Apple's Generative AI Is Coming...

Tailosive Tech Streamed: March 5th, 2024

Episode Transcript

(00:01):
Hello, ladies and gentlemen, Welcomeback to Taylor's of Tech Live on YouTube.
Okay, we're officially in Cite Refreshseason two times a term, and
we got a random launch of Mthree MacBook Air yesterday. I don't think
it's worth it. You're welcome todisagree, but at least the people who

(00:21):
do disagree will know exactly why,which is kind of I think what a
lot of people need to hear afirm, convincing opinion that just says,
you know what, this isn't worthit, And at least if you disagree,
you're going to know exactly why it'sworth it in your mind. But
a lot of people were probably onthe fence and had no idea if they
should get one or not. AndI think for the vast majority of people,

(00:43):
you don't need to get one.Don't worry about it, don't think
about it. But one of themore interesting comments that Apple made in their
newsroom post, because of course theydidn't have an event, there wasn't too
much mentioned in regards to They didn'teven like give it a new wallp.
It was just like, hey,it's got the M three chip. Now

(01:04):
no event. Then disappointing. Ithink the event would have been more disappointing
because then you would have built itup even more in your mind, and
then we would have watched the eventand been even more bored. So site
refreshes for minor spec bumps I thinkare very appropriate. I always think it's
a waste of time to get people'shypes all out of control and hype it
up like it's gonna be this nextbig thing. Oh, we'd like to

(01:26):
formally invite you to this next bigevent, and then you go, oh,
we put a new chip in thesame design as before. Yeah,
the event could be just as disappointing, if not more so. To be
honest, but Apple made some interestingAI comments that they haven't made before,
even though there's not really much.There's not really much that's changed on the

(01:49):
hardware end. The M three chipis not new. It's been around for
months. Same thing with a threeminute, three nanometers architecture, same thing
with the neural cores. But Ithought i'd read them because who was it?
Yeah, Marjell was asking about this. Good to see you in the
chat, Hello, Hello, goodafternoon. Apple's wording here was interesting,
and because I was mainly just focusingon let's not act like the M three

(02:14):
macbookare is worth it, especially whenit's so similar in design and features to
the M two MacBook Are, whichApple is still selling and you can find
refurbished for even cheaper. But evenif you don't have certified refurbished in your
country, M two macboocare so affordable. But this was kind of an interesting
choice of words Apple made, soI thought we could read it together.
They're calling this the world's best consumerlaptop for AI, which they've never really

(02:38):
used terminology like this before, butI think it gives us a sneak peak
of what's to come. At dubdub with the trend here. Since I
might be reading this for a while, I'll put my face on the screen.
There we go with the transition toApple Silicon. Every Mac is a
great platform for AI. M threeincludes a faster and more efficient sixteen core
neural engine, along with accelerated inthe CPUGB to boost on device machine learning,

(03:02):
making Mac macare the world's best consumerlaptop for AI. Leveraging this incredible
AI performance, macwust delivers intelligent featuresthat enhance productivity and creditivity, so users
can enable powerful camera features. Camerafeatures what cottonuty camera accessibility features are much
more. With the broad ecosystem ofapps that deliver advanced AI features, users

(03:23):
can do everything from checking their homeworkwith AI math assistance in good Note six
to automatically enhancing photos and pixel mainor pro to removing background noise from a
video using capcut. Wow Apple droppingthe capcut Combined with the unified memory architecture
of Apple Silicain Macmacair can also runoptimized AI models, including large language models

(03:46):
and diffusion models for image generation locallywith great performance. I would like to
know which apps they're using. Butin addition to on device performance, MacBook
Air supports cloud based solutions. Wow, what a what a shock? The
MacBook Air has Internet access, enablingusers to run powerful productivity and creative apps
that tap into the power of AI, such as Microsoft Copilot, Microsoft three

(04:08):
sixty five, Canva, and AdobeFirefly. So that's relying on other people's
large language models. But that kindof comment about using the neural core on
Apple Silicon to run large language models, I think is kind of giving us
a hint of whoops, let meswitch that back there. It is it's

(04:28):
kind of giving us a hint ofwhat's to come, which brings a lot
of questions for what the future ofApple software is going to look like.
I know sometimes I apologize sometimes Iforget to switch the stream key over.
So whenever I switch the stream keyover or forget to, it live streams

(04:49):
some old on telosavv. It's livestream some old title and thumbnail and apparently
the oldest one I can find isfrom Battery Day, So it live streams
like when I have the wrong streamkey enabled. I'm usually pretty good at
that, but today I slipped upand I live stream to the wrong channel.
But I've fixed it now. Yeah. App AI is the new five

(05:11):
G. That's honestly what it feelslike. Apple used to never use the
word laptop, right. Yeah,There's been a lot of questions about this,
some of which that even apply tome. Marngel pre asked a question
because he's a Taylus of tech promember, and he writes, it's very
likely that Apple will release some newgenerative AI features for iOS and presumably mac

(05:32):
os two according to the rumors,But we also know that some of Apple's
most loyal users are artists and othercreators and among my niche of creator friends,
at least we are openly against generativeAI. So with this in mind,
do you think Apple will limit theirgenerative AI features compared to Google and
Open AI in order to not angertheir creative users? Also a bonus question,

(05:53):
but do you feel concerned at allabout generative AI replacing you? In
my view, AI generated content maylikely never be as good as content made
by humans, but for big mediacompanies, I think they just have to
come close enough to the quality inorder for them to start replacing creators.
Wow, what a topic, Whata subject. We could probably talk on
that for hours and hours and hours. And then Jeremiah says, what wallet

(06:15):
are you currently? Same wallet?Still Ridge Wallet? I've been a ridge
Wallet user for six seven years now. Anyway, I think that and AI
is often looked at as it's goingto exponentially get better over time, and
it's almost never true from what Ican see, and I've you know,
some people disagree with me on this, and I encourage you to disagree with

(06:38):
me in the chat. Tell mewhy I'm wrong. Explain to me how
I'm wrong, because I want tolearn. Even if I'm wrong, I
want to learn why I'm wrong,but I've watched a lot of AI projects
over the years where they'll take verynoticeable big leaps and bounds improvements, but
then they kind of level off.People expect the progress to go like this,

(06:59):
but in dead it's a bit morelike this. It's a bit more
of an S curve where occasionally youstumble onto something that results in a big
leap in performance, but then itlevels off and doesn't really improve to the
point of replacement of a lot ofjobs. I have family members and friends
in the software engineering field. Neitherof them are that scared or that worried

(07:20):
about chat GPT. They've used them, they've tried them. They say they're
useful in kind of handy tools,sometimes for writing notes or accumulating things,
or kind of breaking a subject down. But it's never reached the point where
the large language models get so goodthat you can replace entire roles entire jobs.

(07:41):
Because AI bots can be inconsistent wherethey say one thing with the exact
same circumstances as another question, butbecause it's been trained differently, or because
humans have been messing with it toomuch, it can actually get dumber and
be a little bit too inconsistent.Michael Martel says, spot on with your
AI take. I've watched it happenwith Tesla's and full self driving years ago

(08:05):
when they were developing their neural nets, which is very similar technology with machine
based learning. They expected it tocontinue to grow and grow in performance,
and instead, you know, itoccasionally has these big spikes where wow,
okay, it made a lot ofprogress, but then it levels off.
You know, the version twelve ofFull self Driving was supposed to be this
big, like now it's nothing butneural nets. Now there's no more manually

(08:28):
written code. It's all just AIwriting itself at the whole point. And
within a couple of weeks it hada collision a parking lot, nothing major,
not like a high speed collision,but they had to halt the rollout
of version twelve because of this collision. So it's like, Okay, how
do we improve it? How dowe fix it? If it's now completely

(08:50):
neural net trained, it's not usingany manually written code anymore, how do
you improve it? I guess youjust feed it more data. But I
thought we had all the data.I guess we got keep feeding it data
and hope for the best. WhenAI becomes more innovative than humans, that
will further accelerate AI development, creatingan exponential curve. I'm waiting for that
day to happen, but people keeptalking about it like it's going to happen.

(09:13):
But what I've noticed, especially withopen AI, is you kind of
reached the limit at the chatbots capabilitiesand then they shift their focus to something
else. So once we started kindof capping out at the capabilities of GPT
four and people start going, Okay, you know what, all of the
humans training it are actually making ita bit dumber. It can only get
so many things right. It's veryimpressive if it talks about fields that you

(09:37):
don't know much about, but ifyou know much about the field, you'll
find lots of mistakes and you'll findlots of errors with it. So instead,
because GPT four kind of hits alimit and we can't really see it
replacing that much more functionality, nowthey shift their focus to SORA. So
now we're all talking about text tovideo capabilities and we see issues with that
and limitations with that, and youcan tell that it's AI generated, but

(09:58):
everyone still has it on their mind. Oh but in another five years.
If this growth curve continues, it'llbe next to perfect. But it never
reaches perfect. It always gets close. It looks somewhat really good. But
I feel like every AI project I'veever seen is always great at looking really
close. Oh what if this wasa little bit better? What if they
made it do this or that?And then they never quite get it there?

(10:22):
At least That's what I've seen,So I'm not personally too worried.
I mean, there's definitely certain artistictools that are probably less in demand now
because of AI features. I couldthink of, especially artists. If you
draw for a living and we're hopingto make a living based on drawing artwork

(10:45):
or painting things, there's a lotof AI imagery that you can just crank
out with a few bots and thatkind of you know, it definitely doesn't
have the same touch or you know, you call it innovative look or human
taste as you know, an actualhuman drawing or painting something. But that

(11:07):
is a field I see AI beingpretty disruptive is in whereas in terms of
my work, you know, Sorajust basically is launching now and it can't
do videos longer than sixty seconds andthat's primarily because they say the longer the
video is, the more distorted andthe more AI looking it becomes. And

(11:28):
I've tried to have GPT write myvideos and I don't. I don't think
it's very convincing. I don't thinkit's very good at it personally, but
that's just me. So billions arebeing invested in generative AI projects. Some
people see more bullish on the subject. Yeah, I know, because AI
it's perfect for investment. I think. I think the technology is great at

(11:50):
getting a bunch of investors on boardbecause the prime investor is one that sees
a bunch of potential that hasn't beenrealized yet. That's that's what an investor
wants to put money towards. Thisproduct, or this technology or this service
is about to take off, isabout to do something really crazy, but
it's not quite there yet. Solet me invest now so that when it

(12:15):
blows up tomorrow, my investment looksreally good. And that's how honestly,
Tesla was able to balloon their marketcap over a trillion dollars was mainly getting
a bunch of investors on board withthe concept that our AI is going to
develop this huge robotaxi fleet, andthen our robotaxi fleet is going to make
all the money and you won't needto think about the car business anymore.

(12:35):
And they sold a bunch of themon that years ago and it didn't really
go anywhere. It hasn't really happened. So in the same way that OpenAI
was able to raise a bunch ofcapital and get a bunch of funding really
quickly, they come up with afeature that makes a very noticeable, big
step change in improvement for a chatbot. So it convinces a bunch of

(12:56):
investors, Oh wow, this isabout to take off. Imagine what GPT
seven or eight is going to belike, and you expect it to be
twenty times better, fifty times better. In reality, it's like point two
times better, point four times better, and it never quite gets to the
point of perfection. We talk aboutGBT not getting better as if it wasn't

(13:16):
released beginning of twenty twenty three.Imagine an iput phone improving as fast as
Ai did this year. I'm nottrying to argue that AI doesn't make big
step changes. I'm trying to arguethat it's not always sustainable. You can't
keep that rate of progress up fora decade, you'll find, like I
said, you make those big jumps, but that's it. They're a big

(13:37):
jump, and then it levels offin performance, and that's why you'll see
people stop using it and then movetowards some other project that makes another big
leap, like a Google Gemini.Now Google Gemini is where it's at.
It can do more than GPT,and then Gemini levels off, and then
we get bored with that, andthen we start talking more about Sora with
text to video. So it's asfar as AI project ago. I think

(14:01):
that it's never quite articulate enough orcapable enough to completely replace a huge industry.
I mean, this isn't in alot of ways. It's not exactly
a new subject because automation replacing jobsis a conversation that goes back over one
hundred years. I remember classic examplewas the creation of the ATM. A

(14:22):
lot of people thought that bank tellerswere basically all going to lose their jobs.
There's going to be no need forhaving bank tellers anymore because the ATM
accomplishes the same task of the bankteller. Now I can go up to
an automated machine, put my debitcard in, put the money in,
or cash the check or get cashout of it, and boom, I'm

(14:43):
done. I don't need to interactwith the human anymore. So everyone thought,
oh, well, bank tellers,that that whole industry is going to
die. Turned out, the bankingindustry made so much money off of the
convenience and simplicity of ATMs that becauseof all that extra money they generated,
they were able to afford more banktellers. Now there's actually more bank tellers
than there used to be, andthey just found new work for them.

(15:05):
Now they can focus more on handlingloans. Now they can have more in
person customer service at the banks formanaging those loans and trying to get people
on board with credit cards, morepeople available to develop customized cashier checks and
stuff like that. So there's allkinds of examples where we're worried about automation
replacing a bunch of jobs, butthen a bunch of new jobs or a

(15:26):
bunch of new possibilities open up.It may not be the same jobs,
but I think we're very very shortfrom a labor shortage. But yeah,
automation does tend to disrupt certain industries. I don't think it gets to the
point where everybody's job is replaced,but everybody's job does change a little bit,
and I could visualize generative AI kindof helping me maybe in some way.

(15:48):
I don't know exactly what Apple hasin store for it, but I'm
very curious and excited to find out. But personally, I would love it.
I don't know if this is possible, but I would love it if
Apple GPT whatever they end up callingit. I'm not using the S Voice
Assistant because I don't want to setoff everybody's devices. But what I would
love is if generative AI could beused to analyze the way I edit my

(16:12):
videos, and then I could justtell some you know, intricate, complicated
algorithm on my computer edit my videofor me, and it analyzes the way
I edit a bunch and I cangive them a bunch of samples. I'll
say, look at the way Iedited the last forty videos I made.
Analyze the technique, analyze the wayI edit them, and now you edit

(16:34):
them. And if the AI couldstart editing videos for me, okay,
that helps me be more productive.It didn't really replace me, but now
I can create videos faster, nowit doesn't take up as much as my
time, but it's the same time. I could imagine, Okay, what
if you're a full time editor.What if you edit videos for a living
and that's your full time job,and now Apple comes up with a technology

(16:56):
that replaces video editors or comes veryclose to being as good as a real
professional video editor. Okay, yeah, I could visualize that kind of being
more disruptive and resulting in more layoffsand that kind of thing. But again,
it's especially in the creative field,you kind of have to be adaptable.
You have to be adjustable. Goodpolicy could go a long way in

(17:19):
protecting certain industries from rapid schure.In my fear is just that Microsoft and
Google have such tremendous lobbying power.Okay, well, this opens up to
a different discussion, which is like, how do we get the government involved.
See personally, I don't think there'smuch point in prohibiting or limiting technologies
growth, even if it's disruptive,even if it replaces jobs or results in

(17:41):
layoffs. It's never worked long term. It's never been effective to try to
ban certain technologies from coming out simplybecause we are trying to protect a certain
number of jobs. I mean,there was an old example in a lot
of ways. Like I said,this is not a new topic, an
old example. I remember my dadand I talking about the pony whip factory.

(18:03):
There used to be factories that wouldhire, you know, hundreds of
people specifically to make little whips thatwould whip you know, the ox or
the horse or the ponies or thedonkeys, whatever would carry your carriage.
And that was a big industry ofmaking those whips so you could hit the
animal to get it to move andhaul you around. So when the automobile

(18:26):
came out, there is this hugeargument, there was this huge public backlash
of well, this is going todrive the workers at the pony whip factories
out of business. Now, everybody'sgoing to lose their jobs. So should
we prevent the invention of the automobileto keep the pony whip factory running?
You know that kind of thing.I don't know. I tend to think

(18:49):
there's a lot of jobs that werestruggling to find humans for. And usually
when you struggle to find humans todo certain jobs, you raise the wage
for it because of course the demandfor it grows higher and you need to
incentivize more people to apply. Soespecially in the fast food industry, Like
there's a lot of fast food placesthat are not finding enough workers, so

(19:11):
they raise their minimum wage. Butthe more you raise your minimum wage,
the higher the budget becomes for automation. So now more and more engineering industries
can come up with automated versions ofcookwaar or filling drinks, flipping burgers,
deep frying foods, whatever it is, whatever you can think of. The
budget grows higher the less people arewilling to do it. So it's not
like buggy whip. Thanks Dad,I don't know why I said pony whip.

(19:36):
Dad's still watching things. Things don'twork until they do. And my
point is you can try to regulateit. You could try to make it
illegal. You can try to say, okay, we can't develop AI pass
this point because it'll display too manyjobs. But that's only one country.
Another country is not going to havethose rules, and are you going to
ban the software from that country fromcoming to your country. That makes it

(19:56):
a whole different That makes it awhole different discussion. So my point is,
if we don't develop the tech,someone else will. Because we don't
have a world government. You know, we can't ban all countries from developing
AI features. And again there's alwaysyou know, industries or companies that work
against the law or are not basedin any particular country that try to make

(20:18):
their software and services available to themasses. Just think of the pirrating industry.
How you can pirate things. It'snot legal, but you know you
can do it, and these companiescan hide from it. So in the
same way, if Google and Microsoftget banned from developing more and more AI
features that are more and more disruptive, then some Chinese tech company is going

(20:41):
to do it anyway, and thenwe'll be at a severe disadvantage. That's
kind of what happened in the EVindustry. To be honest, the bank
teller story is not true. Bankshave less and less tellers. I should
find the article I read about that. But my point is there are bank
tellers. A lot of people thoughtbanks would have of basically no tellers at
that point, but going to besome going the way of toolbooth operators as

(21:07):
a result of AI. Oh tollbooth. Yeah, he said, toolbooth
plumbers are making bank right now.Yeah, that's true, because there's not
enough people that pursue those kinds ofindustries. If Apple AI can help me
cut out the dead air from myaudio during video editing, then that is
one scenario where I can see AIbeing useful as a creator. All kinds
of software and technology has always improvedthings. I recall also a lot of

(21:29):
stories about how Adobe Photoshop would killthe photography business. A lot of people
thought, well, if you canphotoshop things now, now anybody can go
out by a computer and make anyphotograph of whatever they want. How why
would anyone need to take beautiful picturesanymore? You can photoshop it to have
a better sunset, to have abetter And I still know photographers, full
time photographers exist still, even thoughPhotoshop has come and improved and gotten way

(21:56):
way better, And a lot ofpeople thought, oh, would be the
point in hiring a photonographer if anyonecan access photoshop? Drew pulling Oppenheimer here,
It is, It really is.It's almost the exact same subject as
Oppenheimer, which is like, wecan't develop atomic weapons because they're too dangerous.
But okay, if you believe that, then someone else won't and that
country will get ahead of you.It's very much true. Bank teller only

(22:22):
exists for old people that don't getthe new tech. I've never done banking
in person. I have when Ineeded to create joint bank accounts when I
got married, as well as whenwe got a mortgage for our house.
It was helpful to have a bankteller in those processes. But yeah,
for a lot of withdraws and depositingcash, yeah, you don't need a
bank teller anymore. But it's notsustainable. As my main point, we
can't prevent technology from making more efficientjobs or taking away jobs. That's just

(22:49):
always happened, and I don't thinkit's very long lasting if you try to
put regulations on it that say no, don't do that, because technology finds
its way around those barriers. Anyway. It's kind of the same thing with
like an Oregon they used to Idon't know if they still do this,
but in Oregon it was illegal fora long time to pump your own gas.

(23:11):
That was like mainly a job protectionthing, so you literally just had
to sit in the car and waitfor someone to pump the gas for you.
You couldn't pump the gas yourself.They were one of the last states
holding on to that law and thenthey just got rid of it a few
years ago. But again, ifa job does not bring actual inherent value,
which can change as technology improves andgets better, then yeah it will.

(23:36):
It will not sustain itself because thenit's just subsidized essentially. Do you
think AI features will be limited toApple Silicon Max at least not according to
Apple's one statement here in their ownnewsroom post on how the MacBook Air is
the best consumer laptop for AI.What's funny here is they talk about the
sixteen core neural engine. The Mone family of chips had sixteen coral neural

(23:57):
engines. This one's a three NANAone, which means that it's faster and
more efficient, but that does nottechnically mean that the neural engine is capable
of doing things that the other andone chips don't already have. And they
already said in the same post thatyou know, macs are good for AI

(24:18):
because of their powerful processing power.But they also mentioned iOS as well,
saying iOS has neural cores. Youknow, there's the same kind of neural
cores in our A series of chipsas well, so it's not like just
a MAC thing. I think ifanything, iOS would get more of the
focus because that's their most popular platform. People who are upset about replace being

(24:41):
replaced by an ar usually the samesorts. You never had a lot of
empathy for blue collar job losses,to be honest. Yeah, there's been
all kinds of job losses over theyears. But I think it's important to
acknowledge when you're in a creative industrythat you don't have much job protection because
demands change. There's lots of competitionin those spaces. So I mean in

(25:03):
the art work industry, and youcould argue that content creation is somewhat of
an art form or whatever. Selfemployment based on creating some kind of imagery,
whether it be digital or physical.You have to be adaptable with the
times, you know. I don'tthink it's personally. I don't think it's

(25:23):
the government's job to make sure thatall of our art directions are always protected.
Because demand changes, and if there'sa technology that can make it easier
for a business or another company tocome up with promotional material, think of
it. Inversely, there could bea business that wants to come up with

(25:45):
certain brands or logos or imagery orwhatever that would go out of business if
they had to hire humans, butcan stay in business if they can use
AI in generative features. Now it'sthe inverse problem. Now it's okay,
well, if we ban AI,that industry will go out of business,
but the other people will. It'sit's the ref playing the game too much.

(26:06):
Government should be the referee, nota player. It's also terrible for
the economy to have an excess ofpeople laid off without relevant skills, because
it's a consumption based economy, sopeople need work disposable income. It's a
balance, it is, but it'snot going to be inherently valuable if it
is replaceable, is my point,because if they don't get it from companies
here, they'll get it from somewhereelse. So it'd be better for the

(26:32):
companies we have domestically to actually investin it or actually get better at it.
But again, all of this tosay, I don't think that AI
is as job replacing as most peoplemake it out to be. AI has
posed some good challenges for me asa teacher. Essays and CHATCHBT go hand
in hand, so I've been tryingother ways of assessment where I can,

(26:52):
and it's been pretty fun. IfI'm if I'm honest. Yeah, I
have teacher friends as well that havesaid that students have tried to use it.
But that's the other interesting thing isthey've mentioned that you can use chat
GPT to detect when students are usingit. Also, I know teachers that
say it's abundantly obvious when a studentuses it because their vocabulary suddenly changes very
drastically. Dad says, I justdated CARLS Junior that Hamburger might have been

(27:18):
improved by an AI robot instead ofa droopy twenty dollars an hour worker.
Not so good, oh man.Well, the consistency involved with it too.
I'm just pointing out that historically we'venever been able to stop with much
success technology development because if there's notan inherent value brought from a human doing

(27:40):
the work, then it will alwaysget priced out. It will always be
more expensive than the AI option,which will find its way in. Another
classic example would be like a bulldozer. You know, a technology came up
with a way for one guy tooperate a bulldozer so he could dig a
big ditch or a big hole inthe ground that's needed, or you know,

(28:02):
move some dirt around for a foundation. Now one guy can do the
job that probably used to take fifteento twenty people. So do we ban
bulldozers to protect that labor? Idon't think so personally, because it's like,
Okay, well you can ban allbulldozers in your country, but another
country's still going to have them,and now they can develop, you know,

(28:23):
building or housing faster than you can. So the price of keeping infrastructure
more expensive is inhibiting a lot ofthe population versus just you know, this
is where tech is headed. We'regoing to have to adapt with it.
The thing with the art industry isthat people who work there generally love the
work they do. That's why they'reagainst AI. You can't really say the

(28:45):
same thing about monotonous tasks like screwinga bolt in the assembly line. I
don't personally. I mean, it'scool that they love what they do,
but I would argue it's irrelevant whetheror not they like what they do.
I would argue it's like, well, it's a job at the end of
the day. Either way. Technologyis capable of coming along and laying off

(29:07):
jobs, laying off workers. Shouldwe not develop electric cars because it would
drive the oil industry out of business, and then we'd lose jobs. I
don't know. I think it's veryeasy to be selective about it in my
opinion, And again, it's onenation we can be I mean, arguably

(29:30):
we're not even really in that muchcontrol of what our government does. Our
government moves very slowly, but overseaswe can't stop what they do. So
if another country doesn't, are wegoing to ban AI projects from other countries,
then people can use VPNs anyway,and that'll be cheaper than hiring people
domestically. So I think I haven'tseen AI or Sora do anything that makes

(29:52):
me feel particularly threatened. But thatcould be because my job is somewhat intricate.
It's not just one aspect. It'slike, it's not just editing videos
and posting them. It's about knowingwhat to say or how to put a
funny spin on something. That's kindof how you give it a humanistic character
to it. But who knows.Maybe my opinion would be very different if

(30:14):
I was just a professional artist thatdrew for a living and just was,
like, you know, painting thingsand coming up with logos and graphic design,
maybe I would feel more threatened byAI in my opinion would change.
Imagine the first construction job when theboss showed up with a circular saw.
Oh yeah, true. Should weban the circular saws to He's got rid
of a lot of time with movingthe saw back and forth. I found

(30:40):
most successful fast food consistency in McDonald's, and they were doing it way before
AI or I guess public school intelligenceright of passage. Yeah, but,
like was mentioned earlier, this isall still fairly new, and there are
a growing number of McDonald's locations thatare no longer requiring cashiers to like work
behind the counter. More and moreof them just have screens and you can

(31:03):
just go up and order that way. I mean, if you really are
worried about any kind of jobs beingreplaced, then we should probably ban all
smartphones. Think of how many jobsgot replaced by the smartphone. The longer
the laws take, the more freedomwe have, at least for the time
being. It's an artist's job touse the tool they have. We'll find
a way, right, So,maybe artists have to get more creative with

(31:25):
how they develop art and can nowuse AI to enhance the way they come
up with graphic design or give theirclients more options or logos. And maybe
you can serve more clients. Ifyou have access to generative AI for photos
or videos, you have to kindof stretch your business around. I mean

(31:45):
similarly, I guess i'd take issuewith like a lot of especially self employed
industries or independent contractors, assuming thatsomeone else is responsible to make sure they
have work. Like. I don'tknow, maybe people disagree with me on
that, but I am self employed. I am an independent contractor, and

(32:07):
I kind of run my business,my little self employment thing here. I
run this knowing that nothing is guaranteed. I run this with no promises.
You know. YouTube doesn't tell methat they will always give me an income.
That's my choice. There's some prosand some cons to that. The

(32:28):
pros are, I'm my own boss, I can set my own hours,
and I'm in control of my content, so I can say whatever I want,
I can do whatever I want,and for the most part, no
one's really gonna stop me. Imean, there's other social ramifications. If
you make content that's more cringey ormore controversial or more embarrassing, maybe less
people watch you and then you makeless money. But it's all up to
you, right. I understand thatat any given time, YouTube could change

(32:50):
their monetization program and say, actually, you know what, your channel's too
small, you can't be monetized anymore. And then I would be at a
loss of most of my income ifthey just change one policy. I accept
that. I don't think the governmentshould force YouTube to pay me, no
matter how poorly my channel does.I don't think YouTube should feel obligated or

(33:14):
pressured to be like, you haveto make sure that I have a paycheck
every month. It's your responsibility.No. YouTube came up with a public
platform with some policies and some guidelinesthat we all have to follow, but
for the most part, it's prettyfree will. We can kind of just
talk about whatever we want. Ican bash Google as a company, I
can complain about their hardware and theirsoftware, and I can say it sucks
and it's worse than Apple, andthey don't ban me. So I still

(33:37):
look at that as a fairly likeaccepting, fairly open platform. I know
there's certain things YouTube doesn't allow thatupsets people, but still in the grand
scheme of things, it's pretty it'spretty nice, it's pretty flexible. And
in my own personal life as anexample, like my YouTube career got kickstarted

(34:00):
because of tech videos. You know, I was not. I didn't one
day decide, you know what,I want to be a tech YouTuber.
No, I wanted to make moviesinitially, So I started uploading, not
with the expectation that I would becomea full time YouTuber, but with the
expectation that I could go to filmschool and become a Hollywood film director.
And you know, I wanted tomake theatrical movies that came out in the

(34:22):
theaters and stuff. So I juststarted making short, little movies with my
friends and post them on YouTube.And then nobody watched them, of course,
because I suck. I'm not agood actor, and I'm not a
great cinematographer either, which is fine, I've accepted that. But I put
all this work and all this timeand energy into developing little comedy sketches or
action movies, and that didn't goanywhere. So then I decided, Okay,

(34:46):
let me try making other videos andsee if people want to watch those.
So I tried doing gaming videos,and I tried making music, and
I tried reviewing movies because I watchedother YouTubers that did that and they had
more success. And I tried allthese things that I didn't really go anywhere
intel the tech channel. Once Istarted trying to do tech videos, I
found a demand. There was ademand for tech videos at that time,

(35:07):
and I could provide a supply.And at the time I started videos,
it's a very different you know,tech YouTuber space now, by the way,
But at least when I started,there was not a lot of tech
channels that were very openly biased orwere like very Apple focused. There's a
couple, I mean, there waslike Iustine and everything Apple pro, but

(35:28):
at that time that was about it. So I wanted to do a more
like daily uploading, maybe a bitmore comedy focused Apple channel that went a
little bit more on the offense aboutcomplaining about things they didn't like or why
Apple is better in some way,shape or form. And I found a
demand you know that that wasn't promisedto me when I started uploading videos.

(35:49):
I had to make that demand orI had to find a supply that there
was a demand for, essentially,and it took me many, many years,
hours and hours of putting in workto find a demand and that I
could supply. So once I gotthere, it grew pretty fast because there
was some of the most interesting,fascinating tech news going around, particularly around
smartphones. A lot of you guys, yeah, are saying, like I

(36:14):
remember back when you were in theAttic days. I've been watching you since
the Attic. Yeah. A lotof people discovered my channel because of all
of the rumors and leaks leading upto the launch of the iPhone ten,
where we called it the iPhone eightback then, right, and there was
so many exciting changes within a singleiPhone generation. Of course, there was
a lot of hype. Of course, there was a lot of internet traffic

(36:36):
based around what Apple was doing thatyear. Oh, they're going to switch
to o LED and they're gonna switchto face ID, they're getting rid of
the home button, they're gonna switchto steel, they're gonna have wireless charging,
all of these upgrades all at once. That generated a lot of traffic,
a lot of hype for the channel. So that's why I was able
to grow it a lot, andI found a big audience during that time.
And I think it's very clear nowit's not the same thing anymore.

(37:00):
Apples not doing those kinds of drasticmovements anymore, where there's so many upgrades
all at once, and now we'relike, oh, iPhone sixteen might have
a new button. I guess so, like, is it Apple's responsibility to
make sure that I have a job. Is it Apple's job to make their
business interesting? Should they be forcedto release a folding phone so I can

(37:21):
have more videos to make to keepme employed. I don't think so,
But I think it's a very similarargument you could make in favor. That's
that's the point of the example ishopefully most of you would agree, No,
that's ridiculous. Of course, Appleand YouTube is not responsible to keep
me employed. But in the sameway, as much as I appreciate artists

(37:43):
and I'm happy for anyone that's beenable to make a career or a job
out of artwork or drawing or graphicdesign and that kind of thing, it's
not on, in my opinion,the government or any particular brand to keep
you employed. It's up to you. You have to be dynamic about it,
you have to be clever, andin the same way I will confess,
I will attest. Over the years, as Apple has become less and

(38:06):
less interesting, there has been anoticeable to decline and the amount of content
as far as Apple coverage goes,that people are willing to watch because there's
not as much to talk about.Everything is a slight iteration on what it
was before. Oh the chip gotslightly faster, Oh the display got slightly
brighter. There's been a noticeable declinein watch time. So if I were

(38:29):
to just sit there and keep makingtech videos and expect more viewers to come,
why aren't they coming? Why aren'tmore people watching? I used to
make this much, now making thismuch? What happened? This is Apple's
fault? Is it YouTube's fault?No, it's just the industry change,
the technology change. That's something technologyalmost always does is adapt with the times.
So I could just sit still andkeep doing the same thing over and

(38:52):
over again, expecting different results.Okay, I'm going to keep making iPhone
leak videos. I'm going to keepmaking Apple coverage videos and expect for my
revenue to stay the same or enoughfor me to stay afloat, which,
of course is unreasonable because the techchanges and it gets less interesting over time,
and there's less people watching it,less people that care about it.
So what did I do? Istarted expanding more into a different field that

(39:15):
was, in my opinion, gettingmore interesting in the YouTube space. You're
kind of like in the hype business. You're following the hype and wherever you
think there's the most interesting technology development, that's, in my opinion, where
you should go. And over time, over the past couple of years,
I've spent more and more energy andmoney on electric vehicles because I found those

(39:35):
more innovative. Those were more interestingthan smartphones and laptops, which we're all
starting to blur together and all kindof sound the same. So I changed
with the times as the technology changed. I shifted my strategy to where now
most of my self employment is fromEV. The EV is my main focus
now, like that's my primary focusbecause that's where there's more demand, more

(39:57):
and more people watching EV content asthey learn about electric vehicles. The growth
in that is visible. I'm seeingit, not with the smartphone and laptop
coverage. So I shifted my focuswith the times, which is just a
more personal example of how I thinkartists and creators out there can adapt.

(40:17):
And it's not always it's not alwayseasy, but I think that in those
fields you kind of have to beadaptable, unless you're in an industry where
they're promising you a pension or acertain amount of years of employment, then
you might have a better argument tobe made as to why the government should

(40:39):
protect your job or whatever. Butwhen it's just the technology is coming for
my job, yeah, that Ihave a harder time wrapping my head around
because it never lasts. Let's see, I'm half and half. I could
go either way with AI. I'man artist as well, and I like
the abilities and technology that goes intoit and the ability to use them as

(40:59):
references. But see how it canbe a little nerve racking towards other artists
and how it could take away jobs. But I don't know. I'm impartial
to it all. Yeah, Ithink you can be against it or you
could be for it. But mypoint is there's no stopping it. It's
Pandora's box. It's opened. Youcould push Congress or push the government to
regulate it, but they're probably notgoing to very effectively, and even if

(41:22):
they did pass a lot, youcan't stop what other countries are enabling or
unlock. If you create a demandfor something, and if there's a demand
for a service, because which we'reacknowledging here, because it's capable of replacing
a human in some way, there'sgoing to be demand for that service,
whether it's domestic or international. Right, So, Marngell says, I guess

(41:45):
the question I have for open ayis what do they expect generative AI to
be useful for? Like, whoare they trying to appeal to besides investors?
Oh, everybody? Right, Like, there's people that use GPT to
compile notes or summarize articles, thatcan kind of thing or look at something
and explain, you know, howdo I cook something. It's it's basically
the next evolution of a search engine. It's like a fancier search engine that

(42:08):
understands context better. The same usecase of a Google assistant or you know,
the Apple one, the Apple Voiceassistant, or the Amazon Voice assistant
or the Microsoft Voice assistant, allthat stuff. It's mainly just to help
people search the web. You know, should we stop Google from offering search

(42:30):
options because it puts travel agents outof work? There's another industry. There's
probably a lot less travel agents thanthere used to be, because now I
can look up flights and I canbuy them all myself. Back in the
day before the Internet, before searchengines, how did you buy tickets?
A lot of people went through travelagents. Or they had to call the
airline directly and get all these prices, so travel agent got a cut.

(42:53):
Now probably a lot less of them. I don't know if I still know.
There's a few travel agents left,but probably not as many as there
used to be. Let's see,I guess the quest. Sorry, I
just read that. I think EVEas tech though. You can merge both
stuff, just like how Apple willnever merge mac os and ipedos. You

(43:14):
can merge stuff, just like howApple will never merge stuff. I don't
understand high Svisualizer. By the way, thank you for twenty seven months of
support. I'm doing well. Thanksfor asking unnecessary industries should be dealt with
accordingly. Yeah, I'm unless ifwe had some giant world government that all
agreed on things, then you'd havea point on, you know, stopping

(43:35):
the progression of certain technologies. Butwe don't. So if you don't development,
someone else will open. AI's goalis artificial general intelligence. They're jumping
making different AIS that do different thingsthan merge them into the ANI that does
everything a human can do. Idon't know if that's their official mission statement,
but I don't think it'll ever getthere personally. But and what I

(43:58):
find very interesting is when I talkto my software engineer friends that don't believe
it's gonna be that different. Ithink AI just like all kinds of previous
generation technologies. It's a tool.It helps with efficiency, it can make
you more productive. I don't thinkit's a fad. I hope people never

(44:20):
understood my impression of it that way. I don't think it's like just the
latest trend and it'll die off.No, it'll be around, but I
don't believe it'll replace as much asI mean, a lot of people thought
iPads were going to replace paper.You know, everyone thought, oh,
with tablets and touch screens, wherethe paper business is going to go under
and we're never gonna need paper anymore. And sure, I don't know.

(44:44):
Maybe paper consumption has gone down,but it's definitely not gone. There's still
a lot of putt. There's stilla lot of paper. Let's see.
Dictating all of this inside a visionpros in my bad for the typos fragments.
You went for it, and that'sthe penalty. That's only educational system

(45:05):
accomplishment. I have certified audio andvideo production and it's hard as hack tedious.
Shout out to everyone who pursues it. Yeah, it is. That's
kind of how the free market works. The hard working and the people with
great ideas get further ahead, andthe people who aren't as creative or don't
work as hard or as smart don'tmove forward as much. Let's see,

(45:30):
would Apple's generative AI efforts be brandedas another product or assistant or could they
use this as a moment to rebrandor potentially replase replace Apple's voice assistant entirely.
Yeah, that's a good question.I would guess that generative AI would
take a slightly different form. IfApple comes up with AI features just like

(45:51):
Microsoft and Adobe has, then Ithink it would be more than just a
voice assistant or just a chatbot.I think it'd be a little bit more
than that. It might be asep app, or it might be a
tool as a little option in thecorner. Do you want AI to finish
this keynote presentation? Do you wantAI to develop a spreadsheet based on your
previous spreadsheets, or do you wantAI to improve your video editing based on

(46:15):
how these videos were editing? OrI kind of think I think there'd be
a little bit more to it thanjust a chatbot. But yes, I
could envision a maybe giving Apple's voiceassistant, I giving it a dedicated app
where you can show photos to itor open the camera and say, hey,
what is this or how do Imake a meal with these ingredients or

(46:37):
what have you? But more paperfor more important paper use. There you
go. Yeah, back in theday overheating pixels. Let's see when the
bus shows up with the circular saws, different than if just Joe Shmosh showed
up with a circular saw if youcould afford one, imagine the hazing minaker.

(47:00):
Yeah, someone had to be first, though, Huh. I'm always
going to be in favor for thefuture. I hope this age as well.
Progress has a price, and Ihope no. And I know or
like has to pay too steep ofone because I like you. Let's see,
we've been using AI for a reallylong time in the creative industry.
It's just now a topic because itis branded. Yeah, there's probably a

(47:22):
lot of truth to that. WillWe use a lot of neural net training
and all kinds of things. Andagain it's a tool. Some tools can
replace whole jobs. But that's,like I said, not a new thing.
Let's see mentioned the crowd's reaction ifthey just called the AI god Wow,

(47:45):
that would be fun. A goodstory is an unemployed software developer that
gave me hope. Thank you,I hope I can give people hope that
like hope and also a dose ofrealism on just nothing in life is really

(48:06):
guaranteed. You know, there's whetheryou're a software engineer, an audio engineer,
or a content creator or an artistor whatever you are, there's there's
no guarantees with any of these jobs, regardless of if you look at AI
or the job market or whatever thatyou know, demand can change, and

(48:28):
especially if the economy goes through adownturn, you've got to be prepared for,
you know, people to hold onto more cash and be less willing
to spend it, and that couldresult in you having less income. That
just happens. Dad says screen timein the fifties through the nineties was a
whole new thing with a whole neweffect. With smartphones, new tech,
AI might be as different from phonesas TV passed. Yeah, I think

(48:52):
that's a great example of how justhow new and how fast a lot of
technology iterates. But like like alltechnology, we can say created a bunch
of new jobs. I wouldn't havethis job if it weren't for technology,
you know, I don't. Idon't know if anyone out there is just
saying, Okay, well let's justprohibit technology from improving. Let's just go
back to the Amish days. Ithink the Amish are onto something though.

(49:15):
Every day I think I think there'sa there's a simplistic way of life,
that there's something good about that forour souls or something. But that's a
deeper subject. But my point iswe wouldn't be talking right now if it
weren't for technology advancing. And ifwe tried to prevent that, then who
knows what kind of tech or developmentsor medical technology that could potentially save lives

(49:38):
never get stumbled upon. Nothing beingguaranteed is the guarantee. Yeah, that's
right. I can't really figure outhow Apple will implement generative AI. They
usually do stuff differently, but Ifeel like other companies have products for a
lot of use cases. Yeah,yeah, I Apple tends to find way

(50:00):
to make a lot of state ofthe art tech more accessible and more simple
to use for the masses, whichI think might be just exactly what the
AI industry needs. Is of likewe're going to break it down, here's
how the feature works, and thenonce Apple shows us how to do it,
then everybody else goes, oh yeah, thank you, like that's how
we should be doing this. Maybeit'll be a lot more simple to use

(50:22):
than all of these other AI services. I don't know, but I tend
to think it's a bit over exaggerated. Sure, there are likely some aspects
of AI capability that could replace jobs, but they were likely jobs that didn't
have much security anyway. Like Idon't know. I know of some people
that were pursuing jobs with graphic designor you know, being licensed out to

(50:46):
make paintings and murals and stuff likethat. But the end of the day,
a lot of people who want bigpaintings done or you know, can
an AI. If the AI floodsthe market with that, then it becomes
less valuable, I suppose. Butthat job didn't have a ton of security

(51:07):
anyway, because paintings or murals arethat kinds of things usually looked at as
a luxury, not a need,which means that it's easily affected by recession
and you know, economic downturn whenpeople aren't willing to spend as much money
now you have less income. Thatkind of thing. Let's see, technology

(51:28):
advances advancing forces me to buy acar and get into accidents, and I
hate driving, but I have nochoice. What forces you to buy a
car and get into accidents. I'mtrying to understand how that works. If
it feel like every time technology triesto make lives easier, it always does
the opposite, I don't I wantto question what's forcing you to buy new
tech. Flip phones are really cheap. Now. You could just have a

(51:51):
flip phone and use it for callingand not have any social media. Nothing
stopping you from buying a really cheapcab in the woods and growing your own
food. You can go backwards ifyou want. Dude, no one's making
you buy all this stuff. Andusually cars are getting safer with more advanced
active safety systems and passive safety systems. We have some of the best air

(52:15):
bag technology that's ever existed, carsthat will break automatically as they get closer
to an object. To that kindof thing, We got more cameras on
our cars, so your visibility improvesthat kind of thing. Who's forcing you
to buy this stuff. There's alsoa lot of cities that have public transport

(52:37):
where you can buy and stuff.Maybe AI will take over some jobs,
but skills will always be rewarded bythe market. Yeah, I do agree
with that, is shiki, ButAI is not new in that regard.
Technology as a whole has always replacedlots of jobs. It's because most US
cities are very car centric. Justlook at not just bikes. Yeah,

(52:57):
I know, I know that alot of cities aren't, but my point
is they they are more likely toget you in accidents. Flip phones are
for the almage. Yeah, Ithink the bigger problem is you're blaming a
city controlled thing on a human demandthing. Humans want cars. Even when

(53:20):
amazing public transportation is available, peoplestill buy cars. That's been proven all
over the world. You can findsome areas where car ownership is lower because
of great public transportation, but it'snot zero. There's still going to be
a demand for it. But youknow, some people make it work in
different cities, but they tend tobe more expensive. So pick your poison.

(53:43):
You can live in a cheaper placewhere you have to drive around,
or you can leave live in anexpensive place where you can walk everywhere.
Which do you prefer? But yeah, I know about the not just bikes
channel. I know there's it comesdown to a lot of the foundation of
the kind being built around freedom,so there's not as much planning that goes
on because people buy land and useit the way they want. But anyway,

(54:07):
the marketing genius Apple is the besttechy as a tech influencer, and
sometimes it seems like them and usare the only ones that get it not
cheesy to say, as they doget company slash industry on board. I
think the sooner you learn to adaptwith the times, the more confident you'll

(54:29):
be in your future. Like Ijust wouldn't get too complacent with any job.
Really, I assume it's always goingto be there. Silicon Valley expensive
place, drive everywhere because you haveto value your time. I know a
lot of bus systems that work theretoo, But anyway, that's a whole
separate. The public transportation is anendless I mean, I agree with you

(54:53):
for the record, I'm all infavor of more public transportation, but it's
just the way the government is runand I wouldn't It's kind of a hopeless
field to pursue in my opinion,because it mainly just involves shaking your fist
out of government and it doesn't reallyget anywhere. You just gonna elect the
right people into Oh yeah, right, because politicians they solve problems. Right.

(55:17):
Anyway, It's a very depressing subject, I know, but that's what
people wanted to talk about, andI don't know, I didn't feel I
feel like it was too big ofa subject to do just one little video
on. So it was kind ofperfect for a livestream. But we can
talk about other things for the record. But Brian Miller just asked, I

(55:37):
just upgraded to sixteen inch M threePro MacBook Pro and absolutely loving it.
Wow, think of all your neuralcores, dude. There was one other
question about Max but sorry, mydad just asked a question, and I
like when he's in the stream,he says, I've looked into property out
in the woods. Building a cabinand living off grade is a lifestyle choice.
But it would not be cheap.Yeah, it probably wouldn't cheap,

(56:00):
but I mean, hey, youwouldn't have to be forced to buy all
this. You wouldn't have a cellphone bill, you wouldn't have to pay
for internet, you wouldn't have topay for all these crazy expensive things.
Roll Seven's I think is his name. Thank you for the question, he
says, what's the next major upgradefor the Mac product line? New high
end monitor soon? I would guessthe Mac Minnie. I'm surprised that Mac

(56:22):
Minni hasn't been touched in so long. It's probably ready for an M three
chip. Honestly, we could getthat tomorrow. For the record, we're
in Apple site refresh season, whichmeans at any time they can usually in
the mornings earlier in the week.I'm kind of surprised they didn't do anything
today. I thought they would dropsomething today, but I guess they dropped

(56:43):
new iOS stuff. But it's likeMacBook Air. We got that, and
we know that there's iPad airs inthe works that'll have the M two chip,
and they'll have a new twelve pointnine in size, and then we
have an old iPad pros as well. They could update the monitors, but

(57:04):
I don't know. They don't refreshthose very frequently, so I wouldn't get
my hopes up on the monitors.I know people are like, come on,
put promotion on those things, butthe problem is with the thunderbolt through
put, it becomes a bigger headacheif you're trying to pump six k at
one hundred and twenty hertz through alittle thunderbolt four port. But it's fear

(57:24):
of the unknown, right, It'stime knocking it before you try and get
refused. Our brains went ease,familiar, comfortable. Yeah, and we
just we never get it. Macminieprobably comes with new USBC peripherals. That
would be a huge one. Please, can we just I would celebrate any
form of killing the lightning port?Can we get rid of the lightning port?

(57:45):
On more things? To me,it's still like criminal that they refreshed
the iMac and didn't ship it withnew types magic accessories, like come on,
we are at a time where likeninety nine percent of people who are
perfectly fine using laptops, smartphones,and smart watches from three to five years

(58:05):
ago. Yeah. Yeah, Andit definitely dwindles the demand for tech content,
that's for sure, which is whyI've transitioned more to EV content.
In case you weren't aware, myEV channel makes more than the tech channel
by a pretty wide margin. Now, so's that's where my focus has gone.
See how I adapted. I didn'tjust keep making iPhone videos expecting that
to always be the same. That'sjust my example. I know it's probably

(58:30):
harder for different industries. But doyou think Apple's goal is to have three
products in total? Vision Pro thatis as strong as a Mac and gains
more capabilities. The iPhone becomes betterthan DSLR cameras and AirPods for the audio.
I don't know, I could still. I don't think point and click
has gone anywhere. Using computers withkeyboards and mice. You know, we've

(58:52):
changed the way that looks now moreand more people use laptops than desktops,
but we still are using keyboard mice, and Apple is still advertising how hey,
with the new Macmacare, you canplug in external monitors and the external
keyboard and mouse. So there's stilldesktop like setups. That hasn't really gone

(59:13):
away. But maybe it'll change.Maybe it'll get to the point where you
wear a vision Pro but you haveto carry around a keyboard and trackpads,
so there's there's a bit more peripheralsto it. I don't know. I
don't think that's their goal. Idon't think there's someone internally at Apple going
how do we end up with threeproducts? I mean, ultimately they want
to make good products that enrich people'slives, and of course they need to

(59:35):
make a profit along the way.So that's really Apple's goal, you know,
make money, deliver cool products.Some people act like a business is
evil for wanting to make money.No, that's just how a business works.
You can't do anything without money,you know. For a business,
a profit in cash is how theybreathe. So saying a company only cares
about money is kind of like mesaying you only care about oxygen because all

(01:00:00):
the day, every day, allyou're thinking about is breathing. And it's
like, well, yeah, Imean I do care about oxygen and breathing,
but there's other things I care aboutmy loved ones, or I care
about my hobbies or my interests,and you know, you can care about
people and still be like, yeah, but I would like to breathe.
Breathing is important. Type CE magSafe battery, PLAQ Yeah. Really so

(01:00:22):
far, no peripherals. I'm onehundred percent vision pro only. You got
to keep going to vision practice.How do you expect otherwise to become a
vision pro? Oh? Wow,Mark, that was good, Nathan says,
I'm still rocking a fourteen inch Mone pro and I from thirteen pro
and have no need to upgrade anytimesee soon. Those are awesome machines.

(01:00:42):
Yeah, I feel similarly about myhardware. There's still, for the most
part, running great other than thestupid iOS bug I ran into yesterday where
once again the camera stops recording forno reason. But I've reported it to
Apple. I think I've got itescalated within the company. I don't know
if I'm supposed to be sharing thatanyway. I included the log files for

(01:01:05):
the bug and submitted it to thesoftware team, so I'm hoping that someone
at Apple takes a look at it. But yeah, I don't really see
a world where AirPods get replaced byanything. Pretty sure AirPods are here to
stick around. I feel pretty confidentabout the iPhone as well. I think
that the iPhone already has become verymuch a camera more so than a phone

(01:01:29):
case in point how I'm using myphone right now as a camera, and
I feel like everything else, though, is up for grabs. With this
whole spatial computing concept, I couldsee tablets kind of going away, maybe
even smart watches. If you're wearingsomething comfortable enough on your face, you

(01:01:51):
could just do this, and itplaced all of the widgets and stuff on
your watch. But I don't know, it's kind of hard to kill Apple
products. You know, what wasthe last time app just stopped making something?
The iPod I was around for quitesome time, and it took a
while. Even though everyone was like, why are they still making iPods,
they kept going for quite a ways, and iPhones had to get pretty affordable

(01:02:14):
before they felt comfortable killing it off. A mouse still has its place over
trackpads, especially with drag and drop. A little difficult to click and hold
on something like folders and open windowsand dragging them far across the screen.
Yeah, yeah, that's true.Same with like I mean, the Vision
Pro is cool and all with theeye tracking and the hand tracking, but

(01:02:35):
I personally don't think that this wholething where I'm controlling the computer with my
eyes and pinching, I don't thinkthat will ever replace completely the concept of
a touch screen and a keyboard andmouse. Those are just too practical,
too efficient to ever completely go away. Maybe the eye tracking and hand tracking

(01:02:59):
gets better. I'm not saying it'lldie off, but I just don't see
it replacing that much. I havea theory what if we are getting an
event, but near the end ofthe month, the same thing happened back
in October. Ruversaid no event,but at the end of the month then
there was. I don't know.I think usually last second, Mark German's
pretty accurate, and he's saying thatthey're not planning an event, so I

(01:03:22):
tend to believe him. They alsosaid that there's a site refresh coming,
and then there was a site refreshcoming. So if it's anything like Apple's
done in the past, I thinkit's more likely that this week we got
the air. Maybe next week we'llget iPad air and iPad pro and maybe
that'll be it. I don't know. Let's see, And what if M

(01:03:46):
three mac mcare launching yesterday was mostlyjust to drive attention away from the EU
ruling statement. It's possible, butyou got to keep your tinfoil head on
because now we're making wild guesses.Nothing's impossible. You could be right.
I don't mean to I don't meanto completely discredit you, but I think
what the far more likely situation isis Apple didn't feel like recording an event

(01:04:08):
because a lot of these announcements arenot that exciting. It's just like new
chip, new iPad with new chip, and then maybe the old iPad pro
might be somewhat different, but Idon't know the dimensions leaked for it,
and it didn't sound that different.I'm pretty sure it might look kind of
exactly the same as our existing iPadpros, just with an O lead display

(01:04:30):
and it's a little bit thinner.I think the interface for vision pro is
great for those people who are handicap. I don't know. It depends on
the person. I guess I knowa lot of people with eye issues that
said vision pro is basically unusable becauseit couldn't track their eyes properly. But
yeah, it depends on the person, depends on the disability. Would I

(01:04:53):
ever review the same Sung fold?I reviewed one before, and my opinions
on it haven't changed that much.How about the next one that comes out,
I don't know. It's I don'tthink they've changed that much. I
tried the what do you call that? The hot dog folding style. I
didn't find it particularly interesting. Iwasn't worried about the durability, but I

(01:05:16):
just didn't think that the screen unlockedthat much more usable space. And I
found and I've heard this from otherpeople as well. I found that for
most foldables, people don't unfold them. They tend to just use them folded
up. I saw a guy theother day with a Z fold, and
he left it unfolded in his shirtpocket, and then he moved it unfolded

(01:05:36):
into his pocket. It's like peopledon't like extra steps, which is why
I don't think foldables have caught onthe way people thought they would have.
You know, a lot of peopleacted like, oh, well, once
they get cheaper, once they getbetter features, foldables will become the mainstream,
and they really haven't. There's neverbeen a folding phone that's come close
to the top ten best selling phonesin the world. What's in regards to

(01:06:00):
the Android space, what sells thebest are the mid range androids. The
flagship Android phones do not sell allthat great, which is funny because in
the tech community we give them somuch attention. We act like they're the
next big thing because it competes withthe iPhone. But the iPhone sales are
way up here. Galaxy s salesand Pixel sales are way down here.
The best selling Galaxy phones are theA series, you know, the phones

(01:06:25):
that cost like four hundred five hundredbucks and folding phones even if they got
down to there, I don't thinkwould be as popular, just because it's
it's not that there's something wrong withfoldables, it's just the feature of folding
in itself is not that it's notthat great. I don't think it unlocks
that much more practicality. It doesn'twow people as much as the tech community

(01:06:46):
thought it would. Some people thought, ooh, this's gonna make a big
difference. Wow, oh my god, we can unfold them. But no,
people got over it like that.It's like, oh, okay,
it folds. That's not a feature, it's just a factoid. You should
review the Quest three. I'm thinkingabout it, honestly. My video I
compared the Quest three to the AppleVision pro and I was very impressed with

(01:07:11):
the hardware. And again, theQuest three is a much lower price.
So if I I don't know ifI'm willing to go out and buy one,
but if I were, I might, I might consider a Quest three
before I consider an Apple Vision proVision pro is like air travel compared to
the road iPhone. Yeah, Ithink I think I agree. I think

(01:07:32):
I know what you're saying. Foldable'swill only become mainstream if Apple releases one.
Whatever Apple does, everybody else doeswell pretty much everyone else has done
it. It's just Apple that hasn'tdone it right. But I do agree
that if Apple made a folda bull, Yes, I do think it would
be the best one because Apple getssoftware better than everyone and more important than
just the software experience. iOS isgrowing in market share anyway without folding phones.

(01:07:56):
But the point is, if welook at phones that sell well over
eight hundred dollars, Apple is likeeighty percent of the market. Apple has
a monopoly basically on the premium smartphonespace. And that's just another way of
saying when people spend a lot ofmoney on a phone, they want it
to be an iPhone. Most ofthe public I know in the tech space,

(01:08:17):
we have our little bubbles where wefeel like everybody's buying Android phones left
and right, But we are notlike the masses. At least the global
statistics are suggesting that if someone spendsthat kind of money on a phone,
they want it to be an iPhone. So if there was to be a
popular foldable, it would likely bean iPhone, simply because Apple could charge

(01:08:40):
two thousand dollars for it, andeverybody would do it. Everybody would just
be like, yep, done,two grand I can afford that. You
know, That's just what people areused to with Apple. They have that
much brand power, They have thereputation for being premium, and people like
their iPhones. So I wish thequest wasn't under Facebook too. Honestly,
I would be a lot more interestedin the company if they weren't on my

(01:09:02):
Facebook. Dad says, I'm waitingfor that thumb and pinky phone that would
sell big time, just like this, like Inspector Gadget, give me a
new Apple TV in home poond minismore Apple TV features. Yeah, I
should probably talk about that. MyApple TV's been sucking lately, but I'm
not exactly sure whose fault it is. I don't know if it's the app

(01:09:23):
developer's fault. We're trying to watcha movie on Max and it keeps like
crashing or freezing up or something wherelike the movie's playing right, but it's
not showing the subtitles like we wantit to. We always want subtitles on
and it turns them off. AndI'm trying to use the serie remote,
which is fully charged and working,but it's not listening. Like I can't

(01:09:45):
bring up the track pad. Ican't bring up anything, but I can
click the volume and the volume adjusts. The volume's controlling the TV and the
volume goes up and down, sothat the volume part's working, but the
track pad part isn't in the appbecomes unresponsive even though it's still playing in
the movie. And that's happened severaltimes now, and I'm getting really annoyed
whenever, like part of the remoteworks and the other part of the remote

(01:10:09):
doesn't work. Bart Jansen, thankyou for the membership for twenty eight months.
I should be sleeping right now,but whatever. Yeah, you should.
Sleep is good for you. Don'tmess around with sleep schedules. They
can create lots of health problems ifyou have a bad sleep schedule. I
know it's fun and the relevant thingfor all the young'ins to brag about it.

(01:10:29):
Oh man, I started up allthat my sleep schedule sucks. Seriously,
don't don't go around bragging like thatlike it's cool. I know people
that do that. You don't evenSubCom you don't even consciously know that you're
doing it. I know because Iused to do this. I had a
horrible sleep schedule. It's not goodfor you. The maxapp is trash.
Absolutely do I upgrade to M twoor M three Macbocare from macbookro Intel twenty

(01:10:51):
twenty in my opinion, personal opinion, feel free to disagree. No one
should buy the M three Macboocare.It is so absurdly close in design,
in features, in performance to theM two Macbookare, which is objectively cheaper
and has been out for a while, so you can find it on sale
through third parties. Honestly, Iwould still recommend the M one Macbookare to

(01:11:15):
a lot of people, and oneMacboocare is still great. I know a
lot of people that just need alaptop for some basic things. M one
chip is still perfectly fast, greatbattery life. Honestly, the speakers I
found on the M one Macbookare wasbetter than the M two and the M
three. So I don't know exactlywhy you need an M two or M
three Macbookare, but you can findthe M one Macbookare for like seven hundred

(01:11:39):
bucks. In a lot of places, tech community hypes too much. Maybe
I'm in the minority. I don'tcare for old you mean, oh you
probably meant oh led or one hundredtwenty hertz. Yeah, I agree,
there's less things to care about becausethe more this you know smartphone and laptop
technology, the more it improves,the smaller the difference has become. It's
the law of diminishing returns, whichis why it's no wonder less people watching

(01:12:00):
tech than they're used to. Butthat's why I'll be over on EV a
lot. Let's see, I thinkeveryone's take on Apple Vision pro versus Quest
three is wrong. Apple Vision Prois way way better, and it's not
even close. In terms of usabilityand smoothness. Quest three is extremely clinkly,
reminds me of early Iowa Arvin.Guy. Let me just ask you,
have you used both for more thanfive minutes? Have you used both

(01:12:26):
a Quest three and an Apple VisionPro for more than five minutes? That's
my one question, because I have, and in my opinion, there's a
lot of things the Quest three getsobjectively better than the Apple Vision Pro.
The field of view, the simplicityof putting it on. You don't have
to walk through the stupid eye trackingthing. Controllers give you a lot more

(01:12:49):
feedback for immersive experiences, and farmore affordable to be fair, and I
was just I was super impressed withit. Okay, you do own both,
interesting because I've tried both extensively andI do not agree with you,

(01:13:10):
but you do, you man,Maybe maybe because you own both, that's
how you justify it. Maybe yourbrain's like, I spent all this money
on Apple Vision pro, it hasto be better, right, Whereas I'm
kind of like, yeah, Idon't know. The difference between the two
is pretty dang close. Also,the Quest three doesn't require the cable going
to a battery pack. You canjust wear it. Honestly felt a lot

(01:13:30):
more futuristic to me to wear theQuest. Let's see what about longevity.
M two era is two years behinda M three air Would M two stop
updating two years earlier to M three? I don't think if you're thinking about
getting an M series of chip,you're probably not going to keep the Mac
that long anyway, if you're stillrocking an Intel, I think I think

(01:13:53):
they'll both last a very very longtime and the types of features we're talking
about by then, where like,Okay, one Mac gets eight years of
support, in another Mac it's sixyears of support, you're not going to
be getting most of the new featuresanyway, you know, think about the
software feature differences between the iPhone tenS and the iPhone eleven. Can you
guys name things? If we comparethe iPhone eleven to the tens in terms

(01:14:17):
of software features, what is theeleven getting that the tens is not?
Would you okay, and then askyourself this, when those six years go
by, would you pay an extratwo hundred dollars to unlock those features?
Let's say it's a difference of It'snot this, But let's say it's the
difference of live text or subject lift. Little handy iOS features like that,

(01:14:42):
oh, I can pull up apicture and pull the text right off the
photo, or I can pull upwhatever I lift a subject out of any
picture. Would you pay two hundreddollars to unlock those features? Probably not.
Most people expect software updates for free. So if you wouldn't I pay
two hundred dollars for it, thenwhy would you pay a two hundred dollars
premium to have an M two overan M one. Let's see, in

(01:15:10):
a lot of ways, it doesget these things better, similar to how
Android has more features than iOS andalways has. But do you not feel
that the Quest three is extremely clunky. I have a lot of issues with
glitching hands and moving stuff around invarious Yeah, the past there is not
as good, but I would arguethat most of the time I used Apple
Vision Pro, I didn't want touse it was path with pass through because
pass through got worse in low lightenvironments. And in a lot of ways,

(01:15:32):
I would say Apple Vision Pro ismore clunky because it's heavier. It
requires a cable going down to abig battery. So now I've got a
battery to worry about and this big, heavy headset to worry about. So
in many ways I would argue theVision Pro is more clunky. The software
is more smooth and seamless on AppleVision Pro, but it felt more natural
and much much easier to use theQuest three. I just picked it up

(01:15:55):
and put it on. That wasit. There was no battery to keep
track of and cable routing through myhair and all that. Very easy to
share too. You could just handthe Quest three to someone else and they
put it on and now they're usingit. Where's Apple Vision Pro. It's
like, okay, hold down thedigital ground. Now look here, now
look here, now look here,now look here, and then you have
to do that eighteen times every timesomeone else puts it on. It's a

(01:16:18):
huge pain in the butt. Ifound that very clunky compared to the Quest
where my friend who had the Questthree, he could just hand it to
me, go here, we go, try it. I had played what
had Mike uses the example Mike mentioned. I had played an entire round of
Beat Saber, probably more than one. I had played two full rounds of
Beat Saber by the time Mike hadgotten through the eye calibration process of Apple

(01:16:43):
Vision Pro. And because he's notthe authorized user, every time he takes
it off and puts it back on, he has to go through all that
set up all over again. Tome, that's clunky. I think that's
a bit clunky. See moving init. I'm an x R programmer and

(01:17:04):
when I use Apple Vision Pro andfeel inspired by the future of tech.
But on the Quest three, I'mlike, yeah, this is too clunky
for mainstream. Yeah, but VisionPro is way too expensive for mainstream too,
So they you pick your poison.I think I think they're both good.
Honestly, they're both very impressive piecesof hardware. It's just amazing to
me that a quest three is theseventh of the price and it is not

(01:17:29):
a seventh of the capability at all. M three macmcpro will support dual screen
as well. Yeah, I sawthat. I pinned it on the video
comment. I don't know why they'reso picky about external monitors. There's older
computers that have so many external monitorsupport. But whatever, good night,
Bart Jensen, Hookey sleep well.Just because iPhone people are in a red

(01:17:51):
Samsung Z series, Google folds mainstream. Uh, okay, believe what you
want to believe, but that's notwhat the data says. Do I think
mac os will have an AI chatlike Windows eleven. Have you seen the
new surface programmers? Would you reviewone? I am not a particularly big
fan of Windows. I've used Windowsin the past and I never really liked

(01:18:13):
it, So if it brought alot of attention to my channel, I
would probably do it. But everytime I try to, it doesn't perform
all that great. So I justdon't think people look at me for the
Windows or views because they know it'sgoing to be this whole Apple sheet perspective
and people don't want that, Iguess, so I'm fine with that.
I don't need to test it out. If I got a lot of people

(01:18:33):
asking me to check it out,then maybe I would. But you're like
the first person to ask me that. In probably a year. M three
does come in a new coating.I'll save you the trouble. Don't get
that color. Just get the silver. It ages the best. You're not
gonna think about the color when you'reusing your laptop. Midnight is fingerprinting on

(01:18:54):
the M three and on the Mtwo. It's less finger printing on the
M three, but it's still fingerprinting. Better off just a lighter shade,
much better off. Just get anormal color. You wouldn't spend two hundred
dollars to have a slightly less fingerprintinglaptop. Would you? Would you pay
someone two hundred dollars to wipe thefingerprints off your laptop? No? I
don't think so AR and VR bothwon't really ever be mainstream due to price,

(01:19:17):
but also because it's inherently not ashared experience. It can get that
come on, think a little broaderthan that, Brian. You can have
two people wearing the headset and lookingat the same thing together. We're just
not there yet. It takes time. You could say the same thing about
the iPhone when it originally came out. It won't be it's too expensive to
go mainstream, five hundred dollars fullysubsidized. These things don't happen overnight.

(01:19:40):
Apple Vision Pro literally came out likea month ago. Guys like, don't
expect it to replace everything and takeover the world in one month. The
original iPhone didn't have a front facingcamera. You couldn't take selfies, you
couldn't take videos. With the firstiPhone, you couldn't change the wallpaper.
Look at how far it's come.We've got a lot of improvement to improve,

(01:20:00):
lots of share play potential. I'msure we'll probably even hear more about
that at Dubbed Up. But anyway, I gotta get going. I appreciate
all you channel members for supporting directlyand people just watching seriously. Helps me
out of ton helps me out withthis dream job, which is not a
guarantee, but I appreciate every daythat I have it. So thank you
all for tuning in. Hope youhave an excellent rest of your day.
Bye bye.