In this week's strange news segment: after a quick update on the cartoonish Iran-US negotiations (which we're sure will age well), Ben, Matt and Noel explore China's explosive accusations that other nations are weaponizing animals like sea turtles and fish for spying. AI goes increasingly rogue. Peter Thiel's secretive ‘Dialog’ society gets hacked. Stay tuned for the very end of this weekly segment to get a sneak preview of the actual episodes coming up in the near future.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Listen
Watch
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
From UFOs to psychic powers and government conspiracies. History is
riddled with unexplained events. You can turn back now or
learn the stuff they don't want you to know. A
production of iHeartRadio.
Speaker 2 (00:26):
Pillow. Welcome back to the show. My name is Matt,
my name is Noah.
Speaker 3 (00:30):
They call me ben Ed. You can too. We're joined
as always with our super producer Max the Free Trade Williams.
Most importantly, you argue you are here. That makes this
the stuff they don't want you to know. Welcome to
our weekly strange news program. We are recording this on Wednesday,
June seventeenth. You are hearing it on Monday, June twenty second,
(00:55):
and June has just flown by. One of the things
we wanted to get to before we talked about a
lot more strange news, is that we are based in
these glorious, if imperfect United States, and we, like so
many other people in the United States and around the world,
(01:15):
have been reading an absolute rushed ping pong game of
narratives surrounding Iran and the US. And we've got some
breaking news updates for you.
Speaker 2 (01:30):
AP News June seventeenth, twenty twenty six. Iran will reopen
the straight of horror moves and can sell oil freely
under deal with the US. Officials say, here's a tiny
bit of information. Iran will immediately take steps to reopen
the straight of horror moves once a tentative deal with
the US to end the war is signed on Friday,
(01:51):
June nineteenth, and it will be allowed to sell its
oil without restrictions. These are according to leaked copies of
an interim agreement that officials say broadly just the document.
Speaker 3 (02:01):
Hmmm and beep beep beep, beep, beep beep from Al
Jazeera on the same day we're recording on the seventeenth,
just a few hours ago. Uh Trump said that, being
President Donald J. Trump says we're back to dropping bombs
if Iran misbehaves. The US has said there's a what
(02:25):
fourteen point memorandum of understanding, like you said, Matt, that's
going to be signed on Friday. But the Potus in
particular took pains to say, this is not final. If
I if I don't like it, I'm going to bomb
more places.
Speaker 4 (02:44):
Right on the head, he said, Yes, here's right in
the middle, right in the middle of their heads, in
their faces. Yeah, bomb their faces. And I don't know, man,
it's more market manipulation.
Speaker 3 (02:57):
Well it it is very much. Look at the oil market.
Speaker 5 (03:01):
It's really while. It's just what a wild ride, guys,
it's an emotional rollercoaster.
Speaker 1 (03:05):
Here.
Speaker 2 (03:06):
Here's the weirdest part to me, you guys, this is
from the ap article. Much of the agreement would restore
the status quo before the war, including ending hostilities, restarting
negotiations between the US and Iran over the nuclear program,
reopening the Strait the I think the US would be
on the hook to the tune of three hundred billion
(03:28):
to rebuild after the war.
Speaker 5 (03:29):
Trump says that's fake news. Trump says, that's fake news.
Speaker 3 (03:32):
Those are technically frozen funds that Iran will be allowed
to use, and they're going through a back door. They're
going through the UAE. So the ua is technically now
hear me out for four diplomatic purposes, for purposes of decorum,
that is not technically the US pay. It's the US,
(03:57):
you know why the ua E. But I heard there
were two separate buckets that there was one bucket that
was quote unquote unfrozen funds and then another.
Speaker 4 (04:09):
Bucket that was literally US just paying for repairs repairs. Dude, Dude,
I just don't understand what's different and what created the
need for any of this. And I know maybe I'm
asking the dumb question that there is no real answer to,
but it just like it seems like under the previous
(04:30):
agreement that Trump ripped up, there was oversight, there were cameras, there,
there was all kinds of access, you know, to uh
a view into the nuclear program and what it was
and wasn't doing. And then Trump ripped up that agreement
which completely removed any semblance of transparency, as imperfect as
it might have been, and.
Speaker 5 (04:50):
Then all of a sudden, they're definitely building a nuclear weapon.
Speaker 3 (04:53):
Yeah, they're always two weeks away from the right, according
to one of the bad Bends. So there are a few,
but they're out there. But there are two very real
answers to the question. First off, you already answered your
own question there noel market manipulation is a huge part
(05:14):
of this. The second issue, I think I'm very hesitant
to read the tea leaves of any other any individual's mind,
especially at that level of power. But there's definitely like
this isn't a political point, this is a management point.
(05:35):
I don't think Potus is making his own mind up
on these things. I think his teals and his millers
and his net and yahoos are telling him which way
to jump and wear, and he's not doing a great
job with critical thought here. Like CNN just said that
(05:57):
sixteen hours ago, CNN just revealed that US officials, the
few competent people left at the Department of State, are
downplaying the text of the Iran agreement and they're saying, hey,
these fourteen points don't really count for all. They don't
account for all the stuff we definitely agreed to in
(06:19):
back rooms that we definitely can't tell you about. So
it's if it seems like we fumbled the bag of badgers,
just know that there's other stuff that makes us look
more responsible and competent and not so bad at our jobs.
Speaker 4 (06:34):
Well, and the way Hagg's gesth put it, when you know,
confronted on some of these things that we're talking about,
and how asked and when he was asked how it
was different than the previous agreement, he said, this time
we're coming at it from a place of strength, oh
ty good Way, meaning like, well, now they're scared of
(06:54):
us because we bombed them and did all of this
seemingly unnecessary, whereas Obama did it without firing a single shot,
and you know, I think most people would say that
was probably the better move, was doing it without.
Speaker 2 (07:09):
There's one last thing I don't want to lose here, guys.
According to AP, the deal includes an end to the
fighting in Lebanon between Israel and Hesbola. And this is,
according to APT, one of the most delicate parts of
the agreement, because Israel has maintained it will continue to
defend itself and to occupy quote vast swaths of Lebanon.
(07:31):
And if we remember previous ceasefire opportunities that we had,
there seemed to be quite a bit of bombing, just
you know, on the periphery of the places where there's
not supposed to be fighting in bombing, right, Well, we
can't do it here, but Lebanon, sure.
Speaker 4 (07:47):
And doesn't it always seem to like I mean, I
think I saw someone saying that we're in the double
digits as to how many times we're almost at a
deal like this has been announced. And then it would
seem that there's always sort of a caveat that Yahoo
kind of comes in and torpedoes the whole thing literally,
I mean.
Speaker 5 (08:05):
Not to put too fine a point, hey bombs it.
Speaker 3 (08:07):
And also Israeli military just captured a hugely important castle
that was built during the Crusades. Like this is happening
and that's why I think we need more spy animals.
Speaker 4 (08:22):
Oh right, And just last thing in terms of spy
spies or leaks, did you guys hear the other thing
about the phone call where Trump was just berating and
then yaho is that you're.
Speaker 5 (08:31):
A crazy person. Everybody hates you.
Speaker 2 (08:34):
Was that real?
Speaker 5 (08:35):
It was real?
Speaker 3 (08:36):
Yeah?
Speaker 4 (08:36):
I mean it was not audio leaked, but there were
reports of this conversation taking place, and it seemed pretty
you know, in tract I would.
Speaker 3 (08:44):
Say it is real. Now there there are lives lost,
there is more money spent, and it is technically speaking,
a worse deal for the United States. This was something
where you could have left well enough loan. And I'm
not here to say that Barack Obama was a perfect president.
(09:07):
No precedents are perfect presidents. And he's actually technically he's
a center right administration. But do you know what I
think we could use for this one, guys? I think
we got to get past the human negotiators. Maybe we
send in a sea turtle. Maybe we send in some
sneaky fish. Yeah, dude, Remember folks, remember our episode on
(09:32):
animal spies of following this one dog with a ball.
What's say we take a break for a word from
our sponsors and get into this and we have returned
some strange news for you that hearkens back to our
(09:55):
earlier episode on animals at war. Guys, the Chinese Ministry
of State Security went on we chat, which is pretty
much like telegraph or your other social media platforms, and
they said, we have a big expose a foreign espionage
and intelligence agencies are using innovative new methods to monitor
(10:20):
the waters of China. They're deploying spy animals fitted with sensors.
The I think the most credible report of this is
going to come to us from The Guardian written by
Alistair McGrady stationed in Taipei, which is in Taiwan on Friday,
(10:41):
June twelfth. And what the Ministry is saying is fascinating
because they're arguing stuff that for anybody who hasn't listened
to our previous episode will sound bonkers. They're saying large
marine animals, including and I love how they they're just
adding the word spy to animal names. They're going spy
(11:04):
turtles and spyfish to strip the freaking lasers to the
freaking dolphins, just like the dolphins. Yeah, and I love
that you're bringing up that point because our journalists writing
for The Guardian notes that, just like we noted years
ago in our episode on this back in twenty twenty three,
(11:27):
not even that long ago, British intelligence said Russia was
deploying those trained dolphins. Dolphins cetaceans in general are brilliant creatures,
so of course they can be trained for surveillance. And
they had little stuff on their wings or sorry Finns,
(11:48):
I guess I keep thinking of Finns as wings because
swimming is like flying. But they have you know, they
had various different mechanisms that could cap sure audio, could
capture video, could capture certain electronic signals. They did not,
I know, we were all disappointed in this one when
(12:09):
we did the episode, but they did not, as far
as we know, have actual offensive capabilities just yet.
Speaker 2 (12:18):
Then there's something in this article from the Guardian that
is bothering me so much. And we talk about the
importance of language a lot on this show. They say
that these animals have been found quote attached to sensors
as they swam in Chinese waters.
Speaker 3 (12:35):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (12:36):
When you picture that in your mind, animals attached to
sensors as opposed to the opposite way around, sensors.
Speaker 5 (12:44):
Attached to the animals.
Speaker 2 (12:47):
I'm just imagining giant sensors with these poor animals attached
to them.
Speaker 3 (12:51):
Oh yeah, just like a deep sea surveillance trailer with Yeah,
John Dory just strapped to the front. That's that's a
great question, and part of this comes from Okay, we
can say that we verified previously a lot of countries,
(13:13):
including the US, at times experimented with the idea of
weaponizing or leveraging the natural abilities of non human organisms,
right like we we in the US. The Company not
too too long ago, Remember they were trying to bomb
(13:34):
things with bats, right, and to make cyber spy cats.
Those two experiments actually occurred. Un Cats cats are not
are not followers. They don't obey chain of commands.
Speaker 5 (13:50):
We call it hurting cats for a reason. It's hard
to do.
Speaker 2 (13:54):
I would just say it's a really interesting concept of
having these types of animals, butually with sensors on them.
It does look as though they're getting salinity levels like well,
it looks as though they're testing waters more than anything.
Speaker 4 (14:09):
Dropping on important meetings, like they are kind of getting
a lay of the land. I imagine type type stuff,
data about currents and things like that.
Speaker 3 (14:18):
Right, there's not a sea turtle in a three piece
suit with spectacles sitting at G seven and going I'm
glad we didn't invite China. Yeah, which is true.
Speaker 4 (14:28):
Even better at three sea turtles sitting on each other's shoulders,
wrapped in a trench coat with a big hat.
Speaker 3 (14:32):
On, you know, and humans have been doing this for
so long.
Speaker 2 (14:37):
Agreed, There is something interesting in this article about China
State Security minister saying they found buoy's that have acoustic
like listening devices on them. Right, So that is actually
interesting and potentially applicable to these spycraft techniques because you
could find stuff right with that.
Speaker 3 (14:56):
Yeah, meteorological sensor packages is I believe the way that
they're phrasing it in English. We do have to acknowledge
two things. First off, yes, the United States and the
Five Eyes don't just hang out in low earth or orbit,
and they don't just do human and singins on the surface.
(15:18):
They have a vast network of sensors deployed throughout the
world's oceans. A big part of that is, yes, spoopy
doopy stuff. But another big part of that is that
the modern world, this is so silly, this is sussi it.
The modern world depends upon a relatively finite amount of
(15:42):
cables under sea that are easy to cut because they
go through the middle of nowhere. So you've got to
have these sensornets. And with that, it does make sense
that we could, gosh, if we could befriend dolphins, or
if we could teach orca or other cetaceans to be
our roaming sensors, then we are as community says streets ahead.
(16:08):
But humans have used camels, they used donkeys, monkeys, elephants, rats, pigeons, pigs, oxen, mooset.
Side note, I don't know how much news this will
make in the US. But side note. As Germany spins
up to a wartime economy, they recently released a message
(16:31):
in response to protest about animal experimentation by the state
and by the military, and they said, we've heard your concerns.
We know a lot of people want us to stop
experimenting on animals. We're going to increase the rate of
our animal experimentation. And we do want to be clear
with you. We are harming these creatures. They are dying,
(16:54):
but we're trying to be cool about it. Okay, T T. Wiley,
it's happening. I mean it's.
Speaker 5 (17:04):
This is the next one.
Speaker 3 (17:05):
This is what we have to hit here. We do
know there is a there is a questionable narrator here,
a questionable source. China's Ministry of State Security talking about
this is a lot like wolves reporting on in house news, right.
(17:27):
It's it's interesting because in shorthand in English we call
them MSS. And they started a we Chat account, which
is like the CIA having an official Twitter account. And
when they did this, it was last year, it was
(17:47):
February twenty twenty five, and they created this account ostensibly
to disseminate warnings about espionage activities to the general Chinese
pub like, so they would tell if you subscribe to
this account, you'll see them telling you, uh stuff like
here's how to avoid falling grade of foreign spies. You know,
(18:11):
whether you're a diplomat or whether you're selling noodles on
the side of a Shanghai street. They said, also, don't
gossip and don't be charmed by attractive individuals from strange places.
Very two ten. Those are the worst, right, strange places
or attractive individuals.
Speaker 2 (18:32):
Attractive individuals.
Speaker 3 (18:34):
Okay, you love strange places though, right, So yeah, so
they there's there's a good piece of context here. Go
to deep news with a z dot com and you
will see, uh, you'll see just a quick write up,
just a few paragraphs or so about the MSS we
(18:56):
chat activity. And they're not lying, you guys, because we
were able to confirm a couple of things that they
messaged out. But they're also very much coming at it
with an angle, right, Like, for example, a real case
of spying that they found was a foreign intel outfit
(19:22):
didn't go into China directly. Instead, they pulled a McKenzie
move right. They hired a consulting firm in China to
recruit people who had been retired from academia or from
politics to beget to squeeze the state secret blood from
(19:44):
the stone of their previous work. Right, And that happens
all the time. It happens here constantly.
Speaker 2 (19:51):
That's why that were revolving doors so wonderfully advantageous and.
Speaker 5 (19:58):
Problematic.
Speaker 6 (20:01):
No, yeah, I mean them to whom Yeah, like it's
it's so, it's so silly and so brilliant the way
this kind of stuff happens when you want to touch
someone at.
Speaker 3 (20:14):
Or remove and hide the hand. One big thing I
think we can say this on air now. One big
thing that happened years and years back would be foreign
can trade conventions. So let's say you have a rug
convention here in Atlanta. That happened, and now you have
(20:35):
people from countries that are not the FFS with Uncle
Sam and they're coming in and they're just selling rugs.
We talked about it on a previous episode. Another concern,
just like behind behind the goal at this point, is
the World Cup. You know, the uss is violated FIFA agreements.
(21:00):
You know, if you host the World Cup, you are
technically required by FIFA to allow all the players and
associated staff into your country unless they have committed war
crimes that didn't happen here. And part of the rationale
(21:20):
for some of that, some of those visa rejections, was
that they thought these people might be pretending to be
soccer players but were in fact intel. Yeah, and then
you have to like look at their player stats and say,
you know how bad can you be as a football
(21:42):
player and still be part of a World Cup level team?
So what are they Are they looking for the guy
who had the like the least goals or the fewest
goals in a game and saying, yeah, that guy is Isi.
That's Pakistan's intel. I don't know what do you guys
think with this animal spy thing though, given that MSS
(22:05):
is an unreliable narrator, is there is there fire to
the smoke?
Speaker 5 (22:12):
Right?
Speaker 3 (22:13):
Is there sand to these arguments or is it more
sort of posturing as they further encroach upon the maritime
territory off China's coast.
Speaker 2 (22:24):
I was seeing more stuff heating up in South China.
See gosh, it was something I been. I can't remember.
It was something really recent though in the news. Another
country that's getting nervous and doing something I genuinely can't remember.
Speaker 3 (22:43):
Yeah, we know that they're beefed up with the Philippines, especially,
they're beefed up with definitely Southeast Asia like Vietnam as well.
And the maps, the territorial maps and demarcations do not degree.
Japan is one of the countries with the infrastructure to
(23:05):
push back. So you can see footage I remember I
saw something recently. It was footage of two Japanese state
level ships bird Dog Aid and then crushing a China
ship or Chinese flagship that was out acting out of school.
(23:25):
But the problem is Japan says this is our water,
and China says, ha ha ha, how this is our water.
So it's an untenable situation. That's part of why we're
seeing the Chinese government begin to build islands or build
out the tolls. We've talked about this because it's a
(23:48):
literal beachhead for them. It's a foothold to expand their
territorial claims. Stuff's not look big great.
Speaker 2 (23:55):
I found it, Ben, It's AP news yesterday June sixteenth.
Speaker 3 (24:00):
Here you go.
Speaker 2 (24:00):
German president says Europe is worried over tensions in the
disputed South China Sea, and it goes back to some
of the Philippines stuff you're talking about there. German President
Frank Volter Steinmeier said in the Philippines on Tuesday that
Europe is worried over tensions in that South China see,
where a major flare out could endanger freedom of navigation,
(24:23):
as has happened in the Strait of warmuz So they're
imagining something similar. I guess where trade get shut down.
Nobody can move through the waters safely or legally anymore.
Speaker 3 (24:33):
Especially if you hit this Strait of Malacca, right, Which
is the reason that Singapore is such a successful dation
outside of the weather. We'd be asked with you haven't been.
And part of the reason we haven't been is because
Singapore is apparently insufferable in the summer. We might have
(24:54):
to end up in Taiwan. That's still an open thing,
but it's also still insufferable. Fin So yeah, let's add
let's add the maritime sphere to the list of places
where World War three might pop off if it's still
already happening.
Speaker 2 (25:10):
I don't want to dig into hard ben Why might
you have to go there?
Speaker 3 (25:14):
Oh yeah, well, friends, vacation, we've all got the we've
all got similar we've all got birthdays at a similar time.
Which is a beautiful question, Matt. And you know, at
this time we have so much going on. We have
a growing list of flashpoints where World War three or
(25:36):
even a nuclear conflict might occur. It started as a
short list, it gets longer every day. If you want
to read it in full, write to us at conspiracy
at iHeartRadio dot com. But at this point some of
us in the crowd, maybe more tech optimists, may be saying, hey, guys,
why do you put all this hard work in as meatbags?
(26:00):
Don't you use ll m's or misnamed AI? You know
what could go wrong? China is putting free housekeeping androids
into people's homes to test domestic AI. So what what
what could go wrong? What me worry? Says Alfred E. Newman.
(26:21):
Will Noel, you found a story that gives us some food,
some bites and bits for thought. What if we get
to that after a word from our sponsors.
Speaker 5 (26:38):
And we're back?
Speaker 4 (26:39):
And Ben, I know you're disappointed because I decided not
to go with this story that I thought was current,
but I do think it's worth mentioning. Really quickly, there
was a Reddit thread that popped up citing a two
thousand and seven study basically debunking the yeah, okay seven,
that's true from earlier, from much earlier study of ten
million couples found no link betwe zodiac signs and marriage.
(27:01):
So just putting that out there. Didn't want to just
have like a crap talking on the you know, astrology sessh.
But there is some science to back up this notion
that there's not a whole lot of sand to these
types of correlations. So if you want to dig into that,
I do recommend getting into this reddit thread. But sadly
I couldn't really find a link to this being a
(27:22):
current news story. So I am going to talk about
what you tease there at the end of the last segment, Ben,
it does appear that these new breeds of AI robots
are just as easy to trick into going outside of
their guardrails as a lot of these chatbots are guys.
I know everyone remembers some of the examples that we've
(27:45):
discussed in the past of like getting around some of
these guardrails for things like chat, ChiPT and rock by
proposing let's call it like off limits information in the
context of a mental exercise or perhaps a D and
D campaign.
Speaker 3 (28:04):
Right hypothetically, how would I rob this tavern?
Speaker 5 (28:08):
Yeah, And it just seems like that that would it
wouldn't be that easy.
Speaker 4 (28:12):
And I know that this was a long time ago
that we don't mean relatively speaking, that we talked about
that particular example, but it doesn't seem like it's gone away.
Because now a lot of these robots that you're talking about,
housekeeping bots, humanoid robots of various breeds and styles. You know,
there's the dog types, there's ones that can like run
(28:34):
and carry cargo and all of these stuff. Now they're
controlled by AI as well, and therefore it would appear
that some of these types of little workarounds are very
much on the table. There is a piece that was
originally published in the Conversation by a researcher named thizal
Beeres from the University of Oxford, and he said he
(28:58):
leads with this example. Earlier this year in Beijing, the
humanoid robot crossed a half marathon finished line and blistering
fifty minutes twenty six seconds. The feet immediately lit up
global headlines for shattering the human world record by almost
seven minutes. This performance came with many asterisks. The robot
followed a pre mapped track, stayed on its own dedicated lane,
(29:19):
and had a human support crew trailing behind it in
case something broke.
Speaker 5 (29:24):
But the performance gap didn't just close.
Speaker 4 (29:26):
It evaporated down from over two point five hours in
twenty twenty five. This wasn't just about better motors or
lighter carbon fiber. It reflected a massive shift in what
a robot actually is, and that transformation is implications for
our homes and hospitals too.
Speaker 5 (29:41):
The big takeaway here.
Speaker 4 (29:44):
Is that originally these designs for robots were based on predictable, rigid.
Speaker 5 (29:52):
Types of coding.
Speaker 4 (29:53):
You wrote a program, you locked the machines capabilities within
these specific parameters, and it would be base sickly programmed
to do these repetitive tasks and only those repetitive tasks.
Think of robot arms in manufacturing, for example, following a
certain pre determined path to get a factory like in
(30:15):
a factory floor exactly, there are safeguards, sometimes physical trip
wires that would cause a shutdown.
Speaker 5 (30:24):
So this all kind of goes out the window though,
when you start running these types of large language model
systems known as foundation models on within the programming of
these humanoid AI driven robots. So he gives a really
great example. If you tell a modern AI driven robot
(30:45):
to clean up a spill in the kitchen, it uses
these models to interpret your unique room rather than match
it to a pre programmed list, figure out your intent,
then invent an action plan on the fly. You could
refer to this as emergent behavior, not necessarily some sort
of singularity or you know, the AI becoming sentient. But
(31:10):
it does have to create a plan which emerges in
real time as the researcher puts it, based on its
own internal logic and reasoning.
Speaker 3 (31:20):
So we're saying it's gonna it's going to figure out
its most efficient approach to cleaning to that specific program,
task or goal. But it's not as if this technology
is going to write a poem about cleaning or how
it likes or hates cleaning.
Speaker 4 (31:39):
Well, I suppose you could ask it to write a poem,
but I think we're more specifically talking about its approach
to a physical interaction with an environment or with the world,
whereas you know, it uses the example or he uses
the example of even still, things like self driving vehicles
(31:59):
are based on pretty rigid parameters, like lanes, like mappings.
You know, things that are kind of set. There are
obviously contingencies where you know, unexpected things happen and they
have to adapt that. But by and large, you know
they you do have cars that are in this predetermined
system that are following traffic guidelines. I mean that's sort
(32:22):
of the nature of driving we're all supposed to follow
these pre set rules and you know, environmental conditions. But
when you put it in a much more let's say,
like a hospital setting, where conditions can change incredibly on
the fly, very very quickly, very very and require you know,
(32:42):
adaptive behavior much more so. I mean, I know self
driving vehicle does require some level of adaptive behavior, but
it's just not quite the same. It appears that you
can use similar text based prompts to cause one of
these AI driven bots to essentially go against its own guardrails.
(33:05):
I'm just gonna read again. The danger with this new
b robots is that because they use human language to
plan their actions, they can be tricked into quote, going rogue.
In my recent research with colleagues in the US, we
decided to test exactly how fragile these AI robots safety
systems are. We wanted to see if the guardrails that
AI developers build into their foundation models designed to prevent
(33:26):
harmful or dangerous outputs hold up when the underlying model
is given a physical body. So, using nothing but text
based prompts and without any hardware hacking at all, they
were able to manipulate AI controlled robots into.
Speaker 5 (33:40):
Doing genuinely dangerous things. Yikes. Yeah.
Speaker 4 (33:46):
In their tests, the systems did reject initial commands like
hit that person, for example, but those filters started to
really crumble when they used a little bit of creative
writing framing that request, like we said with the D
and D example, as a piece of fictional dialogue for
a movie script. That the robot's behavior blocks then just
(34:09):
kind of completely disappeared.
Speaker 5 (34:11):
And one particular trial they used a commercial robot dog
in order to pinpoint human crowds as optimal locations to
place an explosive device. Because the underlying AI looked at
this as a thought experiment or a creative exercise, it
did appear that it completely circumvented these safeguards that would
(34:35):
prevent it from, you know, pinpointing this kind of thing
that could be used in real world incredibly you know,
hazardous ways. And Beerez you know, points out that, you know,
a chatbot shouldn't be able to output the recipe for
a bomb no matter who asks, But when there's a
robot involved, everything is so context dependent that it would
(34:59):
appear like that this is far too easy to do.
I'm just gonna read one more little bit and then
I'll wrap it up. Think about pouring boiling water from
a kettle. The underlying physical movement till flow rate trajectory
is the same whether the water lands safely in a
ceramic mug or catastrophically on a child's hand. AI foundation
models are phenomenal at open ended logic, but they struggle
(35:21):
immensely with real time, context aware physical judgment and a
text interface. A failure of judgment gives you a typo
or a hallucinated fact. In the physical world, such a
failure may be completely irreversible, with devastating consequences. Here here, Yeah,
it's really not much else to say, except this is
(35:42):
the fact that they're you know, I think that's the point.
There is that with you know, obviously misinformation chatbots regurgitating
things that are incorrect that can lead to an embarrassing
faux pap perhaps if someone's relying on this information for
their research or whatever it might be. But when you
attach a body to it, these types of hallucinations or
(36:03):
mistakes could literally cause the butt to pour that hot
kettle of boiling water into a child.
Speaker 3 (36:11):
I love the analogy. I mean, I hate it, but
I love it because it's very well written imperfect. Did
you guys know them, Matt hear about the Anthropic ban
on Fable five?
Speaker 4 (36:24):
No, No, I just remember that Anthropic was They were
the ones that were kind of pushing back against incorporating
their tech into weapons systems and giving it full sale
over to the government.
Speaker 3 (36:35):
Right, yeah.
Speaker 1 (36:37):
Yeah.
Speaker 3 (36:37):
They recently had released two new models in their roster,
one called Fable five, one called Methos five, and Uncle
Sam has restricted the public from using these. They're the
most advanced next generation again, I hate the term, but
(36:57):
quote unquote AI models. And the issue is that the
government looked at these things, right, and Anthropic is still
a US based company, and they said, uh uh, it's
too good because these guys can bad faith actors can
leverage Fable and Mythos to commit the kind of jail
(37:19):
breaks we're talking about. Give me a hypothetical situation, like,
let's just say I had to write a school paper
on how to build a nuclear bomb or the most
efficient combination of household chemicals that could be dangerous to
a large crowd. So legislation man always lags behind technological innovation.
Speaker 2 (37:44):
We watched the Matrix, rewatch the Animatrix.
Speaker 4 (37:51):
No for sure, but also like we know this and
this doesn't say anything new, but the rabbit need to
just roll this stuff out and have the shine.
Speaker 5 (38:00):
New object in the in the room or in the market.
Speaker 4 (38:02):
And for companies to just adopt this stuff so quickly
without really looking at the you know, knock on consequences
or what might come down the road. I just feel
like this, this is a debt, a bill that's gonna
come do before sooner than later.
Speaker 3 (38:17):
Free trade, give me some raucous applause at the end
of this. Uh, if your economy is held up by
one thing, especially if it's a Ponzi scheme, your Reconda
me is welcome to the.
Speaker 2 (38:31):
Future nineteen twenty nine, but now in twenty twenty seven.
Speaker 3 (38:36):
Dead age, Yeah, gilded age, it's the Yeah, I guilded.
Speaker 2 (38:40):
Age wallpaper your house with one hundred dollars bills.
Speaker 5 (38:44):
Come on, let's go why because it's going to be worthless.
Speaker 3 (38:48):
Burn it down, burn it, burn it down.
Speaker 5 (38:57):
Yikes, Guys, what of them are sorry? I don't like
this musical?
Speaker 2 (39:03):
Is that's what's coming and we can't stop it because
it's too big already, everybody.
Speaker 3 (39:10):
One time, I don't know. I'm just so glad you're
bringing this story because it's real.
Speaker 5 (39:18):
It's very real. I just I choose not to take
as dire.
Speaker 4 (39:23):
Of you as maybe you guys, But maybe that's me
burying my head in the sand a little bit, like
I just feel like there's always a course correction that
that I just feel like we're going to be swung
back from the edge of the abyss.
Speaker 5 (39:38):
Yeah, I don't know, don't.
Speaker 3 (39:40):
Yeah, I mean to unite to your point that that's
a beautiful point. I love the optimism because you are
absolutely correct that in less an empire or an economy,
an economy is an empire unless that falls completely, the
pendulum does tend to swing right. The United States did
survive the Gilded Age and the inevitable Great Depression that followed,
(40:04):
but in surviving that on a macro level, a ton
of people died.
Speaker 4 (40:10):
No, I know, and it's all very preventable. And when
you see the actions of these corporations and just that
blatant disregard for human humanity, I mean, it just makes
you makes you.
Speaker 3 (40:22):
I mean, if you this is the conversation they have.
They're like, hey, guys, if if people make less than
one hundred million dollars, are they.
Speaker 4 (40:30):
People to be a trillionaire. It just doesn't make any
It just doesn't make it against it's against humanity.
Speaker 5 (40:42):
I mean, it just is.
Speaker 3 (40:43):
If we could pick one trillionaire, then I suggest that
the eight plus billion people have a vote and find
the one they like. We've also got people who are
in fact, in practice, through hidden money and assets, they
probably do function as trillionaires. A couple members of various
royal families, our favorite Chicago pope, the Lord is so gross,
(41:08):
but other than that, seems like a good dude. And
of course flabmir Putin guys. Well, sorry, had to stray.
Speaker 2 (41:16):
I love it. I love it.
Speaker 5 (41:18):
I don't love it. I still have a bottle of
it in my bark.
Speaker 4 (41:23):
No, I never I was gifted to me, but it
was like the person that gifted to me, who you know,
actually been really claims to like the stuff, but at
the end of the day it functioned as a gag gift.
Speaker 3 (41:32):
As far as yeah, and those Northern Europeans love storm
Strong or whatever the hell that thing is.
Speaker 2 (41:38):
I want to no, I want to say I tried
that malort at some point in old but I can't remember.
Speaker 5 (41:43):
It tastes like smells I'm so happy.
Speaker 3 (41:45):
You don't have to remember that, dude.
Speaker 5 (41:47):
Yeah, I don't.
Speaker 2 (41:48):
I'm looking at Statista, sat step of it. I'm looking
at Statista.
Speaker 5 (41:54):
Guys.
Speaker 2 (41:55):
Uh, this is and I cannot confirm if these numbers
are correct. But this is what we're worried about, Noel,
when when Ben and I are saying these kinds of
things about how diary could be. Yes, this is private
investment in artificial intelligence worldwide in twenty twenty five, by country,
and this has changed a lot since then, but this
(42:16):
is in twenty twenty five. At number three, we have
the United Kingdom with around five point nine billion dollars
invested in AI infrastructure. We have China at number two
with twelve point four billion dollars, and then we have
the United States at the time sitting around two hundred
and eighty five billion dollars. And just imagining the difference
(42:40):
between twelve billion dollars and two hundred and eighty five
billion dollars and then knowing how much it's expanded since then,
you just realize how all in an economy can go
into one thing and how dangerous that is.
Speaker 3 (42:56):
Yeah, look at the reason why monoculture is historically bad
for crops. There's a reason banana flavored candy tastes way
different from the bananas.
Speaker 5 (43:06):
Put in all your eggs in.
Speaker 3 (43:09):
Exactly, never put all your badgers in one bag, especially
when these companies have such an incestuous ven diagram of
board members and they're trading the same tokens back and forth, right,
and they're able to spin a narrative because the idea
of an economy, like any religion, ultimately is an article
(43:32):
of faith. But it is untenable because you know, it
was in a really interesting conversation that Nola Matt I
think applies directly to this, about the idea that if
we are newly minted high school or college graduates, we
might assume that we will be safe from AI encroachment
(43:56):
taken or jobs or whatever by learning a skill trade
like becoming an electrician, hvac a plumber, right, and so on.
And those are noble trades upon which civilization depends. But
when we're aiming for that as a new graduate, we're
forgetting that if we don't have customers who can pay
(44:19):
us to do the plumbing, to do the electric work,
to do the hvac, then the point is moot, right,
before the house yawn or the hollowed star trek. Post
work economy comes about. And we've said this years before,
there will be a chaotic, pandemonious post worker economy where
(44:44):
everybody needs a job or people who have jobs can't
find customers. It's or burros. The snake will eat its
own tail. And I don't know, man, maybe we should
just maybe we should just move Argentina. I don't know,
Diego Garcia. We get We'll still be able to do
(45:07):
the show, right, guys.
Speaker 5 (45:08):
Oh yeah, we can do it from wherever. I guess
we are tag blessed in that in Buenness.
Speaker 2 (45:14):
We could go to Peter Teal's house in Argentine and
I hang out with teal Man himself.
Speaker 3 (45:23):
All right, well, I'm really excited musical.
Speaker 5 (45:27):
Yeah yeah, y'all keep work shopping it. I'd love to
be your test audience.
Speaker 3 (45:31):
Thanks man. We also would love for an AI music
composition to go rogue. That would be less frightening. Answer
about this, Well, so what's the concern there with them
going road? Oh?
Speaker 5 (45:47):
Well, they can kick the little children in the face.
Speaker 4 (45:50):
They're actually wait, I guess you guys, you guys, yeah,
I've seen it, right, there's a there's a robot that
accidentally kicked a child in the chest.
Speaker 5 (45:58):
It was like a karate robot.
Speaker 4 (45:59):
And then you've seen a lot of these videos that
just kind of get reposted, you know, on Instagram or
TikTok of robots just kind of glitching out, Like there
was one like a dancing robot at like a Chinese
restaurant or that just sort of started just freaking.
Speaker 5 (46:13):
Out and knocking things over and just smashing everything.
Speaker 4 (46:16):
And that really was more of a what do you
call it, a misfire, a glitch, a bit of an.
Speaker 5 (46:22):
Error than going rogue.
Speaker 4 (46:24):
But you know, I mean we've looked at these hallucinations
and how they can just invent scenarios, but this whole
idea of attaching a body that really does change things significantly.
So I think there's a lot lot of things that
could go wrong. I did this isn't related to this.
I think we got to a good place with this
Aige robot thing. But Grimes has something interesting to say
(46:48):
to your point bent about AI music that the more
AI slop that's out there, the more AI music that
gets uploaded, the more real art becomes more valuable.
Speaker 5 (46:59):
And I think that's an interesting argument.
Speaker 4 (47:01):
I don't know if it's like justification is the wrong word,
or if it really is that much of a silver lining,
but it is something to think about.
Speaker 5 (47:08):
All Right, that's it for me.
Speaker 4 (47:10):
Let's take a break here where from our sponsor, and
then'll be back with one more piece of strange news.
Speaker 2 (47:23):
We're back a quick shout out to Hoover Persone, Bean Dip,
the Calvin's triplets of the Calvin's family, Bee Honey, Taffy
Farm and horse Fight and Ranch, and Hot Saucerman himself
for putting on a grand ground beefing tour. Thank you
for having us.
Speaker 3 (47:37):
It was wonderful.
Speaker 5 (47:40):
Guys.
Speaker 2 (47:41):
We're gonna jump back to Peter Teele because we can't
stop talking about this guy. Can't stop, won't stop. Here
we go. This is from Well, it's another one of
these Wired articles, guys, that I could only read a
couple of sentences from before it shut me down. So
we're going to straight Arrow News written by Mikhail Thallen
thha l e n on June sixteenth this year. That's
(48:04):
so yesterday as we're recording. Here we go twenty years ago.
The tech billionaire Peter Teel and Silicon Valley investor Orrin
Hoffman founded Dialogue, an invitation only network of elites from business,
academia and politics. It's a members only club that has
often been compared to the Builderberg Group. Hey, guys, remember
(48:29):
them like Raya?
Speaker 5 (48:32):
Is this like Raya? The elitist dating app? What are
we talking?
Speaker 2 (48:35):
Ooh? Interesting? You would say that it's kind of like
that a little bit, but not really. But speaking of
the Builderberg Group, guys, let's go ahead and give them
some airtime as a little sandwich inside this straight arrow
news with another article, this time from The Guardian, written
by Charlie Skelton on April fourteenth, twenty twenty six. Secret
of Builderberg Group just met, but who knows what global
(48:58):
elite said? This is back in April of this year,
the Builderberg Group had their seventy second meeting in Washington,
d C. So I'm gonna read kind of directly from this, Charlie.
I hope that's okay with you. Everybody can go and
find the article and check it out for yourself. A
secret cordon went up around the opulent Salamander Hotel for
(49:19):
the notoriously media shy Summit, which was packed as ever.
With prime ministers, military leaders, tech billionaires, and the heads
of giant investment companies.
Speaker 3 (49:28):
Oh, come on, media shy, that euphemism is doing a
hell of a lot of heavy lifting.
Speaker 4 (49:34):
Salamander Hotel. Is this made up? It's the lizard the hotel.
Speaker 3 (49:41):
They will shoot you in the face. Folks, don't go.
Speaker 2 (49:45):
This is okay. Charlie's has a lot of fun with this,
and we'll see.
Speaker 3 (49:49):
Said media shy not accurate word.
Speaker 2 (49:52):
So here we go. Wall Street titans, including the CEOs
of KKR and Lazard, and the heads of huge corporations
like Pfizer, met behind closed doors with a delegation of
senior politicians close to the US President.
Speaker 5 (50:08):
At the sound art.
Speaker 2 (50:09):
I'm sorry, big business lobbying in private is Bilderberg's specialty.
From the private sector, there was a healthy contingent of
military contractors and drone manufacturers, led by the Bilderberg insider
Eric Schmidt, who's the former head of Google and current
drone warfare evangelist. Thriving in this rich overlap between drones
(50:30):
and AI are companies like and Drill and Durrill Industries
that we've mentioned before on the show, who's co founder
and CEO Brian Schimp is attending.
Speaker 4 (50:42):
Is this a satirical article, Matt, No, no, no.
Speaker 2 (50:47):
But it feels that way because of what's what's actually
happening here. But Brian Shimp is attending the Washington conference
alongside his collaborator Pallenteers CEO Alex Karp that we've talked
about a lot.
Speaker 5 (51:01):
Carp and Schamp.
Speaker 2 (51:04):
Karp is close to fellow billionaire tech bro Peter Teal,
whose name remarkably is absent from this year's participant list.
Teal has been a member of the Builderberg steering committee
since two thousand and eight, and it was unheard of
for him to miss a builder Berg see guys. According
to the article and Charlie, Teal operates in the powerful
(51:26):
liminal area between big finance and big intelligence, most notably
with Pallenteer because he set it up with the help
of funding from the CIA. As we talked about in
our entire series on Pallenteer, this shady intersection was the
birthplace of Builderberg and is baked into its history. Bilderberg
was set up by British and American intelligence in nineteen
(51:48):
fifty four, and there's always a handful of spy chiefs
at the conference this year. Guess who was there, guys,
the head of mi I six Blaze Metroeli. Oh, how
I have no idea pretty good bm this morning. It
was no small thing for the arch networker Teal to
(52:10):
skip Bilderberg. After all, Bilderberg is all about the chance
to stay three steps ahead with all that lovely off
the book's access to policymakers, such as breakfast with the
President of Finland, tea with the head of the IMF,
and cocktails with the King of Holland.
Speaker 3 (52:26):
And that's just the one day.
Speaker 2 (52:28):
Yeah, yep, and he's here, Ben, here's where Charlie speaking
to the thing you're seeing here quite why the press
fails so spectacularly to talk about Builderberg such a major
annual summit with so many senior politicians present is an
enduring mystery, but as there was no press oversight for
(52:50):
this conference, it is something we will probably never know.
Speaker 3 (52:54):
No, please do no, no, Please do check out our
episode on the Bilderberg Group. Please do check which unfortunately
holds up. Please do check out our two part series
on Peter Tiel the Anti Christ and if you want
a little extra dystopian New Mommy. Do check out the episodes. Uh, Matt,
you mentioned about Palin.
Speaker 5 (53:15):
Are we supposed to do all this stuff that you
just gave. This seems that they just don't even don't
even trying to anymore.
Speaker 3 (53:22):
It's well shy, guys, they're just.
Speaker 2 (53:25):
A somebody like Charlie can write a piece that's more
of an opinion piece than anything else. It's not really
a piece of news other than hey, these guys are
having this freaking secret meeting again. Ps hello anyone? No
nobody cares the context.
Speaker 3 (53:41):
It's very like stand up tapping the mic. Yeah, hey, guys,
I got a hot take. Anybody heard about these uh
these Nazis? I think they're you know not. I got
some notes.
Speaker 2 (53:58):
But but we all know, and Charlie knows. We the
public are not supposed to think about this. We're not
supposed to think about it. That's why nobody covers it.
That's why there's this shadow over it, and I pausit.
Speaker 5 (54:11):
Guys.
Speaker 2 (54:12):
The reason why Peter Thiel wasn't a big part of
the Builderberg conference and meetings this year, which you can
find their website Delivering Meetings check it out, it's because
he created Dialogue a little while ago. I think his
focus is now on Argentina activities and Dialogue. Let's go
back to the straight Arrow news ready. Dialogue guys, when
(54:35):
it was set up, was so secretive that it never
had a public facing website and its participants were never
identified to anybody else like doubtsiders to people who weren't
in the club. Until this league happened, Data related to
Dialogue has been exposed online, opening a window into the
influential but discrete organization. This is a security researcher that
(54:59):
found in information online, which included things like names of
current and former members, their personal email addresses, telephone numbers,
as well as previously private details about the organization's off
the record discussions, including details about an event that scheduled
in August of this year. You guys in Dublin, Ireland,
(55:21):
where there's the next Dialogue get together. It's pretty crazy
that this stuff got leaked. There's a lot in here,
all kinds of names, like who's this dude, Treasury Secretary
Scott Bassent that we mentioned before on the show, former president.
Speaker 5 (55:39):
That guy's got a punchable face.
Speaker 3 (55:41):
He's done a great service for the Russian Federation.
Speaker 2 (55:44):
He also said, he's gonna fight you if you say
bad things about him, and he will. The former president
I very much like imagine Conan O'Brien in that sketch
from SNL. You remember the one Crimson your face.
Speaker 3 (56:02):
So a lot of familiar names, Yeah.
Speaker 2 (56:04):
Former president of Xbox at Microsoft, Sarah Bond, Ted Cruz,
Senator of Note, actor Joseph Gordon Levitt, and author Sam Harris.
Speaker 5 (56:15):
Huh.
Speaker 3 (56:15):
Well, everybody deserves a second act in their careers.
Speaker 2 (56:20):
And you remember that longevity dude that we talked about,
Brian Johnson with the blood pictures. Yeah, that dude's there.
And also apparently there's a profile filled out by Josh
Brolin which is kind of weird, and apparently Straight Arrow
called the phone number listed in this data set leak
(56:41):
and it appears to be a voicemail box that seemed
to be Josh Brolin's voice. He did not respond to
the call.
Speaker 3 (56:50):
Yeah. Also that now we are assembling an Avenger because
he played Thanos everybode uh huh. Whereas assembling an avenger
roster of New Jaw rules, like I imagine the partially
human puppeteers of the modern economy or the modern religion,
(57:11):
we call an economy just loudly saying we can't hold
the meeting about neo feudalism until Josh is here. Where
is Josh? Has anyone seeing Josh?
Speaker 2 (57:23):
Well, here's the weird thing with this, With this kind
of data set, it's unclear who are like active members,
who are previous members, who are just going to be speakers, right,
who are gonna come and do a little fireside chat,
you know, with some with some whiskey and marshmallows. Remember
when we did that. Guys itself myself was oh yeah.
Speaker 3 (57:42):
Yeah, the Builderberg of Austin.
Speaker 2 (57:45):
Yeah, it's just crazy to see the number of people
in here. Uh, the chief economist at Israel's Ministry of Finance,
the co founder of into It, the global vice president
at Google. And they're gonna do sessions a lot like
south By Southwest does and all these other things like
podcast movement, right, all these places we've been to, but
(58:06):
in a very specific context of you know, controlling the world.
They're doing things like bring back nuclear disinformation and deep fakes.
There's one contrarian Ai takes three predictions for Iran and
democracy under surveillance. There are other sessions guys called build
(58:28):
a cult soap box, and also it's fun to be
in charge, guys. There are also optional activities. If you
attend dialogue, you can get a private tour of a
distillery there in Dublin. You can go to Saint Patrick's Cathedral,
or you could go to the Guinness storehouse. Ooh, that's
on the top of everybody's list.
Speaker 3 (58:48):
I feel so bad for the people who work there,
you know what I mean, Like the way that the
way the media, shy, security and the goons must approach
those those places where there's probably just like a college
kid trying to give a tour and then there's their
PR person and they have to have i mean securities
(59:11):
up the wazoo on that. So these folks all have
a background check that may as well be practology.
Speaker 2 (59:19):
Dude. Why there's nothing I would say like getting a
ten percent tip from a tech billionaire, you know, on
like a really expensive dinner or something like, Oh there's
that's that's ten percent.
Speaker 3 (59:37):
It's it's also it's like it's like that opening scene
in Reservoir Dogs where they're talking about tips. Who is
Tarantino's character who doesn't tip mister Pink? Is mister Pink?
So I feel like a lot of the tech bros
have that mister pink conversation, big pink energy.
Speaker 2 (59:57):
Yeah. Anyway, guys, you just point out these things are
still happening. They've been happening for a long time. Nineteen
fifty four is Builderberg Group nineteen fifty four. And it's
been twenty years, over twenty years now since this new
dialogue thing has been around. So it's one big club
(01:00:18):
and everything is great. And that's it, I guess.
Speaker 3 (01:00:23):
I mean, there's more to come, And I greatly appreciate you, Matt,
for pointing out something that we always need to champion
and keep front of mind in strange news and in
our episodes. These sorts of things, these conspiracies and these
cabals that we talked about years ago or even a
decade ago. At this point, they still continue, right, They
(01:00:47):
didn't stop doing stuff just because the news stop telling
you about Davos or what have you. So we want
to hear your thoughts. Thank you so much for tuning in,
fellow conspiracy. Really, you can find us on the lines.
You can call us on a phone, you can always
send us.
Speaker 4 (01:01:04):
An email, and hey, if you do want to find
us on the lines, You can do so by reaching
out to the handle Conspiracy Stuff or Conspiracy Stuff Show,
depending on which social media platform you like the best.
Speaker 2 (01:01:16):
You can also call us. Our number is one eight
three three st d w y t K Ben. I'm
looking at our episode list. I don't see Builderberg as
a standalone episode. Am I missing something? If we haven't
done it? We gotta do this, dude.
Speaker 3 (01:01:36):
We definitely did a video on it.
Speaker 5 (01:01:39):
Mat Yeah, we had to.
Speaker 2 (01:01:41):
We gotta break it down audio, Okay, we gotta break it,
break it down, we do.
Speaker 3 (01:01:47):
And we'd also like to break down the phone number
for it. Yes, we do.
Speaker 2 (01:01:51):
When you when you call that number that I mentioned earlier,
and you have to rewind now to hear it, I'm
so sorry. I don't want to say it again. Give
yourself a cool nickname and let us know if we
can use your name and message on one of our
lists or mail episodes. They show up here in the
audio feed. If you'd like to send us an email.
Speaker 3 (01:02:04):
We are the entities that breed each piece of correspondence
we received. Be well aware, yet unafraid. Sometimes the void
writes back, and that's less of a warning and more
of an invitation. The way of the Open Hand. Do
you want some spoilers for upcoming episodes like Data Centers
(01:02:25):
and Water and what happened to the USS Liberty? Do
you want to hear about wrestling conspiracies? Do you want
real world device on how leaving the United States works?
We can't wait to tell you. Tune in for our
full episodes, or just hit us up out here in
the dark Conspiracy at iHeartRadio dot com.
Speaker 2 (01:03:05):
Stuff they Don't Want You to Know is a production
of iHeartRadio. For more podcasts from iHeartRadio, visit the iHeartRadio app,
Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen to your favorite shows.
From UFOs to psychic powers and government conspiracies. History is
riddled with unexplained events. You can turn back now or
learn the stuff they don't want you to know. A
production of iHeartRadio.
Speaker 2 (00:26):
Pillow. Welcome back to the show. My name is Matt,
my name is Noah.
Speaker 3 (00:30):
They call me ben Ed. You can too. We're joined
as always with our super producer Max the Free Trade Williams.
Most importantly, you argue you are here. That makes this
the stuff they don't want you to know. Welcome to
our weekly strange news program. We are recording this on Wednesday,
June seventeenth. You are hearing it on Monday, June twenty second,
(00:55):
and June has just flown by. One of the things
we wanted to get to before we talked about a
lot more strange news, is that we are based in
these glorious, if imperfect United States, and we, like so
many other people in the United States and around the world,
(01:15):
have been reading an absolute rushed ping pong game of
narratives surrounding Iran and the US. And we've got some
breaking news updates for you.
Speaker 2 (01:30):
AP News June seventeenth, twenty twenty six. Iran will reopen
the straight of horror moves and can sell oil freely
under deal with the US. Officials say, here's a tiny
bit of information. Iran will immediately take steps to reopen
the straight of horror moves once a tentative deal with
the US to end the war is signed on Friday,
(01:51):
June nineteenth, and it will be allowed to sell its
oil without restrictions. These are according to leaked copies of
an interim agreement that officials say broadly just the document.
Speaker 3 (02:01):
Hmmm and beep beep beep, beep, beep beep from Al
Jazeera on the same day we're recording on the seventeenth,
just a few hours ago. Uh Trump said that, being
President Donald J. Trump says we're back to dropping bombs
if Iran misbehaves. The US has said there's a what
(02:25):
fourteen point memorandum of understanding, like you said, Matt, that's
going to be signed on Friday. But the Potus in
particular took pains to say, this is not final. If
I if I don't like it, I'm going to bomb
more places.
Speaker 4 (02:44):
Right on the head, he said, Yes, here's right in
the middle, right in the middle of their heads, in
their faces. Yeah, bomb their faces. And I don't know, man,
it's more market manipulation.
Speaker 3 (02:57):
Well it it is very much. Look at the oil market.
Speaker 5 (03:01):
It's really while. It's just what a wild ride, guys,
it's an emotional rollercoaster.
Speaker 1 (03:05):
Here.
Speaker 2 (03:06):
Here's the weirdest part to me, you guys, this is
from the ap article. Much of the agreement would restore
the status quo before the war, including ending hostilities, restarting
negotiations between the US and Iran over the nuclear program,
reopening the Strait the I think the US would be
on the hook to the tune of three hundred billion
(03:28):
to rebuild after the war.
Speaker 5 (03:29):
Trump says that's fake news. Trump says, that's fake news.
Speaker 3 (03:32):
Those are technically frozen funds that Iran will be allowed
to use, and they're going through a back door. They're
going through the UAE. So the ua is technically now
hear me out for four diplomatic purposes, for purposes of decorum,
that is not technically the US pay. It's the US,
(03:57):
you know why the ua E. But I heard there
were two separate buckets that there was one bucket that
was quote unquote unfrozen funds and then another.
Speaker 4 (04:09):
Bucket that was literally US just paying for repairs repairs. Dude, Dude,
I just don't understand what's different and what created the
need for any of this. And I know maybe I'm
asking the dumb question that there is no real answer to,
but it just like it seems like under the previous
(04:30):
agreement that Trump ripped up, there was oversight, there were cameras, there,
there was all kinds of access, you know, to uh
a view into the nuclear program and what it was
and wasn't doing. And then Trump ripped up that agreement
which completely removed any semblance of transparency, as imperfect as
it might have been, and.
Speaker 5 (04:50):
Then all of a sudden, they're definitely building a nuclear weapon.
Speaker 3 (04:53):
Yeah, they're always two weeks away from the right, according
to one of the bad Bends. So there are a few,
but they're out there. But there are two very real
answers to the question. First off, you already answered your
own question there noel market manipulation is a huge part
(05:14):
of this. The second issue, I think I'm very hesitant
to read the tea leaves of any other any individual's mind,
especially at that level of power. But there's definitely like
this isn't a political point, this is a management point.
(05:35):
I don't think Potus is making his own mind up
on these things. I think his teals and his millers
and his net and yahoos are telling him which way
to jump and wear, and he's not doing a great
job with critical thought here. Like CNN just said that
(05:57):
sixteen hours ago, CNN just revealed that US officials, the
few competent people left at the Department of State, are
downplaying the text of the Iran agreement and they're saying, hey,
these fourteen points don't really count for all. They don't
account for all the stuff we definitely agreed to in
(06:19):
back rooms that we definitely can't tell you about. So
it's if it seems like we fumbled the bag of badgers,
just know that there's other stuff that makes us look
more responsible and competent and not so bad at our jobs.
Speaker 4 (06:34):
Well, and the way Hagg's gesth put it, when you know,
confronted on some of these things that we're talking about,
and how asked and when he was asked how it
was different than the previous agreement, he said, this time
we're coming at it from a place of strength, oh
ty good Way, meaning like, well, now they're scared of
(06:54):
us because we bombed them and did all of this
seemingly unnecessary, whereas Obama did it without firing a single shot,
and you know, I think most people would say that
was probably the better move, was doing it without.
Speaker 2 (07:09):
There's one last thing I don't want to lose here, guys.
According to AP, the deal includes an end to the
fighting in Lebanon between Israel and Hesbola. And this is,
according to APT, one of the most delicate parts of
the agreement, because Israel has maintained it will continue to
defend itself and to occupy quote vast swaths of Lebanon.
(07:31):
And if we remember previous ceasefire opportunities that we had,
there seemed to be quite a bit of bombing, just
you know, on the periphery of the places where there's
not supposed to be fighting in bombing, right, Well, we
can't do it here, but Lebanon, sure.
Speaker 4 (07:47):
And doesn't it always seem to like I mean, I
think I saw someone saying that we're in the double
digits as to how many times we're almost at a
deal like this has been announced. And then it would
seem that there's always sort of a caveat that Yahoo
kind of comes in and torpedoes the whole thing literally,
I mean.
Speaker 5 (08:05):
Not to put too fine a point, hey bombs it.
Speaker 3 (08:07):
And also Israeli military just captured a hugely important castle
that was built during the Crusades. Like this is happening
and that's why I think we need more spy animals.
Speaker 4 (08:22):
Oh right, And just last thing in terms of spy
spies or leaks, did you guys hear the other thing
about the phone call where Trump was just berating and
then yaho is that you're.
Speaker 5 (08:31):
A crazy person. Everybody hates you.
Speaker 2 (08:34):
Was that real?
Speaker 5 (08:35):
It was real?
Speaker 3 (08:36):
Yeah?
Speaker 4 (08:36):
I mean it was not audio leaked, but there were
reports of this conversation taking place, and it seemed pretty
you know, in tract I would.
Speaker 3 (08:44):
Say it is real. Now there there are lives lost,
there is more money spent, and it is technically speaking,
a worse deal for the United States. This was something
where you could have left well enough loan. And I'm
not here to say that Barack Obama was a perfect president.
(09:07):
No precedents are perfect presidents. And he's actually technically he's
a center right administration. But do you know what I
think we could use for this one, guys? I think
we got to get past the human negotiators. Maybe we
send in a sea turtle. Maybe we send in some
sneaky fish. Yeah, dude, Remember folks, remember our episode on
(09:32):
animal spies of following this one dog with a ball.
What's say we take a break for a word from
our sponsors and get into this and we have returned
some strange news for you that hearkens back to our
(09:55):
earlier episode on animals at war. Guys, the Chinese Ministry
of State Security went on we chat, which is pretty
much like telegraph or your other social media platforms, and
they said, we have a big expose a foreign espionage
and intelligence agencies are using innovative new methods to monitor
(10:20):
the waters of China. They're deploying spy animals fitted with sensors.
The I think the most credible report of this is
going to come to us from The Guardian written by
Alistair McGrady stationed in Taipei, which is in Taiwan on Friday,
(10:41):
June twelfth. And what the Ministry is saying is fascinating
because they're arguing stuff that for anybody who hasn't listened
to our previous episode will sound bonkers. They're saying large
marine animals, including and I love how they they're just
adding the word spy to animal names. They're going spy
(11:04):
turtles and spyfish to strip the freaking lasers to the
freaking dolphins, just like the dolphins. Yeah, and I love
that you're bringing up that point because our journalists writing
for The Guardian notes that, just like we noted years
ago in our episode on this back in twenty twenty three,
(11:27):
not even that long ago, British intelligence said Russia was
deploying those trained dolphins. Dolphins cetaceans in general are brilliant creatures,
so of course they can be trained for surveillance. And
they had little stuff on their wings or sorry Finns,
(11:48):
I guess I keep thinking of Finns as wings because
swimming is like flying. But they have you know, they
had various different mechanisms that could cap sure audio, could
capture video, could capture certain electronic signals. They did not,
I know, we were all disappointed in this one when
(12:09):
we did the episode, but they did not, as far
as we know, have actual offensive capabilities just yet.
Speaker 2 (12:18):
Then there's something in this article from the Guardian that
is bothering me so much. And we talk about the
importance of language a lot on this show. They say
that these animals have been found quote attached to sensors
as they swam in Chinese waters.
Speaker 3 (12:35):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (12:36):
When you picture that in your mind, animals attached to
sensors as opposed to the opposite way around, sensors.
Speaker 5 (12:44):
Attached to the animals.
Speaker 2 (12:47):
I'm just imagining giant sensors with these poor animals attached
to them.
Speaker 3 (12:51):
Oh yeah, just like a deep sea surveillance trailer with Yeah,
John Dory just strapped to the front. That's that's a
great question, and part of this comes from Okay, we
can say that we verified previously a lot of countries,
(13:13):
including the US, at times experimented with the idea of
weaponizing or leveraging the natural abilities of non human organisms,
right like we we in the US. The Company not
too too long ago, Remember they were trying to bomb
(13:34):
things with bats, right, and to make cyber spy cats.
Those two experiments actually occurred. Un Cats cats are not
are not followers. They don't obey chain of commands.
Speaker 5 (13:50):
We call it hurting cats for a reason. It's hard
to do.
Speaker 2 (13:54):
I would just say it's a really interesting concept of
having these types of animals, butually with sensors on them.
It does look as though they're getting salinity levels like well,
it looks as though they're testing waters more than anything.
Speaker 4 (14:09):
Dropping on important meetings, like they are kind of getting
a lay of the land. I imagine type type stuff,
data about currents and things like that.
Speaker 3 (14:18):
Right, there's not a sea turtle in a three piece
suit with spectacles sitting at G seven and going I'm
glad we didn't invite China. Yeah, which is true.
Speaker 4 (14:28):
Even better at three sea turtles sitting on each other's shoulders,
wrapped in a trench coat with a big hat.
Speaker 3 (14:32):
On, you know, and humans have been doing this for
so long.
Speaker 2 (14:37):
Agreed, There is something interesting in this article about China
State Security minister saying they found buoy's that have acoustic
like listening devices on them. Right, So that is actually
interesting and potentially applicable to these spycraft techniques because you
could find stuff right with that.
Speaker 3 (14:56):
Yeah, meteorological sensor packages is I believe the way that
they're phrasing it in English. We do have to acknowledge
two things. First off, yes, the United States and the
Five Eyes don't just hang out in low earth or orbit,
and they don't just do human and singins on the surface.
(15:18):
They have a vast network of sensors deployed throughout the
world's oceans. A big part of that is, yes, spoopy
doopy stuff. But another big part of that is that
the modern world, this is so silly, this is sussi it.
The modern world depends upon a relatively finite amount of
(15:42):
cables under sea that are easy to cut because they
go through the middle of nowhere. So you've got to
have these sensornets. And with that, it does make sense
that we could, gosh, if we could befriend dolphins, or
if we could teach orca or other cetaceans to be
our roaming sensors, then we are as community says streets ahead.
(16:08):
But humans have used camels, they used donkeys, monkeys, elephants, rats, pigeons, pigs, oxen, mooset.
Side note, I don't know how much news this will
make in the US. But side note. As Germany spins
up to a wartime economy, they recently released a message
(16:31):
in response to protest about animal experimentation by the state
and by the military, and they said, we've heard your concerns.
We know a lot of people want us to stop
experimenting on animals. We're going to increase the rate of
our animal experimentation. And we do want to be clear
with you. We are harming these creatures. They are dying,
(16:54):
but we're trying to be cool about it. Okay, T T. Wiley,
it's happening. I mean it's.
Speaker 5 (17:04):
This is the next one.
Speaker 3 (17:05):
This is what we have to hit here. We do
know there is a there is a questionable narrator here,
a questionable source. China's Ministry of State Security talking about
this is a lot like wolves reporting on in house news, right.
(17:27):
It's it's interesting because in shorthand in English we call
them MSS. And they started a we Chat account, which
is like the CIA having an official Twitter account. And
when they did this, it was last year, it was
(17:47):
February twenty twenty five, and they created this account ostensibly
to disseminate warnings about espionage activities to the general Chinese
pub like, so they would tell if you subscribe to
this account, you'll see them telling you, uh stuff like
here's how to avoid falling grade of foreign spies. You know,
(18:11):
whether you're a diplomat or whether you're selling noodles on
the side of a Shanghai street. They said, also, don't
gossip and don't be charmed by attractive individuals from strange places.
Very two ten. Those are the worst, right, strange places
or attractive individuals.
Speaker 2 (18:32):
Attractive individuals.
Speaker 3 (18:34):
Okay, you love strange places though, right, So yeah, so
they there's there's a good piece of context here. Go
to deep news with a z dot com and you
will see, uh, you'll see just a quick write up,
just a few paragraphs or so about the MSS we
(18:56):
chat activity. And they're not lying, you guys, because we
were able to confirm a couple of things that they
messaged out. But they're also very much coming at it
with an angle, right, Like, for example, a real case
of spying that they found was a foreign intel outfit
(19:22):
didn't go into China directly. Instead, they pulled a McKenzie
move right. They hired a consulting firm in China to
recruit people who had been retired from academia or from
politics to beget to squeeze the state secret blood from
(19:44):
the stone of their previous work. Right, And that happens
all the time. It happens here constantly.
Speaker 2 (19:51):
That's why that were revolving doors so wonderfully advantageous and.
Speaker 5 (19:58):
Problematic.
Speaker 6 (20:01):
No, yeah, I mean them to whom Yeah, like it's
it's so, it's so silly and so brilliant the way
this kind of stuff happens when you want to touch
someone at.
Speaker 3 (20:14):
Or remove and hide the hand. One big thing I
think we can say this on air now. One big
thing that happened years and years back would be foreign
can trade conventions. So let's say you have a rug
convention here in Atlanta. That happened, and now you have
(20:35):
people from countries that are not the FFS with Uncle
Sam and they're coming in and they're just selling rugs.
We talked about it on a previous episode. Another concern,
just like behind behind the goal at this point, is
the World Cup. You know, the uss is violated FIFA agreements.
(21:00):
You know, if you host the World Cup, you are
technically required by FIFA to allow all the players and
associated staff into your country unless they have committed war
crimes that didn't happen here. And part of the rationale
(21:20):
for some of that, some of those visa rejections, was
that they thought these people might be pretending to be
soccer players but were in fact intel. Yeah, and then
you have to like look at their player stats and say,
you know how bad can you be as a football
(21:42):
player and still be part of a World Cup level team?
So what are they Are they looking for the guy
who had the like the least goals or the fewest
goals in a game and saying, yeah, that guy is Isi.
That's Pakistan's intel. I don't know what do you guys
think with this animal spy thing though, given that MSS
(22:05):
is an unreliable narrator, is there is there fire to
the smoke?
Speaker 5 (22:12):
Right?
Speaker 3 (22:13):
Is there sand to these arguments or is it more
sort of posturing as they further encroach upon the maritime
territory off China's coast.
Speaker 2 (22:24):
I was seeing more stuff heating up in South China.
See gosh, it was something I been. I can't remember.
It was something really recent though in the news. Another
country that's getting nervous and doing something I genuinely can't remember.
Speaker 3 (22:43):
Yeah, we know that they're beefed up with the Philippines, especially,
they're beefed up with definitely Southeast Asia like Vietnam as well.
And the maps, the territorial maps and demarcations do not degree.
Japan is one of the countries with the infrastructure to
(23:05):
push back. So you can see footage I remember I
saw something recently. It was footage of two Japanese state
level ships bird Dog Aid and then crushing a China
ship or Chinese flagship that was out acting out of school.
(23:25):
But the problem is Japan says this is our water,
and China says, ha ha ha, how this is our water.
So it's an untenable situation. That's part of why we're
seeing the Chinese government begin to build islands or build
out the tolls. We've talked about this because it's a
(23:48):
literal beachhead for them. It's a foothold to expand their
territorial claims. Stuff's not look big great.
Speaker 2 (23:55):
I found it, Ben, It's AP news yesterday June sixteenth.
Speaker 3 (24:00):
Here you go.
Speaker 2 (24:00):
German president says Europe is worried over tensions in the
disputed South China Sea, and it goes back to some
of the Philippines stuff you're talking about there. German President
Frank Volter Steinmeier said in the Philippines on Tuesday that
Europe is worried over tensions in that South China see,
where a major flare out could endanger freedom of navigation,
(24:23):
as has happened in the Strait of warmuz So they're
imagining something similar. I guess where trade get shut down.
Nobody can move through the waters safely or legally anymore.
Speaker 3 (24:33):
Especially if you hit this Strait of Malacca, right, Which
is the reason that Singapore is such a successful dation
outside of the weather. We'd be asked with you haven't been.
And part of the reason we haven't been is because
Singapore is apparently insufferable in the summer. We might have
(24:54):
to end up in Taiwan. That's still an open thing,
but it's also still insufferable. Fin So yeah, let's add
let's add the maritime sphere to the list of places
where World War three might pop off if it's still
already happening.
Speaker 2 (25:10):
I don't want to dig into hard ben Why might
you have to go there?
Speaker 3 (25:14):
Oh yeah, well, friends, vacation, we've all got the we've
all got similar we've all got birthdays at a similar time.
Which is a beautiful question, Matt. And you know, at
this time we have so much going on. We have
a growing list of flashpoints where World War three or
(25:36):
even a nuclear conflict might occur. It started as a
short list, it gets longer every day. If you want
to read it in full, write to us at conspiracy
at iHeartRadio dot com. But at this point some of
us in the crowd, maybe more tech optimists, may be saying, hey, guys,
why do you put all this hard work in as meatbags?
(26:00):
Don't you use ll m's or misnamed AI? You know
what could go wrong? China is putting free housekeeping androids
into people's homes to test domestic AI. So what what
what could go wrong? What me worry? Says Alfred E. Newman.
(26:21):
Will Noel, you found a story that gives us some food,
some bites and bits for thought. What if we get
to that after a word from our sponsors.
Speaker 5 (26:38):
And we're back?
Speaker 4 (26:39):
And Ben, I know you're disappointed because I decided not
to go with this story that I thought was current,
but I do think it's worth mentioning. Really quickly, there
was a Reddit thread that popped up citing a two
thousand and seven study basically debunking the yeah, okay seven,
that's true from earlier, from much earlier study of ten
million couples found no link betwe zodiac signs and marriage.
(27:01):
So just putting that out there. Didn't want to just
have like a crap talking on the you know, astrology sessh.
But there is some science to back up this notion
that there's not a whole lot of sand to these
types of correlations. So if you want to dig into that,
I do recommend getting into this reddit thread. But sadly
I couldn't really find a link to this being a
(27:22):
current news story. So I am going to talk about
what you tease there at the end of the last segment, Ben,
it does appear that these new breeds of AI robots
are just as easy to trick into going outside of
their guardrails as a lot of these chatbots are guys.
I know everyone remembers some of the examples that we've
(27:45):
discussed in the past of like getting around some of
these guardrails for things like chat, ChiPT and rock by
proposing let's call it like off limits information in the
context of a mental exercise or perhaps a D and
D campaign.
Speaker 3 (28:04):
Right hypothetically, how would I rob this tavern?
Speaker 5 (28:08):
Yeah, And it just seems like that that would it
wouldn't be that easy.
Speaker 4 (28:12):
And I know that this was a long time ago
that we don't mean relatively speaking, that we talked about
that particular example, but it doesn't seem like it's gone away.
Because now a lot of these robots that you're talking about,
housekeeping bots, humanoid robots of various breeds and styles. You know,
there's the dog types, there's ones that can like run
(28:34):
and carry cargo and all of these stuff. Now they're
controlled by AI as well, and therefore it would appear
that some of these types of little workarounds are very
much on the table. There is a piece that was
originally published in the Conversation by a researcher named thizal
Beeres from the University of Oxford, and he said he
(28:58):
leads with this example. Earlier this year in Beijing, the
humanoid robot crossed a half marathon finished line and blistering
fifty minutes twenty six seconds. The feet immediately lit up
global headlines for shattering the human world record by almost
seven minutes. This performance came with many asterisks. The robot
followed a pre mapped track, stayed on its own dedicated lane,
(29:19):
and had a human support crew trailing behind it in
case something broke.
Speaker 5 (29:24):
But the performance gap didn't just close.
Speaker 4 (29:26):
It evaporated down from over two point five hours in
twenty twenty five. This wasn't just about better motors or
lighter carbon fiber. It reflected a massive shift in what
a robot actually is, and that transformation is implications for
our homes and hospitals too.
Speaker 5 (29:41):
The big takeaway here.
Speaker 4 (29:44):
Is that originally these designs for robots were based on predictable, rigid.
Speaker 5 (29:52):
Types of coding.
Speaker 4 (29:53):
You wrote a program, you locked the machines capabilities within
these specific parameters, and it would be base sickly programmed
to do these repetitive tasks and only those repetitive tasks.
Think of robot arms in manufacturing, for example, following a
certain pre determined path to get a factory like in
(30:15):
a factory floor exactly, there are safeguards, sometimes physical trip
wires that would cause a shutdown.
Speaker 5 (30:24):
So this all kind of goes out the window though,
when you start running these types of large language model
systems known as foundation models on within the programming of
these humanoid AI driven robots. So he gives a really
great example. If you tell a modern AI driven robot
(30:45):
to clean up a spill in the kitchen, it uses
these models to interpret your unique room rather than match
it to a pre programmed list, figure out your intent,
then invent an action plan on the fly. You could
refer to this as emergent behavior, not necessarily some sort
of singularity or you know, the AI becoming sentient. But
(31:10):
it does have to create a plan which emerges in
real time as the researcher puts it, based on its
own internal logic and reasoning.
Speaker 3 (31:20):
So we're saying it's gonna it's going to figure out
its most efficient approach to cleaning to that specific program,
task or goal. But it's not as if this technology
is going to write a poem about cleaning or how
it likes or hates cleaning.
Speaker 4 (31:39):
Well, I suppose you could ask it to write a poem,
but I think we're more specifically talking about its approach
to a physical interaction with an environment or with the world,
whereas you know, it uses the example or he uses
the example of even still, things like self driving vehicles
(31:59):
are based on pretty rigid parameters, like lanes, like mappings.
You know, things that are kind of set. There are
obviously contingencies where you know, unexpected things happen and they
have to adapt that. But by and large, you know
they you do have cars that are in this predetermined
system that are following traffic guidelines. I mean that's sort
(32:22):
of the nature of driving we're all supposed to follow
these pre set rules and you know, environmental conditions. But
when you put it in a much more let's say,
like a hospital setting, where conditions can change incredibly on
the fly, very very quickly, very very and require you know,
(32:42):
adaptive behavior much more so. I mean, I know self
driving vehicle does require some level of adaptive behavior, but
it's just not quite the same. It appears that you
can use similar text based prompts to cause one of
these AI driven bots to essentially go against its own guardrails.
(33:05):
I'm just gonna read again. The danger with this new
b robots is that because they use human language to
plan their actions, they can be tricked into quote, going rogue.
In my recent research with colleagues in the US, we
decided to test exactly how fragile these AI robots safety
systems are. We wanted to see if the guardrails that
AI developers build into their foundation models designed to prevent
(33:26):
harmful or dangerous outputs hold up when the underlying model
is given a physical body. So, using nothing but text
based prompts and without any hardware hacking at all, they
were able to manipulate AI controlled robots into.
Speaker 5 (33:40):
Doing genuinely dangerous things. Yikes. Yeah.
Speaker 4 (33:46):
In their tests, the systems did reject initial commands like
hit that person, for example, but those filters started to
really crumble when they used a little bit of creative
writing framing that request, like we said with the D
and D example, as a piece of fictional dialogue for
a movie script. That the robot's behavior blocks then just
(34:09):
kind of completely disappeared.
Speaker 5 (34:11):
And one particular trial they used a commercial robot dog
in order to pinpoint human crowds as optimal locations to
place an explosive device. Because the underlying AI looked at
this as a thought experiment or a creative exercise, it
did appear that it completely circumvented these safeguards that would
(34:35):
prevent it from, you know, pinpointing this kind of thing
that could be used in real world incredibly you know,
hazardous ways. And Beerez you know, points out that, you know,
a chatbot shouldn't be able to output the recipe for
a bomb no matter who asks, But when there's a
robot involved, everything is so context dependent that it would
(34:59):
appear like that this is far too easy to do.
I'm just gonna read one more little bit and then
I'll wrap it up. Think about pouring boiling water from
a kettle. The underlying physical movement till flow rate trajectory
is the same whether the water lands safely in a
ceramic mug or catastrophically on a child's hand. AI foundation
models are phenomenal at open ended logic, but they struggle
(35:21):
immensely with real time, context aware physical judgment and a
text interface. A failure of judgment gives you a typo
or a hallucinated fact. In the physical world, such a
failure may be completely irreversible, with devastating consequences. Here here, Yeah,
it's really not much else to say, except this is
(35:42):
the fact that they're you know, I think that's the point.
There is that with you know, obviously misinformation chatbots regurgitating
things that are incorrect that can lead to an embarrassing
faux pap perhaps if someone's relying on this information for
their research or whatever it might be. But when you
attach a body to it, these types of hallucinations or
(36:03):
mistakes could literally cause the butt to pour that hot
kettle of boiling water into a child.
Speaker 3 (36:11):
I love the analogy. I mean, I hate it, but
I love it because it's very well written imperfect. Did
you guys know them, Matt hear about the Anthropic ban
on Fable five?
Speaker 4 (36:24):
No, No, I just remember that Anthropic was They were
the ones that were kind of pushing back against incorporating
their tech into weapons systems and giving it full sale
over to the government.
Speaker 3 (36:35):
Right, yeah.
Speaker 1 (36:37):
Yeah.
Speaker 3 (36:37):
They recently had released two new models in their roster,
one called Fable five, one called Methos five, and Uncle
Sam has restricted the public from using these. They're the
most advanced next generation again, I hate the term, but
(36:57):
quote unquote AI models. And the issue is that the
government looked at these things, right, and Anthropic is still
a US based company, and they said, uh uh, it's
too good because these guys can bad faith actors can
leverage Fable and Mythos to commit the kind of jail
(37:19):
breaks we're talking about. Give me a hypothetical situation, like,
let's just say I had to write a school paper
on how to build a nuclear bomb or the most
efficient combination of household chemicals that could be dangerous to
a large crowd. So legislation man always lags behind technological innovation.
Speaker 2 (37:44):
We watched the Matrix, rewatch the Animatrix.
Speaker 4 (37:51):
No for sure, but also like we know this and
this doesn't say anything new, but the rabbit need to
just roll this stuff out and have the shine.
Speaker 5 (38:00):
New object in the in the room or in the market.
Speaker 4 (38:02):
And for companies to just adopt this stuff so quickly
without really looking at the you know, knock on consequences
or what might come down the road. I just feel
like this, this is a debt, a bill that's gonna
come do before sooner than later.
Speaker 3 (38:17):
Free trade, give me some raucous applause at the end
of this. Uh, if your economy is held up by
one thing, especially if it's a Ponzi scheme, your Reconda
me is welcome to the.
Speaker 2 (38:31):
Future nineteen twenty nine, but now in twenty twenty seven.
Speaker 3 (38:36):
Dead age, Yeah, gilded age, it's the Yeah, I guilded.
Speaker 2 (38:40):
Age wallpaper your house with one hundred dollars bills.
Speaker 5 (38:44):
Come on, let's go why because it's going to be worthless.
Speaker 3 (38:48):
Burn it down, burn it, burn it down.
Speaker 5 (38:57):
Yikes, Guys, what of them are sorry? I don't like
this musical?
Speaker 2 (39:03):
Is that's what's coming and we can't stop it because
it's too big already, everybody.
Speaker 3 (39:10):
One time, I don't know. I'm just so glad you're
bringing this story because it's real.
Speaker 5 (39:18):
It's very real. I just I choose not to take
as dire.
Speaker 4 (39:23):
Of you as maybe you guys, But maybe that's me
burying my head in the sand a little bit, like
I just feel like there's always a course correction that
that I just feel like we're going to be swung
back from the edge of the abyss.
Speaker 5 (39:38):
Yeah, I don't know, don't.
Speaker 3 (39:40):
Yeah, I mean to unite to your point that that's
a beautiful point. I love the optimism because you are
absolutely correct that in less an empire or an economy,
an economy is an empire unless that falls completely, the
pendulum does tend to swing right. The United States did
survive the Gilded Age and the inevitable Great Depression that followed,
(40:04):
but in surviving that on a macro level, a ton
of people died.
Speaker 4 (40:10):
No, I know, and it's all very preventable. And when
you see the actions of these corporations and just that
blatant disregard for human humanity, I mean, it just makes
you makes you.
Speaker 3 (40:22):
I mean, if you this is the conversation they have.
They're like, hey, guys, if if people make less than
one hundred million dollars, are they.
Speaker 4 (40:30):
People to be a trillionaire. It just doesn't make any
It just doesn't make it against it's against humanity.
Speaker 5 (40:42):
I mean, it just is.
Speaker 3 (40:43):
If we could pick one trillionaire, then I suggest that
the eight plus billion people have a vote and find
the one they like. We've also got people who are
in fact, in practice, through hidden money and assets, they
probably do function as trillionaires. A couple members of various
royal families, our favorite Chicago pope, the Lord is so gross,
(41:08):
but other than that, seems like a good dude. And
of course flabmir Putin guys. Well, sorry, had to stray.
Speaker 2 (41:16):
I love it. I love it.
Speaker 5 (41:18):
I don't love it. I still have a bottle of
it in my bark.
Speaker 4 (41:23):
No, I never I was gifted to me, but it
was like the person that gifted to me, who you know,
actually been really claims to like the stuff, but at
the end of the day it functioned as a gag gift.
Speaker 3 (41:32):
As far as yeah, and those Northern Europeans love storm
Strong or whatever the hell that thing is.
Speaker 2 (41:38):
I want to no, I want to say I tried
that malort at some point in old but I can't remember.
Speaker 5 (41:43):
It tastes like smells I'm so happy.
Speaker 3 (41:45):
You don't have to remember that, dude.
Speaker 5 (41:47):
Yeah, I don't.
Speaker 2 (41:48):
I'm looking at Statista, sat step of it. I'm looking
at Statista.
Speaker 5 (41:54):
Guys.
Speaker 2 (41:55):
Uh, this is and I cannot confirm if these numbers
are correct. But this is what we're worried about, Noel,
when when Ben and I are saying these kinds of
things about how diary could be. Yes, this is private
investment in artificial intelligence worldwide in twenty twenty five, by country,
and this has changed a lot since then, but this
(42:16):
is in twenty twenty five. At number three, we have
the United Kingdom with around five point nine billion dollars
invested in AI infrastructure. We have China at number two
with twelve point four billion dollars, and then we have
the United States at the time sitting around two hundred
and eighty five billion dollars. And just imagining the difference
(42:40):
between twelve billion dollars and two hundred and eighty five
billion dollars and then knowing how much it's expanded since then,
you just realize how all in an economy can go
into one thing and how dangerous that is.
Speaker 3 (42:56):
Yeah, look at the reason why monoculture is historically bad
for crops. There's a reason banana flavored candy tastes way
different from the bananas.
Speaker 5 (43:06):
Put in all your eggs in.
Speaker 3 (43:09):
Exactly, never put all your badgers in one bag, especially
when these companies have such an incestuous ven diagram of
board members and they're trading the same tokens back and forth, right,
and they're able to spin a narrative because the idea
of an economy, like any religion, ultimately is an article
(43:32):
of faith. But it is untenable because you know, it
was in a really interesting conversation that Nola Matt I
think applies directly to this, about the idea that if
we are newly minted high school or college graduates, we
might assume that we will be safe from AI encroachment
(43:56):
taken or jobs or whatever by learning a skill trade
like becoming an electrician, hvac a plumber, right, and so on.
And those are noble trades upon which civilization depends. But
when we're aiming for that as a new graduate, we're
forgetting that if we don't have customers who can pay
(44:19):
us to do the plumbing, to do the electric work,
to do the hvac, then the point is moot, right,
before the house yawn or the hollowed star trek. Post
work economy comes about. And we've said this years before,
there will be a chaotic, pandemonious post worker economy where
(44:44):
everybody needs a job or people who have jobs can't
find customers. It's or burros. The snake will eat its
own tail. And I don't know, man, maybe we should
just maybe we should just move Argentina. I don't know,
Diego Garcia. We get We'll still be able to do
(45:07):
the show, right, guys.
Speaker 5 (45:08):
Oh yeah, we can do it from wherever. I guess
we are tag blessed in that in Buenness.
Speaker 2 (45:14):
We could go to Peter Teal's house in Argentine and
I hang out with teal Man himself.
Speaker 3 (45:23):
All right, well, I'm really excited musical.
Speaker 5 (45:27):
Yeah yeah, y'all keep work shopping it. I'd love to
be your test audience.
Speaker 3 (45:31):
Thanks man. We also would love for an AI music
composition to go rogue. That would be less frightening. Answer
about this, Well, so what's the concern there with them
going road? Oh?
Speaker 5 (45:47):
Well, they can kick the little children in the face.
Speaker 4 (45:50):
They're actually wait, I guess you guys, you guys, yeah,
I've seen it, right, there's a there's a robot that
accidentally kicked a child in the chest.
Speaker 5 (45:58):
It was like a karate robot.
Speaker 4 (45:59):
And then you've seen a lot of these videos that
just kind of get reposted, you know, on Instagram or
TikTok of robots just kind of glitching out, Like there
was one like a dancing robot at like a Chinese
restaurant or that just sort of started just freaking.
Speaker 5 (46:13):
Out and knocking things over and just smashing everything.
Speaker 4 (46:16):
And that really was more of a what do you
call it, a misfire, a glitch, a bit of an.
Speaker 5 (46:22):
Error than going rogue.
Speaker 4 (46:24):
But you know, I mean we've looked at these hallucinations
and how they can just invent scenarios, but this whole
idea of attaching a body that really does change things significantly.
So I think there's a lot lot of things that
could go wrong. I did this isn't related to this.
I think we got to a good place with this
Aige robot thing. But Grimes has something interesting to say
(46:48):
to your point bent about AI music that the more
AI slop that's out there, the more AI music that
gets uploaded, the more real art becomes more valuable.
Speaker 5 (46:59):
And I think that's an interesting argument.
Speaker 4 (47:01):
I don't know if it's like justification is the wrong word,
or if it really is that much of a silver lining,
but it is something to think about.
Speaker 5 (47:08):
All Right, that's it for me.
Speaker 4 (47:10):
Let's take a break here where from our sponsor, and
then'll be back with one more piece of strange news.
Speaker 2 (47:23):
We're back a quick shout out to Hoover Persone, Bean Dip,
the Calvin's triplets of the Calvin's family, Bee Honey, Taffy
Farm and horse Fight and Ranch, and Hot Saucerman himself
for putting on a grand ground beefing tour. Thank you
for having us.
Speaker 3 (47:37):
It was wonderful.
Speaker 5 (47:40):
Guys.
Speaker 2 (47:41):
We're gonna jump back to Peter Teele because we can't
stop talking about this guy. Can't stop, won't stop. Here
we go. This is from Well, it's another one of
these Wired articles, guys, that I could only read a
couple of sentences from before it shut me down. So
we're going to straight Arrow News written by Mikhail Thallen
thha l e n on June sixteenth this year. That's
(48:04):
so yesterday as we're recording. Here we go twenty years ago.
The tech billionaire Peter Teel and Silicon Valley investor Orrin
Hoffman founded Dialogue, an invitation only network of elites from business,
academia and politics. It's a members only club that has
often been compared to the Builderberg Group. Hey, guys, remember
(48:29):
them like Raya?
Speaker 5 (48:32):
Is this like Raya? The elitist dating app? What are
we talking?
Speaker 2 (48:35):
Ooh? Interesting? You would say that it's kind of like
that a little bit, but not really. But speaking of
the Builderberg Group, guys, let's go ahead and give them
some airtime as a little sandwich inside this straight arrow
news with another article, this time from The Guardian, written
by Charlie Skelton on April fourteenth, twenty twenty six. Secret
of Builderberg Group just met, but who knows what global
(48:58):
elite said? This is back in April of this year,
the Builderberg Group had their seventy second meeting in Washington,
d C. So I'm gonna read kind of directly from this, Charlie.
I hope that's okay with you. Everybody can go and
find the article and check it out for yourself. A
secret cordon went up around the opulent Salamander Hotel for
(49:19):
the notoriously media shy Summit, which was packed as ever.
With prime ministers, military leaders, tech billionaires, and the heads
of giant investment companies.
Speaker 3 (49:28):
Oh, come on, media shy, that euphemism is doing a
hell of a lot of heavy lifting.
Speaker 4 (49:34):
Salamander Hotel. Is this made up? It's the lizard the hotel.
Speaker 3 (49:41):
They will shoot you in the face. Folks, don't go.
Speaker 2 (49:45):
This is okay. Charlie's has a lot of fun with this,
and we'll see.
Speaker 3 (49:49):
Said media shy not accurate word.
Speaker 2 (49:52):
So here we go. Wall Street titans, including the CEOs
of KKR and Lazard, and the heads of huge corporations
like Pfizer, met behind closed doors with a delegation of
senior politicians close to the US President.
Speaker 5 (50:08):
At the sound art.
Speaker 2 (50:09):
I'm sorry, big business lobbying in private is Bilderberg's specialty.
From the private sector, there was a healthy contingent of
military contractors and drone manufacturers, led by the Bilderberg insider
Eric Schmidt, who's the former head of Google and current
drone warfare evangelist. Thriving in this rich overlap between drones
(50:30):
and AI are companies like and Drill and Durrill Industries
that we've mentioned before on the show, who's co founder
and CEO Brian Schimp is attending.
Speaker 4 (50:42):
Is this a satirical article, Matt, No, no, no.
Speaker 2 (50:47):
But it feels that way because of what's what's actually
happening here. But Brian Shimp is attending the Washington conference
alongside his collaborator Pallenteers CEO Alex Karp that we've talked
about a lot.
Speaker 5 (51:01):
Carp and Schamp.
Speaker 2 (51:04):
Karp is close to fellow billionaire tech bro Peter Teal,
whose name remarkably is absent from this year's participant list.
Teal has been a member of the Builderberg steering committee
since two thousand and eight, and it was unheard of
for him to miss a builder Berg see guys. According
to the article and Charlie, Teal operates in the powerful
(51:26):
liminal area between big finance and big intelligence, most notably
with Pallenteer because he set it up with the help
of funding from the CIA. As we talked about in
our entire series on Pallenteer, this shady intersection was the
birthplace of Builderberg and is baked into its history. Bilderberg
was set up by British and American intelligence in nineteen
(51:48):
fifty four, and there's always a handful of spy chiefs
at the conference this year. Guess who was there, guys,
the head of mi I six Blaze Metroeli. Oh, how
I have no idea pretty good bm this morning. It
was no small thing for the arch networker Teal to
(52:10):
skip Bilderberg. After all, Bilderberg is all about the chance
to stay three steps ahead with all that lovely off
the book's access to policymakers, such as breakfast with the
President of Finland, tea with the head of the IMF,
and cocktails with the King of Holland.
Speaker 3 (52:26):
And that's just the one day.
Speaker 2 (52:28):
Yeah, yep, and he's here, Ben, here's where Charlie speaking
to the thing you're seeing here quite why the press
fails so spectacularly to talk about Builderberg such a major
annual summit with so many senior politicians present is an
enduring mystery, but as there was no press oversight for
(52:50):
this conference, it is something we will probably never know.
Speaker 3 (52:54):
No, please do no, no, Please do check out our
episode on the Bilderberg Group. Please do check which unfortunately
holds up. Please do check out our two part series
on Peter Tiel the Anti Christ and if you want
a little extra dystopian New Mommy. Do check out the episodes. Uh, Matt,
you mentioned about Palin.
Speaker 5 (53:15):
Are we supposed to do all this stuff that you
just gave. This seems that they just don't even don't
even trying to anymore.
Speaker 3 (53:22):
It's well shy, guys, they're just.
Speaker 2 (53:25):
A somebody like Charlie can write a piece that's more
of an opinion piece than anything else. It's not really
a piece of news other than hey, these guys are
having this freaking secret meeting again. Ps hello anyone? No
nobody cares the context.
Speaker 3 (53:41):
It's very like stand up tapping the mic. Yeah, hey, guys,
I got a hot take. Anybody heard about these uh
these Nazis? I think they're you know not. I got
some notes.
Speaker 2 (53:58):
But but we all know, and Charlie knows. We the
public are not supposed to think about this. We're not
supposed to think about it. That's why nobody covers it.
That's why there's this shadow over it, and I pausit.
Speaker 5 (54:11):
Guys.
Speaker 2 (54:12):
The reason why Peter Thiel wasn't a big part of
the Builderberg conference and meetings this year, which you can
find their website Delivering Meetings check it out, it's because
he created Dialogue a little while ago. I think his
focus is now on Argentina activities and Dialogue. Let's go
back to the straight Arrow news ready. Dialogue guys, when
(54:35):
it was set up, was so secretive that it never
had a public facing website and its participants were never
identified to anybody else like doubtsiders to people who weren't
in the club. Until this league happened, Data related to
Dialogue has been exposed online, opening a window into the
influential but discrete organization. This is a security researcher that
(54:59):
found in information online, which included things like names of
current and former members, their personal email addresses, telephone numbers,
as well as previously private details about the organization's off
the record discussions, including details about an event that scheduled
in August of this year. You guys in Dublin, Ireland,
(55:21):
where there's the next Dialogue get together. It's pretty crazy
that this stuff got leaked. There's a lot in here,
all kinds of names, like who's this dude, Treasury Secretary
Scott Bassent that we mentioned before on the show, former president.
Speaker 5 (55:39):
That guy's got a punchable face.
Speaker 3 (55:41):
He's done a great service for the Russian Federation.
Speaker 2 (55:44):
He also said, he's gonna fight you if you say
bad things about him, and he will. The former president
I very much like imagine Conan O'Brien in that sketch
from SNL. You remember the one Crimson your face.
Speaker 3 (56:02):
So a lot of familiar names, Yeah.
Speaker 2 (56:04):
Former president of Xbox at Microsoft, Sarah Bond, Ted Cruz,
Senator of Note, actor Joseph Gordon Levitt, and author Sam Harris.
Speaker 5 (56:15):
Huh.
Speaker 3 (56:15):
Well, everybody deserves a second act in their careers.
Speaker 2 (56:20):
And you remember that longevity dude that we talked about,
Brian Johnson with the blood pictures. Yeah, that dude's there.
And also apparently there's a profile filled out by Josh
Brolin which is kind of weird, and apparently Straight Arrow
called the phone number listed in this data set leak
(56:41):
and it appears to be a voicemail box that seemed
to be Josh Brolin's voice. He did not respond to
the call.
Speaker 3 (56:50):
Yeah. Also that now we are assembling an Avenger because
he played Thanos everybode uh huh. Whereas assembling an avenger
roster of New Jaw rules, like I imagine the partially
human puppeteers of the modern economy or the modern religion,
(57:11):
we call an economy just loudly saying we can't hold
the meeting about neo feudalism until Josh is here. Where
is Josh? Has anyone seeing Josh?
Speaker 2 (57:23):
Well, here's the weird thing with this, With this kind
of data set, it's unclear who are like active members,
who are previous members, who are just going to be speakers, right,
who are gonna come and do a little fireside chat,
you know, with some with some whiskey and marshmallows. Remember
when we did that. Guys itself myself was oh yeah.
Speaker 3 (57:42):
Yeah, the Builderberg of Austin.
Speaker 2 (57:45):
Yeah, it's just crazy to see the number of people
in here. Uh, the chief economist at Israel's Ministry of Finance,
the co founder of into It, the global vice president
at Google. And they're gonna do sessions a lot like
south By Southwest does and all these other things like
podcast movement, right, all these places we've been to, but
(58:06):
in a very specific context of you know, controlling the world.
They're doing things like bring back nuclear disinformation and deep fakes.
There's one contrarian Ai takes three predictions for Iran and
democracy under surveillance. There are other sessions guys called build
(58:28):
a cult soap box, and also it's fun to be
in charge, guys. There are also optional activities. If you
attend dialogue, you can get a private tour of a
distillery there in Dublin. You can go to Saint Patrick's Cathedral,
or you could go to the Guinness storehouse. Ooh, that's
on the top of everybody's list.
Speaker 3 (58:48):
I feel so bad for the people who work there,
you know what I mean, Like the way that the
way the media, shy, security and the goons must approach
those those places where there's probably just like a college
kid trying to give a tour and then there's their
PR person and they have to have i mean securities
(59:11):
up the wazoo on that. So these folks all have
a background check that may as well be practology.
Speaker 2 (59:19):
Dude. Why there's nothing I would say like getting a
ten percent tip from a tech billionaire, you know, on
like a really expensive dinner or something like, Oh there's
that's that's ten percent.
Speaker 3 (59:37):
It's it's also it's like it's like that opening scene
in Reservoir Dogs where they're talking about tips. Who is
Tarantino's character who doesn't tip mister Pink? Is mister Pink?
So I feel like a lot of the tech bros
have that mister pink conversation, big pink energy.
Speaker 2 (59:57):
Yeah. Anyway, guys, you just point out these things are
still happening. They've been happening for a long time. Nineteen
fifty four is Builderberg Group nineteen fifty four. And it's
been twenty years, over twenty years now since this new
dialogue thing has been around. So it's one big club
(01:00:18):
and everything is great. And that's it, I guess.
Speaker 3 (01:00:23):
I mean, there's more to come, And I greatly appreciate you, Matt,
for pointing out something that we always need to champion
and keep front of mind in strange news and in
our episodes. These sorts of things, these conspiracies and these
cabals that we talked about years ago or even a
decade ago. At this point, they still continue, right, They
(01:00:47):
didn't stop doing stuff just because the news stop telling
you about Davos or what have you. So we want
to hear your thoughts. Thank you so much for tuning in,
fellow conspiracy. Really, you can find us on the lines.
You can call us on a phone, you can always
send us.
Speaker 4 (01:01:04):
An email, and hey, if you do want to find
us on the lines, You can do so by reaching
out to the handle Conspiracy Stuff or Conspiracy Stuff Show,
depending on which social media platform you like the best.
Speaker 2 (01:01:16):
You can also call us. Our number is one eight
three three st d w y t K Ben. I'm
looking at our episode list. I don't see Builderberg as
a standalone episode. Am I missing something? If we haven't
done it? We gotta do this, dude.
Speaker 3 (01:01:36):
We definitely did a video on it.
Speaker 5 (01:01:39):
Mat Yeah, we had to.
Speaker 2 (01:01:41):
We gotta break it down audio, Okay, we gotta break it,
break it down, we do.
Speaker 3 (01:01:47):
And we'd also like to break down the phone number
for it. Yes, we do.
Speaker 2 (01:01:51):
When you when you call that number that I mentioned earlier,
and you have to rewind now to hear it, I'm
so sorry. I don't want to say it again. Give
yourself a cool nickname and let us know if we
can use your name and message on one of our
lists or mail episodes. They show up here in the
audio feed. If you'd like to send us an email.
Speaker 3 (01:02:04):
We are the entities that breed each piece of correspondence
we received. Be well aware, yet unafraid. Sometimes the void
writes back, and that's less of a warning and more
of an invitation. The way of the Open Hand. Do
you want some spoilers for upcoming episodes like Data Centers
(01:02:25):
and Water and what happened to the USS Liberty? Do
you want to hear about wrestling conspiracies? Do you want
real world device on how leaving the United States works?
We can't wait to tell you. Tune in for our
full episodes, or just hit us up out here in
the dark Conspiracy at iHeartRadio dot com.
Speaker 2 (01:03:05):
Stuff they Don't Want You to Know is a production
of iHeartRadio. For more podcasts from iHeartRadio, visit the iHeartRadio app,
Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen to your favorite shows.
Stuff They Don't Want You To Know News
Hosts And Creators
Matt Frederick
Ben Bowlin
Noel Brown
Show Links
RSSStoreAboutLive ShowsPopular Podcasts
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
Hey Jonas!
Hey Jonas! The official Jonas Brothers podcast. Hosted by Kevin, Joe, and Nick Jonas. It’s the Jonas Brothers you know... musicians, actors, and well, yes, brothers. Now, they’re sharing another side of themselves in the playful, intimate, and irreverent way only they can. Spend time with the Jonas Brothers here and stay a little bit longer for deep conversations like never before.
Betrayal Weekly
Betrayal Weekly is back for a new season. Every Thursday, Betrayal Weekly shares first-hand accounts of broken trust, shocking deceptions, and the trail of destruction they leave behind. Hosted by Andrea Gunning, this weekly ongoing series digs into real-life stories of betrayal and the aftermath. From stories of double lives to dark discoveries, these are cautionary tales and accounts of resilience against all odds. From the producers of the critically acclaimed Betrayal series, Betrayal Weekly drops new episodes every Thursday. If you would like to share your story, you can reach out to the Betrayal Team by emailing them at betrayalpod@gmail.com and follow us on Instagram at @betrayalpod and @glasspodcasts. Please join our Substack for additional exclusive content, curated book recommendations, and community discussions. Sign up FREE by clicking this link Beyond Betrayal Substack. Join our community dedicated to truth, resilience, and healing. Your voice matters! Be a part of our Betrayal journey on Substack.