Yeah. I mean, I think we stand at a very strange crossroads right now with the rise of artificial intelligence and that the quality of AI as a tool to try and teach you something. Like if you want to learn and understand some concept, AI is pretty good at this point. You know, the hallucinations are mostly tamped down. Its ability to find you sources and give you that information is pretty good. And that if you want to deeply understand a topic, it's a good. Scaffolding to bring you along with it. It's, and I think where it fails is having any shred of personality or nuance or of it being interesting to listen to. Like it's just, it's awful, just terrible. And so right now you can say, well, like, this is how it's always going to be. And that's possible that it will just never be better. Or it'll be, they'll solve this problem. And then maybe it's a genuine risk for a person who's trying to create information. But I think right now there is a craving for a human voice for people who are doing the work and actually finding the people and doing the interviews and leveling up their knowledge and sharing what they're finding that you can provide almost like these oases from the land marketing slash open AI just gibberish. So I think, you know, people always say, it's too late. And they said that back in 2007, they said that, but, you know, I've been this entire time. People are like, oh, it's too late. And then you watch people pick, you know, the whole rise of all the people on Substack and people who are doing blogging again and email newsletters and YouTube and podcasts and all of these revolutions just keep happening as because the audience is always there. The audience is always hungry for knowledge, for information. They especially appreciate when someone does a good job of communicating that information in a human form and are rankled by the bland automated techno gibberish. So I think we're as long as like when the robots do our job better than we can, then there's a risk. But right now, I do not see that in the least. They are,

they

Yeah. You know, a couple of things come to mind. I wonder if people back in the 14th century when the printing press was invented were saying this thing is going to take the humanity out of whatever reporting, whatever newsletters, whatever reporting was done. I think we might have talked about this. There might have been someone else where for a thousand years, a reliable job was copying the Bible by hand. And I'm sure the first printed Bible probably was a novelty and someone's, oh, this will never catch on. But I do wonder whether the line from that invention to large language models is a direct line or whether large language models are something parallel or something orthogonal. I don't know yet. Yeah.

I don't spend too much time trying to predict where it's going to go. I think it's it is right now it's it's just hot steaming garbage to read and it has been for its entire lifetime that it is it has gotten a better to be a better writer technically, but it is still awful to read. And you and as soon as you recognize its patterns and you see them everywhere, you don't want to spend another second reading it. So if it can introduce new novel patterns that are genuinely surprising and interesting to read and is telling you compelling stories and has, you know, like if someone, if they figure that out, then there might be a risk to human as communicator. But for now, I don't see any risk of it in the current state. But I'm open. Like, and I've always said, like, when it does, when it genuinely does a better job than me, then I will step off the field. Sure. But, but, but I'm not going to step off the field when there is like all of this hype and fear that it's maybe going to do a better job than us, that we should be worried. No, like you've got stories to tell. You've got audiences to speak to. Why would you silence your voice because you have this worry that some amorphous computer Terminator is going to show up and write better prose and crush skulls with its robot foot?

Sure. And I think it depends on what you're looking for. For example, if someone wanted to read the definition of space journalism, they could Google it and the AI would assemble a half-page definition with some examples. But presumably people are coming to this episode for the overt personal story of you or of someone in the field. And every personal story is going to be different to the point where an AI assimilated summary of it is going to is not what that audience is looking for. And I agree with you, trying to chase the audience is a fool's errand, at least in the long term.