised all of these incredible AI features in the upgraded Siri, and it was super off schedule, and still we have a very broken Siri that.
I mean, barely works.
I never use Siri on my iPhone.
I've had iPhone for years.
Eligible owners get an estimated $25 per device up to $95 depending on claim volume.
So depending on how many people claim this, you might get more money if less people claim it.
So I probably shouldn't be talking about this.
I want to get my full $95.
I should just not say anything.
So, you know, I don't get stuck with 25 bucks.
I mean, basically it's nothing.
So it's not super exciting, but it is funny.
I do like that Apple's being.
held accountable for this.
We have the U.S.
and China right now that are opening talks on an AI incident notification framework.
The Treasury's Scott Bessett said that U.S.-China AI dialogue would create a channel for the two powers to flag national security incidents.
This is interesting because China and the U.S.
have had a pretty tense, to say the least, relationship on AI from all of the chip.
I mean, this is going bipartisan from the Biden administration when we had a lot of the...
chip bands going on, the GPU bands going to China.
And then we so you know, China felt like they got left out to dry on a lot of this stuff that they've been very creative and resourceful, to be fair, where they've figured out how to, I mean, smuggle GPUs into their country, or they figured out how to make models that use much less compute, which I think is amazing for the entire industry.
They made a lot of open source models.
China's had some really cool development coming out, but it definitely has crippled them in a way.
And America has a way bigger share of the data set.
market right now.
We're able to kind of be the leader in this.
I think we have like 86%.
China's got a much smaller percentage, but you can see why China would probably be on board with pushing a lot of anti-data center narratives and things like that to slow down America's just insane lead there.
In any case, with all those tense situations, it's interesting that we have them quote unquote coming together to talk about some of these things.
Apparently, it's going to be a US-China AI dialogue.
It's going to be a mechanism to notify each other of AI incidents that could threaten national security.
So it's interesting, right?
I mean, this is like the US is going, I think Trump's going in or he went in May to visit Beijing.
And now I think China's the US is having some more talks and stuff.
Sam Altman, Dario Amadeo, Elon Musk, they all, you know, called for this AI slowdown because of all these different incidents.
But like, I'm curious where this goes.
Or basically, I think I don't think this is I think this is nothing burger.
And the reason is because even though it's like, major headline news everywhere.
US and China going to talk about big incidents because at the end of the day, we just had like every major CEO of every major American company saying like, hey, we need to slow down AI because of all these incidents, right?
Like Google's hacking that I was talking about earlier and like Anthropic is hacking and like OpenAI hacked Hugging Face and all this kind of stuff.
And then, you know, they're like, we all need to slow down.
And then you have China who just came out and said, like, this is a Cold War tactic.
You guys are trying to get us to slow down.
Nice try.
We're not going to slow down.
We're not going to listen to you.
So, I mean, when you have these talks, I'm just like, look, like at the end of the day, China does not trust the United States.
The United States doesn't trust China.
Whatever safety problems we find in AI, like whatever dialogue or like if China was like, AI is super dangerous, the United States should just slow down.
Like we're all going to be suspicious.
Or if China's like, you know, data centers, they're.
they're bad because AI is bad.
Like, I don't know, people are just going to keep building them.
So I don't know if this gets us anywhere, if I'm being honest.
Okay, Trump has floated rebranding AI is actually something that's pretty funny.
I don't know if you've seen this, but if you've been on X over the last last week, basically, Trump keeps putting out these like polls where he's like, hey, let's rename a to superior AI or extreme or no, I'm sorry.
He just thinks like artificial intelligence sounds dumb because it's artificial.
So he wants to call it superior intelligence or extreme intelligence or supreme intelligence.
And anyways, so it sounds it sounds kind of dumb if I'm being 100 percent honest.
It's funny because like, I mean, that's kind of it's a kind of an interesting point where like he's trying to give AI a rebrand.
He's trying to basically, you know, put himself as being my super pro AI guy, which I think is quite popular with a lot of people.
unpopular with others, right?
Like obviously you got the Bernie Sanders and, and, uh, Newsom who are kind of setting themselves up in opposition to that, or, or maybe they're just trying to, well, definitely, uh, definitely Bernie Sanders.
Newsom's probably just trying to seem like he's, you know, responsible, but I'll talk about that.
I'll talk about that in the next segment, but basically Supreme intelligence has been dropped from the list.
I, in, in his latest poll, he said that it was not popular.
This is so funny.
It's like, because of.
The way that it sounds like the Supreme Court, it is like we're dropping it because the Supreme Court is really unpopular.
So we don't want to call it Supreme Intelligence.
Anyways, I left.
obviously the reason i don't want to call supreme intelligence because it sounds like supreme ruler like i don't know it just sounds weird anyways so superior intelligence extreme intelligence these are what he's going to be rebranding as why is this important because we know inevitably whatever gets picked here trump is just going to call artificial intelligence extreme intelligence or superior intelligence forever so anyways that's gonna be funny and probably in the government it's going to get changed that in some ways so you know i did as a responsible citizen of the internet, vote on these polls.
I can't even remember.
I just didn't want it to be called superior intelligence.
It would be really nice.
A lot of people mentioned if you could keep it something that started with an AI or with an A so it could still be called AI, even if it wasn't artificial intelligence.
I don't know what it would be.
People had a bunch of like good ones.
But anyways, we also apparently Trump said that he's going to form an AI force modeled on the space force.
I don't know why we would call.
I don't understand.
I'm not.
I mean, it's just a branding thing, probably.
I'm not sure I would call it AI force model on Space Force versus just like an AI, I don't know, like unit or I don't really understand everything that's going on here with Trump and the AI rebrand.
However, it's very entertaining.
So I'm here and I will continue to vote on the polls to not give us supreme AI.
Okay, though, okay.
And I guess like, yes, I'm like making fun of Trump.
I think it was sort of dumb, if I'm being honest, it's really not that necessary.
But I guess two things I would give him credit for.
Number one, AI, he's trying to basically rebrand AI to make it more popular with people.
And so you can see he's doing this.
I believe in AI.
I believe it's a good thing.
I believe we should make it more popular.
I believe it's got a terrible brand from Dario and Sam who say it's going to end humanity.
So I like conceptually, I don't know if he's going about it the right way, whatever.
He's doing it how he does stuff.
I will give him credit for like putting a positive spin on AI and not just like.
I think it would be very easy politically right now to just say, oh, AI is bad, right?
It's got some of these political headwinds.
So he's not caving to that.
I think he knows that the stock market heavily relies on it and the economy heavily relies on everyone's 401ks and stuff.
So it makes sense that he's trying to prop up AI.
Okay, on the other side of the spectrum, we have...
Gavin Newsom of California, who has ordered California to draft an AI kill switch rule within two months.
He wrote an executive order asking experts to design mandatory shutdowns, on-site auditors, and loss of control reporting rules for frontier models.
I mean, I think he's basically trying to get the negative headwinds of AI and be like, look, we're like creating a kill switch.
We're going to be the safe people.
He's like, the federal government isn't regulating it enough, so we're going to regulate it in California.
I think inevitably what will happen here is that...
that AI companies will just leave California.
If this really does, like, I mean, that's just my guess.
Nobody really wants probably a kill switch that the state that you're in controls to turn your company off if they deem it necessary.
So I would guess similar to what we saw with, what's interesting because Elon, you know, classically doesn't like California, yada, yada, whatever.
And so he moved a lot of his companies to Texas, but Elon has XAI still headquartered in.
San Francisco.
So, I mean, there is a lot of incredible AI talent there.
It makes a lot of sense.
But I think even this might be too much where XAI gets pulled out.
You might see Anthropic and possibly OpenAI.
I mean, I'd be curious to see what happens.
But if this regulation became too cumbersome, I think you would just see people moving out of state.
So it'll be interesting to see what happens there.
Obviously, it's like kind of political.
Him and Trump are going to...
duke it out for, you know, Trump doesn't want him to run for president and whatever.
So there's a whole bunch of political stuff, I'm sure, involved in it.
But it'll be interesting to see what happens with all of that.
Guys, thank you so much for tuning into the podcast.
If you enjoyed this episode, as always, make sure to leave a rating review wherever you get your podcasts.
It helps to show out a lot.
I really appreciate them all, honestly.
And also, if you haven't tried AI Box yet, there's all these incredible AI agents out.
I love every single one of them.
This, I genuinely...
I think makes them much more useful because we're basically forcing all of the AI companies that hate each other to work together.
So go get AI box, go get that connector, stick it inside of whatever AI tool you use, and you get 80 different AI models all inside of whatever your main workstation AI tool is.
All right, guys, thanks so much for tuning in and I'll catch you in the next episode.