The Exchanges

Q and codex apps, Where, which has driven so much of the growth in AI right now, which is sort of, uh, applicable for coders today, but over time, if the AI labs see it, you know, see their way, prove out, everyone will use these type of apps. So I'm curious to hear your perspective on this. Um, is this as big of a liability for Google as I'm imagining?

A I mean, I do think it's a problem. You even heard Sundar Pichai was on, um, you know, with, with Casey Newton and Kevin Ruse on their podcast, and he explicitly said, like, just straight up, like, um, that they're a little bit behind in, in coding, you know, with regard to AI and everyone knows that this is sort of the forefront where you need to be, not only from a actual coding perspective, but because a lot of people of course think that this is what is the key for sort of the agentic use cases going forward. Um, And, you know, potentially self, um, you know, these models that can teach themselves and whatnot, and we'll see how that plays out. But still, it's clear that everyone recognizes from open AI, which realized they had to sort of, if you don't want to call it a pivot, they had to reorient the entire business right around. Yeah. Building towards the super app and bringing in a codex and, and putting it all together, which they still have not done yet, but presumably were We're closing in on that happening. Um, and now, yeah, Google recognizing and acknowledging that they're not where they need to be with regard to coding, and there have been reports, you know, that, that everyone from Sergey Brin on down is sort of, ah, all hands on deck, literally, to make, make sure that they can sort of catch up in this world, because of course, they're Google. They should be. They…

AI assessment note: “I mean, I do think it's a problem. You even heard Sundar Pichai”

Q again. You had a really funny, funny, uh, piece about that. You said it's almost like Apple's having some major issues with their AI implementation and strategy. They should probably look into that. But it just keeps happening, right? That, that this keeps getting delayed and, you know, you start to lose faith over time, even with the Google partnership, that they're going to be able to figure this out.

A Yeah. I was always like a little bit skeptical. I mean, I've obviously been super skeptical of Siri over the past, having used it over the past, but like when they announced the Google partnership, I was always a little bit skeptical of the initial rollout. Cause it's like, how are they going to, it's sort of what we're talking about with the government. Like, right. Like you can't just swap these things in. It may seem like it's, it's that simple, but like, there's a lot of like underlying things that need to be connected. Look at Amazon for an example of that, right? Like, look how long it took them to, to rework Alexa, to be able to To work with things like anthropics models and, and all the models that they're using behind the scenes to sort of upgrade Alexa. It took over a year and then they promised something and they couldn't deliver on the timing of it. And now we're seeing the same thing. We've seen the same thing play out with Apple. It just takes a long time to get like all of the little pieces, uh, in place because the last thing Apple can afford to do right now is put something out there, even in beta. I think even in some sort of, you know, like thing where it's any, any forward facing user facing, um, Uh, service, um, and just have it flop again. That would be just a death now. I think to, they would have to change the Siri name at that point. You would have like…

AI assessment note: “I was always a little bit skeptical of the initial rollout.”

Q again. You had a really funny, funny, uh, piece about that. You said it's almost like Apple's having some major issues with their AI implementation and strategy. They should probably look into that. But it just keeps happening, right? That, that this keeps getting delayed and, you know, you start to lose faith over time, even with the Google partnership, that they're going to be able to figure this out.

A Yeah. I was always like a little bit skeptical. I mean, I've obviously been super skeptical of Siri over the past, having used it over the past, but like when they announced the Google partnership, I was always a little bit skeptical of the initial rollout. Cause it's like, how are they going to, it's sort of what we're talking about with the government. Like, right. Like you can't just swap these things in. It may seem like it's, it's that simple, but like, there's a lot of like underlying things that need to be connected. Look at Amazon for an example of that, right? Like, look how long it took them to, to rework Alexa, to be able to To work with things like anthropics models and, and all the models that they're using behind the scenes to sort of upgrade Alexa. It took over a year and then they promised something and they couldn't deliver on the timing of it. And now we're seeing the same thing. We've seen the same thing play out with Apple. It just takes a long time to get like all of the little pieces, uh, in place because the last thing Apple can afford to do right now is put something out there, even in beta. I think even in some sort of, you know, like thing where it's any, any forward facing user facing, um, Uh, service, um, and just have it flop again. That would be just a death now. I think to, they would have to change the Siri name at that point. You would have like…

AI assessment note: “It just takes a long time to get like all of the little pieces”

Q the models and in some cases amongst the hardware because of the TPU thing. And, and when you see commoditization happens, the economics of AI shift. So I'm curious what you think about it. And I I'm curious what you think, you know, if you agree with my premise that we are starting to see this commoditization, um, what do you think the economic impacts of the commoditization really are?

A Yeah, I would frame it's like the taking what you're saying and framing it slightly differently is that, um, If you believe all of that to be true, that you're, that you're laying out there, maybe investors are just looking at it. Like, look at the end of the day, then if that's the case, who has the sort of best position and best business model for all of this, you know, future going forward. And I think it would be hard to argue against Google, just given that they own not only Google cloud, you know, on which a lot of models and everything are running, but they, the TPUs as you're noting, obviously they have the search business and Waymo and all of these other things. Whereas the other companies, if, if AI is starting to, um, commoditize in some way. You know, Nvidia, their business potentially is impacted in a good way in some cases, but for the most part, it's probably going to be looked at as like, well, the arms race is sort of slowing down a bit, and that's going to be bad news for Nvidia at the highest level, because you won't need to necessarily buy, you know, the absolute top of the line. Um, and, or on the flip side, as we're talking about, if Google's able

AI assessment note: “who has the sort of best position and best business model for all of this”

Q price for it. Because you would imagine like there should have been a meeting within the company to say, well, AI is going to be big or going to create a lot of this demand. They've seen the funding numbers. And so even if we're not going to build our own foundational model, let's ramp up our purchases. What happened there? Like, isn't this a big problem for the company?

A It's a great point because again, you noted Tim Cook was, you know, Famous as the, as the logistic expert, right? He was COO of Apple before he became CEO under, under jobs, obviously under Steve jobs, obviously. And this was what he was famous for. He built this Chinese supply chain. He basically was considered the master of this that everyone then tried to emulate and copy over the next several decades. And now shouldn't he have been in position, um, you know, as CEO of one of the largest companies in the world, uh, to be able to say like, look, even exactly what you're saying, even if we're not going to, Spend all this money to do the capex build out ourselves. All of our peer group is, and they're the biggest companies in the world alongside of save billions, hundreds of billions of dollars potentially to spend. So what's that going to do to the supply chain? It's very strange that they wouldn't have gained that out. You have to believe that they did to some level, but cook keeps saying in all the, you know, and this was, this, uh, you know, was famously his last earnings report, um, with John turnus now coming into takeover, but he keeps saying it was a hundred year storm and a hundred year flood and all these things. Um, you know, noting that it's just, Above and beyond what, what they modeled out clearly. Um, and what they thought was even feasible. And I mean, obviously…

AI assessment note: “cook keeps saying... it was a hundred year storm and a hundred year flood”

Q price for it. Because you would imagine like there should have been a meeting within the company to say, well, AI is going to be big or going to create a lot of this demand. They've seen the funding numbers. And so even if we're not going to build our own foundational model, let's ramp up our purchases. What happened there? Like, isn't this a big problem for the company?

A It's a great point because again, you noted Tim Cook was, you know, Famous as the, as the logistic expert, right? He was COO of Apple before he became CEO under, under jobs, obviously under Steve jobs, obviously. And this was what he was famous for. He built this Chinese supply chain. He basically was considered the master of this that everyone then tried to emulate and copy over the next several decades. And now shouldn't he have been in position, um, you know, as CEO of one of the largest companies in the world, uh, to be able to say like, look, even exactly what you're saying, even if we're not going to, Spend all this money to do the capex build out ourselves. All of our peer group is, and they're the biggest companies in the world alongside of save billions, hundreds of billions of dollars potentially to spend. So what's that going to do to the supply chain? It's very strange that they wouldn't have gained that out. You have to believe that they did to some level, but cook keeps saying in all the, you know, and this was, this, uh, you know, was famously his last earnings report, um, with John turnus now coming into takeover, but he keeps saying it was a hundred year storm and a hundred year flood and all these things. Um, you know, noting that it's just, Above and beyond what, what they modeled out clearly. Um, and what they thought was even feasible. And I mean, obviously…

AI assessment note: “he keeps saying it was a hundred year storm and a hundred year flood”

Q Yeah, talk briefly again, and then we'll head out. Um, why is it important for OpenAI to go before Anthropic?

A So, so much of this, to your book publishing point, is around the narratives and around drumming up, uh, investor interest in, in these stocks. And while SpaceX and OpenAI are interesting because obviously SpaceX has XAI now, which is directly analogous in ways to To open AI's business. They're very different businesses. Obviously open AI doesn't have a rocket launching arm, nor do they have Twitter, uh, for probably for better in that case. Um, and so they don't have a lot of overlap. And so there's, there's going to be comps that are done like, you know, market comparables done, uh, between the two companies on their AI businesses, but they're not direct. Anthropic and open AI would be much more viewed as direct, obviously competitors, Um, between the two. Now, their businesses, as we've been talking about, are different in ways, but as we've also spent a lot of this conversation about, they're converging, right? Because they have, because OpenAI feels like they have to go after what Anthropic's been able to tap into with developers, and yeah, leaning into, you know, coding, and, and then eventually agentic work, and so they are converging, and the comps between Anthropic and OpenAI that we're seeing with this, these most recent fundraisers, Just increasingly do not look good for open AI. And so when public investors see that they are going to say, okay, we're going to invest…

AI assessment note: “comps between Anthropic and OpenAI... increasingly do not look good for open AI.”

Q emails from this and I might regret saying this, but what standout product does AI product does Microsoft have outside of selling AI services from Azure? What standout product does Amazon, AI product does Amazon have outside of selling some AI Uh, with AWS. What standout AI product does Apple have? We both know that they don't have one. And what standout product does Meta have? Uh, none. AI product.

A They have none. They have none. Certainly none on the consumer front. And even on the enterprise front though, right? Like that's long been what Microsoft said would be, you know, sort of, that's always been their fallback, right? If they couldn't do it on, on consumer side. And obviously they try across the board for every single different technology that comes out and they, You know, they don't have that much success on the fronts, but like you would think that they could fall back to the, the, you know, massive enterprise, um, just sales, you know, sail through that they sell through that they have. And yeah, to your point, like they'll say that everything, it looks great. And, but again, just watch the actions of these companies. I think you're exactly right. And I think for Microsoft in particular, it's, it's glaring because you hit on it. They had, Not only the open air relationship, they had being as like the original, like product out there. It was going to make Mike, it was going to make Google dance and who's dancing now it's Google. Like Microsoft is not dancing, you know, so no rhythm. They got no rhythm. Um, and I, it was a huge, a huge missed opportunity. They could have made being a real potential competitor to Google and In some ways they, they, you know, they were probably too early, I'm sure. And they stubbed their toe and they pulled back, you know, the whole…

AI assessment note: “They have none. They have none. Certainly none on the consumer front.”

Q complaining to the FT that OpenAI doesn't have enough compute for this device to run, that to me is, is pretty interesting and I think not a good sign. And this is a multi-billion dollar tie-up. It's not a good sign for The fact that, um, somebody close to Ive is saying this, you know, for a story about the device hitting speed, speed bumps. What do you think, MG?

A Yeah. Um, yeah, the behind the scenes element of that is, is super interesting. You have to wonder, it, to me, it sort of felt almost as if it's, um, you know, probably, I'm, I, I don't want to say it's an intentional leak, but I do feel like it's directionally interesting that, uh, they're basically telling the market that this device is not going to be on time. Like, cause their original reports, right. Where that it was going to be Probably sometime at the end of next year, the end of 26. And so, you know, this to me signals that this is more like a 2027 type thing now. Um, and I, I think that that sort of quote maybe, uh, helps that, you know, get out there. So people aren't expecting, you know, have a countdown all of a sudden for a year from now when, when this device doesn't hit the market. Um, but I also think like there's a lot in that, in that report, including. Yeah. Like what this device, you know, potentially is they don't come out and say it directly, but you know, a lot, I think a lot of us who read those original like reports when the, when the two sides both started working together, but then obviously when the acquisition happened, which also feels like 20 years ago, but was only a few months ago, uh, which is again, wild. Um, but I think, you know, we all sort of zeroed in on it being not necessarily a wearable, even though that was, you know, what meta and, …

AI assessment note: “they're basically telling the market that this device is not going to be on time”

Q on a dull of its output. So he's basically saying like, listen, uh, there are others that want to use this technology for automation. We want to give everybody the benefit of being able to use this technology. And there he is setting that Well, let's say unique vision for now, um, but I'm actually going to question it, but is that, is that the right read on it, MG?

A I think so. Um, yeah, I mean, it's basically like, look, there's all of these other AI companies out there, um, including Google, by the way, which are, you know, saying that they're, that they're closing in on solving, um, Again, we'll get to the branding, but whatever you want to call it, AGI or super intelligence. Um, and that, that sense that it's though this nebulous term, which I think everyone would agree with, right. That it, that it can be used for anything. So maybe, maybe it's a problem because no one really knows then what it's actually going to be used for. And in some cases that's, that's scary to people, to a lot of people. Right. And so what I think Zuckerberg is trying to frame it as like, We're not trying to boil the ocean. We're not going to use this, this technology to do every single thing under the sun. You know, we don't necessarily, uh, you know, focus on enterprise like some of the competitors do. We focus on personal relationships. And so we're going to use, we're going to get to that technology, this level of technology, and we're going to use it for your own personal purposes to empower you to use it for your own personal purposes. Right. And so it's trying to be, again, an empowering message versus some of the others where it maybe sounds a bit Not nefarious, but a little bit nebulous and scary in that regard, because it can, you know, who knows wha…

AI assessment note: “I think so. Um, yeah, I mean, it's basically like”

Q by, by the, you know, Steve jobs, for instance, to continue on the apple front left, uh, Tim cook with a roadmap really, and cook crushed it. Um, but what roadmap does Tim cook leave apple with if he leaves in Q one? And if apple does continue to lag behind and suffer On the AI front, is that a ding on Tim Cook's legacy, even if he's not there?

A Yeah, that, and that was one, um, that I didn't even mention this in, in the piece, but I do think, um, there was some talk maybe a year ago or so that the one thing cook was really focused on internally. There was, there was a couple of reports to this, to this notion that the one thing he was focused on right now, or at the time was, um, was really meeting the market for what meta has done with the, with the Ray bands. And so he was sort of going all in on trying to make that potentially his last big Product unveil, because as we know, the Vision Pro just hasn't sort of, you know, lit the world on fire. Obviously there's, there's really nothing to show right now for, on the AI fronts and You know, the new iPhones, those continue just the current model that's, that's been, you know, playing out over the past. 1520 years. And so, um, is there a new product that he can sort of go out with a bang on? And, you know, there was some inkling again, that, that he might think that the glasses are the thing. I sort of discount that a little bit now. Cause I just view like, yeah, they can make like a nice product with that, but I don't think it's going to be, you know, a, an overnight game changer for Apple where it would like. Necessitate, you know, postponing, uh, a good time for retirement necessarily. Right. And to your point, like of leading leaving, um, sort of the cupboard stocked…

AI assessment note: “if he has sort of this, um, yeah, this pipeline of new products coming out”

Q lot of what we're seeing now Um, is just gonna be the claims, the hype on the claims will just escalate as the IPO window opens, and we know that Anthropic is sort of on the way there, and I'm curious if this big push from, you know, OpenAI has something to do with that, although, I mean, the benchmarks look good, but I do wonder, what do you think?

A Yeah, I mean, a huge part of an IPO is obviously the marketing and the story behind it, right? And, um, So as you're noting, like all these companies continue to battle. It does feel like open AI has had a resurgence after being downtrodden and sort of, you know, falling behind, uh, Anthropic because, you know, they obviously were more consumer focused. Well, Anthropic recognized the opportunity with, uh, with coding and, and sort of have basically used that to slingshot ahead of open AI. And now all of a sudden they're going to go public before them and, and, uh, everything's looking good. I, I, It's very interesting what Anthropic will do leading up to that IPO. Presumably we're going to get the, uh, you know, the S one any day now, it could be this week, could be next week. Um, and, uh, and, and the, you know, the offering might be next month. And, um, you know, what do they do to that marketing and, and product end, uh, ahead of that? Do they, what do they do to keep momentum? Cause it does feel like, again, opening eye has, has, uh, taken back some of it with, with this Astra push, but obviously Uh, Anthropic just released, you know, a new version of, of Mythos, um, and Fable, uh, right ahead of, uh, OpenAI doing that, and, uh, the backdrop, of course, behind all of this now is everything going on with security and these breaches, uh, that are sort of being disclosed left …

AI assessment note: “a huge part of an IPO is obviously the marketing and the story behind it”

Q it seems like now with this deal with AMD, which we're going to get into the details of, which by the way, uh, might have opening eye ending up as a 10% owner of AMD. Uh, this is part of the interesting new ideas that Sam teased. So, uh, let's just start with the high, the high level. Here, um, are we starting to see Sam's plan come to fruition?

A It seems like this is part of it, right? Um, it's, it's, this is, it's so hard to analyze this in part because of what we kicked off with, right? Things are moving so fast and it's almost hard. It's obviously impossible for us on the outside to know how much of these deals are coming together sort of on the fly. Like there was the reporting about obviously the, the Nvidia a hundred billion dollar deal, which led presumably to Sam's, you know, post there that you're talking about that, that sort of came together while they were both on the Overseas excursion with, uh, with Trump and, and sort of going around and, and they were able to hash out that deal sort of one-on-one. And so with a deal like this now with, with AMD, you almost wonder, like, did a similar thing play out? Was, was Sam with, uh, Lisa Sue traveling around somewhere? Did, did she pick up the phone when she saw that Nvidia deal and decide, like, we need to, you know, figure out a deal basically over the next few days to sort of be able to To respond to that in some ways. And so it's when, when talking about Sam's post, it's sort of like, I'm, I'm unclear if he even knows all of the, uh, the ways that this is going to go from his sort of nebulous, uh, yeah. Talk about, uh, these interesting new ideas for financing. Um, and also that post, I, I felt the need to write about that both because I liked the, the Sam Alt…

AI assessment note: “It seems like this is part of it, right?”

Q the report from Gurman, like we mentioned, is that they are thinking about Anthropic, uh, over OpenAI. Um, let's just talk about the bake-off there. Why do you think that is? Because if you just put it product to product, OpenAI's voice mode is mature. Uh, and much better than Anthropix. Anthropix just released the Claude voice mode. So what do you think is going on behind the scenes there?

A I sort of wonder when you and I last spoke, we spoke about, um, you know, the list of companies that Apple could potentially acquire right in the space. And, and the one that I had sort of at the top, um, you know, we, we talked about perplexity. Um, but the one above that, even for me was, uh, Anthropic, even though I don't think it's possible for them to do that for all sorts of reasons, namely the price at this point. But I do just feel like overall from everything you hear externally, the, uh, mentality that, that Anthropic, That team has, and obviously they spun out right from, from open AI famously. Um, you know, some of the, some of the team spun out and, and started Anthropic in that way. Um, just the mentality is more in line with what I think Apple would want, um, from, from an AI perspective. And so part of me wonders if it's not that, that said, I don't think that they would, if it was much worse, I don't think that they would, they would pick that over, uh, chat GPT. So obviously they're using it and they do think it's better. I mean, there's been the reports as well, um, that they've been using it for Xcode, right, internally, and that, that was going to be the thing that they, they outsource, that Anthropic was going to be the tool that they used on the AI side to outsource, um, Vibe coding to, uh, and, you know, there's, there's some work, it seems like that's u…

AI assessment note: “the mentality is more in line with what I think Apple would want”

Q AI spend was just a wealth transfer. I would say from like meta advertising to Lama from Google search revenue to Gemini from Microsoft Azure to open AI. So what happens here? Because, um, you know, basically if they, if a lot of the AI industry has been driven based off of subsidies coming from other businesses, and doesn't need that type of spend anymore, like does the party end?

A So I think it's different for each company, probably Microsoft and Google are closest, you know, aligned in terms of where they net out. And it's sort of interesting, you know, the, the numbers you just rattled off with where the stocks are at, that feels, you know, just like a very, um, clear picture from wall street, what they think now, right? Like they think NVIDIA is going to get hit fast because, uh, in this, in this doomsday scenario, because obviously they're the beneficiary from everyone, from all of those companies, all those other companies. That you mentioned, uh, big tech is, is pouring as much money as possible as they can. They can't get it, get enough chips fast enough into Nvidia. And if they pause that, that obviously is bad news for Nvidia in the short term. Again, I think there's longer term stuff that that's different for Nvidia, which we can talk about, but to just hit on the rest of this question right now, um, I think that Microsoft and Google, which are, as we just mentioned, you know, are trying to sort of figure out the right models For how to charge for AI. I think that this puts them in a really tricky situation if the underlying economics just totally changed overnight of what AI's, yeah, underlying economic model should be. And so they were, you know, Moving around different pieces, trying to get to the right, the right, uh, end state so that, yea…

AI assessment note: “I think that this puts them in a really tricky situation if the underlying economics”

Q There's going to be a price war. Apple can just wait until the technology matures. The price war happens. And then implement it. Maybe they can even implement it on device. Um, how much credence do you give if that is the bet? And it sounds like that might be the Tim Cook apple, but, uh, how much credence do you give to this idea that they might be right?

A Yeah. I mean, hence the title, the binary bet, like, and, and that's, um, I think that there is a chance, right? I mean, obviously I think in the short term, it's a lot, uh, more straightforward for that to, you know, if that plays out that way, because it's so relative, everyone believes that it's relatively early in this, in the AI game. And so there's a, there's a world in which there's a few avenues where it works out for Apple and it's not just Um, you know, the lack of, of spend on, on training these models. I mean, we, you know, we've talked about it before. What if LLMs don't end up being the end all be all of AI that gets us to AGI, right? What if you need to sort of even not fully pivot, but you need to basically then ramp up sort of these other massive, um, infrastructure, um, arrangements in order to, to build up, you know, world models and, and whatever else comes next down the pike and robotics and everything else in order to get us to, uh, what many would Considered to be the sort of holy grail of AI. And so if even just in not choosing to participate in this LLM build out, maybe Apple's wise in that they're realizing, or, you know, lucking into, even if you, you don't necessarily believe in their, um, vision of this to date, um, that it's not just gonna be LLMs that the LLMs are step one of, of many steps to get us towards, um, the future of AI. And so maybe App…

AI assessment note: “I think that there is a chance, right?”

Q being this, like, personalized agent for you that can help you with work or your personal life. And so I guess what I'm asking is, do you believe in that vision? Like, do you think that is appealing enough To pivot the entire company, uh, toward, and if it is, I mean, you're basically going to see open AI versus anthropic head to head. So who do you think wins?

A So first I do think that it is, again, I think it's directionally the right bet. I think we've seen enough now of the early signs. Um, and I think it was frankly, I'm not sure how much it was Claude code, um, that drove this decision as much as it's Claude coworkers. Right. The, the offshoot that sort of goes after the more, again, computer use agentic use cases that are more meant for regular day, everyday usage of, of quote unquote, regular people, not just, uh, developers coding, um, where open AI must've looked at that mixed with what's been going on with open claw. Um, and just been like, look, we need to be the one go to shop for everyone to do this. We already have ChatGPT, which has sort of become the Kleenex of, uh, you know, the ubiquitous brand within AI. And we have a risk of losing that if we're not there with these sort of agentic coding, um, and agentic, um, services. And again, it feels like it's early even now, like with all the momentum and all the hype around these things, it still feels like it's too early for these things to really take off in a, in a meaningful way on the mainstream. Um, but Uh, I think that you're seeing everyone sort of go after little pieces of it. Again, we talked about open claw. It felt like that was, you know, there's a movement behind that, but at the same time, it's sort of, it's sort of too, um, obtuse, I think for, for sort of e…

AI assessment note: “So first I do think that it is, again, I think it's directionally the right bet.”

Q stock is, you know, up a tiny bit, but mostly flat, uh, since the earnings announcement. What does Apple need to do to get that story turned around? It's been flat for six weeks or so. I think this is, again, this is going to be the best year in Apple history. Uh, but of course, the AI story is something that, that is not really working in its favor.

A Yeah. Uh, so there's a few things there. First, first and foremost, I do think that some of that, you know, um, apprehension about Apple is related to just what's going on with memory chips and everything, right? And, and that it could ultimately end up squeezing their margins. The margins were incredible this quarter, which was sort of a surprise to many given everything going on, but it does seem like Apple's sort of been savvy in terms of like potentially hoarding, uh, memory chips, which is not something that Tim Cook Usually likes to do. He likes to get this inventory as streamlined as possible, but we're in a weird, um, sort of macro environment for this. Uh, and, and that's in no small part because of the AI, uh, revolution that's happening. Right. And, and is changing all of those equations. And so, um, I do think the broader picture though, yes, is that the market sees what Apple is doing with Google and they applauded it right when it was first announced that like, oh, it's like, oh, They're teaming up with one of the leaders in AI, if not the leader in AI now, in Google, and, and Gemini will finally fix Siri, and, and we're gonna have, uh, you know, a great situation for Apple. But I do think, like, ultimately, they might be looking at this as like, well, look, we have, we have Meta over here that's spending a hundred and thirty billion dollars in CapEx, whereas Appl…

AI assessment note: “apprehension about Apple is related to just what's going on with memory chips”

Q somebody in my recap, uh, from the event, uh, on Monday says, they said, I don't give one flying flip for AI on my phone. Apple should just leave it out altogether. I don't want AI reading my messages. I don't want AI looking at my photos. I want AI to get the F out of my life. I wonder how many, what percentage of the population that comment represents?

A Yeah. I mean, there's a lot in there, right? Like I've seen that too. I've seen that general comment. People have left me similar comments, right? Like, especially about Apple. It's interesting, especially about Apple products. Cause I feel like, I don't know if it's the sort of historical privacy messaging or even the anti sort of meta and, and Google messaging, right? Where it's like people who are, you know, diehard in the Apple ecosystem, almost at least historically have viewed Google and meta, um, you know, as, as sort of The villains, uh, you know, who are just all about data hoovering and, and, you know, bringing this all in to, to feed their business models. Obviously there's some level of truth to that, um, because their model, that is their business model, but there's, you know, there's of course a flip side to that too, which is Apple's not, you know, the, the full on, uh, white knight in this regard, who's, you know, who's doing everything, you know, for purely, um, Uh, you know, above board reasons. Um, everyone has their own agendas, right? And everyone has their own business models and everyone, uh, has, has reasons. All companies have reasons to do what they're doing. Um, but to you, to that comment, yeah, I do think that there's, there's a subset of people who, um, look at this stuff with AI and think like, is this Apple sort of delving into a world really? Th…

AI assessment note: “I do think that there's, there's a subset of people who”

Q control and what Apple wants in every single one of its product experiences is the control. So is that the argument not to do this? And do you think that, I mean, I sort of have this feeling that Apple will eventually kind of fall back on that. Like, yeah, we'll just try to control the experience and do it ourselves. Um, so what would be the counterpoint to that?

A Yeah, and a lot of that was sort of even thinking back to pre-last year's WWDC leading up to what they would eventually announce was the partnership with OpenAI. There had been the rumors that they were potentially going to do something with them, and what might that look like with regard to Siri? And definitely one of the things, you know, that, that jumps to mind when you first hear that is user privacy, right? And, and Apple's, you know, big proponent of, of user privacy and not wanting to send Um, their own user data over to third parties unnecessarily. And so they obviously have sort of an opt-in mechanism to do that right now. But if they were to actually outsource this in a major way, would presumably they would still have some sort of opt-in to begin with, but would they do it on, you know, the ongoing basis, like saying, probably not on every query that, you know, you would do that, but do they sort of prompt users like once a month or, or more often or less often than that? Um, in order to ensure that they know what they're sending. And, you know, I think that that's the, the one argument, the major argument on Apple side on top of the other stuff that you're, you know, talking about where Apple just wants to control that user experience, regardless of sort of the data and user privacy aspect. They want to make sure also that the thing's not going to hallucinate, righ…

AI assessment note: “that's the, the one argument, the major argument on Apple side”