Meta’s Introdces Llama 3, Google's New Culture, MKBHD vs. Humane

Channel: Alex Kantrowitz

Published at: 2024-04-20

YouTube video id: SsuyLdNTF1I

Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SsuyLdNTF1I

First of all, like we're continuing our
cycle of every Friday or every week
having a big celestial event happen. We
had three weeks ago an earthquake last
week an eclipse. This week Taylor
Swift's new album is out, The Tortured
Poets Department. So, we're keeping up
this streak. Have you Have you gotten a
chance to listen to it today?
You know, I actually started playing it
um like an hour ago. Um and I don't
know, man. I I really feel like I
shouldn't weigh in here unless you
unless you have something like
overwhelmingly positive to say about
Taylor Swift. I've realized it's best to
just not put opinions on the internet.
So,
well, I'm not going to be afraid with my
thought here. And I'll tell you this,
I hit play. I was eager to see what she
had. It's obviously been a very hyped
album. And I realized that I am Taylor
Swifted out. Between the exposure at the
NFL and the fact that she's become this
mega even bigger than mega celebrity, I
am I think I'm good for the time being
on new Taylor Swift music and I'm not
ashamed to admit it. It doesn't mean
she's not great at what she does, but
I've had my share of Taylor Swift. I'm
ready for something new.
RIP your mentions, Alex.
All right. Well, we'll we'll take your
your silence here as uh as telling, but
we won't put you on the spot. Uh
something that you will be able to
comment on is this new meta llama 3
model. Uh obviously it's really when you
talk about like llama 1, llama 2, llama
3, it's a large language model, but it's
really more than one model. They've
released two models this week, two
smaller models, and they're working on a
massive one that's set to come out this
summer. And of course, you know, we have
GPT4 and Claude. These are not open-
source models, but Metazar, and you
know, it's a very big strategic moment
for them in terms of putting these out.
So would love to hear your reaction to
what this act what Meta is doing here
and um and where it puts them in the
conversation in in the broader AI world.
Yeah, I mean I'd also be curious to hear
what you think. I think they have been
considered a leader in open-source AI um
especially with Llama 2 last year. Um
but now with Llama 3 and the assistant
uh and putting that everywhere in
WhatsApp, Instagram, um if you start
using the search box in Facebook and
Instagram, you're going to see Meta AI
at least in the US and a bunch of other
countries. So that's a big bet. That's a
lot of real estate. And I think um you
know I talked to Zuckerberg this week
about it and I think he wants to use
kind of their massive distribution to
kill Jad GPT in the cradle if he can so
to speak. I mean I think they he sees
this area of you know AI chat bots
agents uh as something that Meta has to
be in. And I don't know, man. It's not
it's not super obvious to me that that
is a thing that makes sense inside a
social media app. I think the jury is
still out on if people want to be uh
using like a chat GPT like experience
next to their friend chats and WhatsApp.
Um,
right.
So, I think they've got to prove that.
This is now they're in the like I don't
know. this week was the like firing gun
of the race and now they have to prove
that they can execute and that people
actually want this. Um, and so I think
that the pressure is on.
Well, let's talk about that right from
the start and I definitely want to talk
a little bit about these models and
their capabilities, but I think the
productization is really the key here.
So your point about whether this should
live within a social media company.
Well, it's a messaging company, I think,
first and foremost, right? Meta had this
pivot to privacy. Basically, the company
figured out that people don't really
want to share as much on news feeds.
They want to share privately within
messaging groups. And so, they've, you
know, you think about what Facebook is
today and the big blue app is very is
much less important, I would argue, than
the messaging apps, uh, Messenger and
WhatsA and WhatsApp and to some extent
Instagram is is a messaging app with a
media sort of front end. And so if
you're thinking about where one of these
bots is going to live naturally,
wouldn't it be in a messaging app where
you would effectively you're messaging
with your friends? You can call it in,
you know, to conversations with your
friends when you're like trying to find
something to do or trying to answer a
question. And then also it is a
conversational interface. So why not
have that live within a messaging app?
Yeah. I guess just the mental model that
I have for these chat bots is that there
are things that you go to separately,
right? like the chat the chat GPT app.
Um, and I think of them more as like
utilities right now than I do like
another friend almost. Um, would live
next to like where my mental model is
when I go into WhatsApp is like to talk
to people or groups of people.
And so adding in like a
a chat GPT type experience to that feels
a little strange. I know like in the
Verge newsroom there was a lot of heated
opinion about whether this was a good
idea and people had a lot of strong
opinions that they didn't want this in
their WhatsApp. So um they have to prove
that people want it and you know what
what Zuckerberg told me was they see you
know the feedback loop of this. So
basically getting this out to more
people, having more people engage with
it and then learning from that and how
they can improve from that as being one
of their key differentiators um over
time versus like an anthropic or a chat
GPT which just has less surface area and
less potential users to reach uh by
default of just not having uh a network
of three billion plus daily users that
Meta has. So, um, it makes sense why
they're doing it, uh, from like a, you
know, if you really believe that these
AI agents are the future and that's how
we're going to be interacting with
computing, you want to get it out there.
Um, Meta has a mixed track record on
this stuff, right? Uh, and, you know, I
think but I think Zuckerberg sees this
as like you've got you had stories, you
know, uh, which was like a format that
Snap invented and then they grafted on
to to Meta's apps. And then the same
thing with reals, which was, you know,
Tik Tok basically, which just works now.
Um, and has has done really well for
them. And I think he sees the assistant
as the same thing for these AI chat
bots. Um, and you know, he I mean he's
very clear like he wants this to be the
most used AI assistant in the world. Um,
and they have a shot just by default of
the distribution. It kind of it shows
how distribution is still king. Uh and
you even if you have cool tech and you
start the race like OpenAI did, you
know, it may just come down to
distribution at the end of the day.
You're right. And it is really important
like the type of personalities that
these things take on in different
settings, right? So in meta they might
be more might be more social within uh
chatbt. It might be moreformational.
Claude, you might want to like talk with
your documents there. Like there's
different versions of this. And it it
may be that you know because of that
distribution they can sort of steer what
this becomes. Um and this is sort of
what you talked about how distribution
is is so important right we have a
comment tier coming in people don't come
back to chat GPT and it's true I mean
chat GPT the usage the from the data
that I see has really leveled off it
like hit that 100 million user benchmark
pretty quickly and then hasn't really
blown past that. In fact, it seems to
have shrunk uh in the time since its
release or even sorry maybe
incrementally um increased but nothing
close to maintaining its growth level.
And so even if Meta isn't the perfect
place for this um it still seems like it
has a chance to live out that vision
that Zuckerberg wants to see because
again because of that distribution right
like let's say Chachi Pat had 200
million users right now right it's
nothing compared to the billions of
people that now have access to Meta AI
yeah I mean that's the bet we'll see
right I think uh I there it's been a
running joke inside Meta you know for
the last six months or so because they
first debuted dude this assistant um in
September of last year, right? And it
was only in the US, but it's kind of a
joke inside Meta that um no one uses it
and not even like Meta employees use it.
Um and it was also kind of hard to find
though, like you had to kind of search
it out, right? Um I was actually shocked
in the Verge newsroom how many people
didn't even know that this assistant
already existed in their WhatsApp and
Messenger. Um, and that's why Meta is
now putting it, I mean, literally inside
the Facebook feed. So, if you're
scrolling and there's a video, it may
like recommend a prompt based on what's
in the video. Like, do you want to learn
guitar like this?
Um, and same thing with the search. I
mean, the IG search box is probably one
of the most, you know, traffic surfaces
of that app. Uh, and the fact that the
assistant's going to be right there in a
lot of Meta's biggest markets is is a
big bet. And it's um they would normally
test this for a really long time, AB
test it in different countries with
different cohorts, and they're just
turning it on for everyone, which means
it's a it's a top- down huge bet. Um and
yeah, I don't know. They they they want
to play to win here. Um and they have a
really great research group. It's
definitely I wouldn't say it's um
considered to be as elite as Open AIs,
but they're definitely in the top, you
know, three or four uh research groups
in the world. You've got Google, Open
AAI, um them, uh Anthropic. So, they've
got a lot of the right ingredients and
they've got a lot of GPUs. So, um I'm
really interested to see with Llama 3
this 400 billion parameter model that
they're training. I know you talked to
uh uh Ahmad, their head of Genai on the
pod this week. Um and yeah, I that's
going to be a big deal if they open
source that. There's not been a model
that large and that complex um that's
been open sourced. Um and I'm curious to
see like from a bigger than meta
perspective picture, what pressure that
puts on OpenAI and others uh to either
open source or not. Um,
so what what Alex, what is your I mean,
you've brought up like a lot of the
skepticism here in terms of whether this
will work.
What is your sense on whether it will
work or not? Like
I I don't know, man.
I know you're a reporter and you're
going to beg off this question, but just
like handicap it a little bit for us.
Like the assistant or Llama 3.
Well, let's go let's go both.
I mean, Llama 3 is going to be is a big
deal. I mean it's just it's it's already
I think it's been they said it been
downloaded uh like over a hundred
million times. Um it's it's been used in
a lot of apps already. Um it's a huge
part of the developer ecosystem for EI
AI already. So the third uh you know
Llama 3 with um especially the 400
billion one when that comes out that's a
it's a big deal for the industry in
terms of the consumer applications of
this as a assistant in Meta's
properties.
Um,
I don't know. They have a good shop, but
it has to be a good product. And um, I'm
looking forward to to trying the
assistant more. Um, now that it's been
upgraded, uh, with Llama 3, I think
there was a sense that Llama 2 was it
was barely like chat GPT3.5
level um, performance. So, um, this
these bots are really only as good as
the models that power them. And so now
that there's a model that is more
approaching GPT4
um and when the 400 billion one comes
out maybe even exceeds it on some areas
um that will make the assistant more
compelling. You know they've also got
Google in there now which um Google's
providing real time search results which
I think they're the only uh chatbot
besides Google's own Gemini that has
that. So they've got Bing and Google.
I'm sure they'll build some other
hookins. They've got to keep building it
out and making it I think it's pretty
bare bones right now. Um but they've got
to make it more um personalized as well
is something I really want. Like I've
heard that they will probably let you
eventually be able to to generate images
based on your likeness on like Instagram
for example.
Oh, that's definitely coming. Yeah.
Yeah. And like that that's cool and
that's unique to what they do. So, they
need to have more kind of unique wedges
that complement the fact that your
internet presence is already on their
apps and they have a lot that's a lot of
valuable data that they can use to
personalize the assistant to you. Um,
and like if I'm, you know, searching on
Instagram for uh, you know, ideas for
like a Japan trip that I'm taking next
month, I would like the assistant to
know that and to know what I'm already
looking for. And like if I ask it a
question, be like, "Well, you looked at
this spot in Kyoto. This is another one
that looks, you know, very similar. Um,
stuff like that. So, I think it's like
we're in the very very beginning of this
stuff, uh, especially for meta. And they
they have to move really quickly because
OpenAI is moving really quickly. And if
I talked to Zuckerberg about this, if
OpenAI puts out GPT5
um, later this year, does that leaprog
them again and reset everything? You
know, so it's a fastmoving space. That's
why it's so fun to cover.
And what did Zuckerberg say with that to
that question?
Um
the thing I mean he he he can't know,
right? I mean no one really knows what
GPT5 is going to hold, but um he made
the point, which is fair, that they put
out Llama 2 after GPT4 had already come
out and now three is and three is coming
out before GPT5 and they're about to
train version Llama 4 and they're
already roadmapping llama 5. They're
moving very fast.
Yeah, this is with this model. They said
that they had they're using 10 times the
amount of data and 100 times the amount
of compute that they use to do two. And
that's
what Ahmed Aldella told me on uh big
tech war stories which is the show I do
through um big technology.com like the
newsletter
separate to this one. Um it was a very
interesting conversation where we talked
about the making of these models and of
course like again like we've talked
about it a couple times on this
conversation. And there's like the two
smaller models that are out now and then
this bigger 400 par bill billion
parameter model that's supposed to come
out this summer which is like four or
five times the size of what they have
now. Um but and I want to talk about
that because there's questions about
whether they're going to open source it.
But I think this conversation also gets
to the value of where gets to where
value is going to be created with these
models, right? Because
you have of course the actual
development of the model themselves and
that's what meta and open AAI and
anthropic and Google are competing on
and then you have the way that it be
gets built into products and there's
been so much focus on the actual models.
Um, but I guess like one of my thoughts
here is that the model race is going to
matter less and less as these things
converge. Uh, because the real money is
going to be made in terms of how people
turn this into products.
Yeah. And it's almost like Meta has this
week even pushed that home even more
because it's Llama 3 model is good
enough and it's going to be, you know,
it's going to be free to everyone to use
through open source and it's good enough
that like you can you can get it and
it's not like there's going to be riches
if you build something incrementally
better than it because people will just
go with it. So that seems to me like
we've always asked like where's the
economic benefit going to come from this
AI revolution and more and more it seems
like it's going to be with
semiconductors like Nvidia uh and then
the way that you build products on top
of it. So like whether Llama 3 is as
good as GPD4 or not seems almost like
beside the question. Like the real point
is the one we started earlier which was
you know is this going to actually
deliver value in a product for Meta and
I think everybody who's building with AI
is including Microsoft is asking is AI
going to deliver value in our products
and that's the big question right now.
What do you think about that?
I think that is exactly right. I mean I
cover this stuff and I don't get a ton
of value out of these chat bots. Um, you
know, the hallucination problem is a big
one for me. Uh, and being able to trust
what it tells me. Like if I'm using it
for research for a story, um, and I want
to like compare a bunch of financials or
something that actually it would be
actually kind of hard to find all this
and SEC documents, etc. And I ask the
model to do it in a very specific way,
and it gives me an answer, but it's like
I can't trust it. And therefore why why
am why why am I using this to begin with
because like then I'll have to go find
all of it anyway which I was trying to
avoid by using the model. So the more it
can be grounded the more things like
search um are integrated and you can it
can learn from you I think the more
valuable this stuff will become. I mean
clearly people want to use this stuff. I
mean, I don't think Meta would be
putting this across all their products
like this if this was some flash in the
pan interface. Um, it's just it's just
early, man. I know I said that already,
but I just feel like the industry is
moving so fast, even though consumer
um interest in actually using these
tools as valuable parts of everyday life
uh is relatively early. Um, and I think
I think Zuckerberg knows that. Um, and
like he knows he hopes at least that the
meta AI will be the first time that
millions of people are introduced to
conversational generative AI like this
because even with chat GPT hitting that
100 million user mark as quick as they
did. Um, I think that was monthly or
something. It wasn't daily. Um, there's
a lot of people a lot of mil billions of
meta users that have never used a
chatbot, right? And it's kind it reminds
me of stories, right? Like we both
covered that era with Snap and the
competition there. And they really
kneecapped Snap and uh heard its growth
by taking this kind of magic thing that
Snap had and introducing it to a lot of
people where it's like at that point
it's like why do I need to go download
another app? If I have a really good
chatbot in my WhatsApp, why would I
download the chat GPT app?
Exactly. And last year I wrote this
story that said Mark Zuckerberg is
coming for Sam Alman and OpenAI. Yeah.
And it's like Zuckerberg, first of all,
he's very good at seeing a product
that's taking off and has mass user
appeal and baking that into Facebook.
And I also think there's an element of
like he wants to be the alpha dog in the
tech world. And it almost like it's so
interesting because there's been all
these different attempts for Zuckerberg
to shape his image, whether that was
like the tour that he did around America
or, you know, the different speeches
that he gave defending free speech, all
that stuff. But it seems to finally be
working for him. And I think one of the
signs that I've seen is that there's
been this image floating around social
media uh this past week. Uh that's sort
of a photoshop of his actual
announcement video where he like gave
the Llama 3 update um clean cleanly
shaven but with a chain and a t-shirt
and someone photoshopped this beard onto
him and it's been going wild and there's
all these uh great memes of it. like
somebody wrote I think um they posted
the picture and they they did quote
you're the only girl I'm talking to
Zuckerberg and the beard and it is
interesting it sort of goes to the um
the image of Zuckerberg which is kind of
a important part of this uh this whole
thing he's almost become and I'm curious
what your take is on this this like kind
of tech icon in a in a strange way where
he's being woripped in Silicon Valley as
someone I think who's taken a beating
kept on shipping and has this kind of
don't give a you know [ __ ] attitude in
terms of like what he's going to do and
that's sort of like the new Zuckerberg
and and it seems to be working. What's
your perspective on that?
Yeah, I mean I think it's certainly
working. Um I think his comm's team is
thrilled. Um yeah, it's I I don't know
really what to attribute to. I mean you
said he's like an icon. I don't know if
icon has positive or negative
connotations. I think it can have both.
But like I think he's always been an
icon. I think he's always been like
but there's a different level to it now.
Well now he people
there's worship of him going through the
timeline right now.
Yeah. People in tech like him now which
is um different and he's seen as like a
innovator which is what he desperately
wants and needs for recruiting and for
all these reasons and also just personal
you know gratification and ego right we
all want to be loved. Um,
yeah, man. I I don't know. Like he uh
he's in his like what is it? Like Chad
era. I don't know. He's he's he's really
just letting his hair down literally. Um
and it's working from a perspective of
like he seems to be more out there. Um
and
willing to engage in a way that uh he
felt really robotic and really closed
off for a very long time. And we're
we're we're both members of the press. I
wonder what you think about this idea
that this might be part of his ability
to like have he took a real beating from
the press over the past few years. Like
there was a moment where you could say
anything negative you wanted about
Zuckerberg and no one would come after
you and sort of some of it became a
little excessive. So he took this
beating from the press. You know, he's
continued to remain relevant relevant
through Facebook. He made these
difficult year of efficiency decisions
within Facebook and then like you know
almost to solidify his reputation as a
fighter, right? Started doing UFC stuff
or whatever his his uh MMA. Um do you
think that's part of it
that just that that's all connected the
MMA?
Yeah. Yeah, for sure. I mean, I think
the MMA literally was like it was the
pandemic and he found a hobby a little
bit, but um
yeah, I mean, I think he, you know,
there was something he said, I
interviewed him around their connect
event last year in the fall and there
was something he said at the end about
I just want to be like building awesome
stuff again. like I think he'd felt
really um pulled away and distracted by
the c everything from Cambridge
Analytica on through like 20 really into
the pandemic that time period was all
about politics uh scandals government um
he was spending a lot of time in policy
world and not like he is an engineer and
a product guy at the end of the day and
I think he feels like he's finally able
to like focus on that because the
reputation of the company is
constantly under fire like it used to
be. They're always like one scandal away
from that happening, right? Like they're
I know they're they're terrified of a
Gemini diversity type scandal with the
assistant, for example. Like if that
were to happen, that's a whole another,
you know,
the metaverse stuff was rough in terms
of kind of getting out ahead of their
skis on messaging on that and then
everybody kind of realizing there's not
a lot there yet. Um, but now that he's
moved on to AI and that's what everyone
cares about, you know, they're able to
position themselves as like a key and
and it's it's true. They are a key
leader in the space. Um,
yeah, I I don't know. I I I just think
he's like becoming more comfortable,
right? Oh, it definitely appears that
way. Yeah. Let me tell you where I think
the potential misstep here is. Um,
their commitment to open sourcing these
models. Now, the argument that they're
giving is that if this technology is
going to be super powerful, better to
give it in everybody's hands versus
allow one sort of unchecked actor to
have it. And you know that sounds good
in when you say it um as a line, but
then when you think about think about it
a little bit deeper like this, the fact
that this technology which is so
powerful can really be used by anyone if
you open source this open source it and
you have really little recourse if
someone goes against your rules like
that is a that seems like a potential
vulnerability. And when I was speaking
with uh Ahmed Aldella about the the the
I'm sorry, the metagenerative AI head
about it, I said, well, are you going to
open source this 400 billion parameter,
right? This massive model that's going
on uh that they're going to build and
release in summer. They're training it
right now. It wasn't a definitive yes.
And that I think that even shows this
sort of discomfort that Meta might have
with what open sourcing all these models
might have. Now, I'm pro open source. I
think it's obviously good be silly to be
anti-open source but it also goes to the
point where like where you're when
you're spending these hundreds of
millions of dollars maybe billions of
dollars to train these models and they
can do crazy things uh how open do you
want to make that and um I think there
are potential downsides like potential
things that can explode in a negative
way if this stuff is so freely released.
I talked to Mark about that and I do
think they're going to open source the
big model. Um they have to they have to
go through safety evaluation once it's
done training. So they just can't say
that until in case they're I mean he
basically said barring any like really
unforeseen anomaly in the output of the
model. It'll be open source. He wants to
open source it. They just can't they
can't definitively say it until they've
evaluated it. Which I think is like the
responsible way to approach this. I
think it would actually be even scarier
if they were saying we're going to open
source any tech we make no matter even
if we don't know like what the model end
state is going to be. Um but he did say
like uh image generation for example
they made some big leaps in image
generation with the new assistant and
llama 3 and he was saying you know
different modalities of these models
when you get out of text so video output
or text output we may not open source
those and he he specifically called out
you know that it's an election year and
they were concerned about the image
generation uh being kind of just out
there and freely available for
developers to use in potentially, you
know, more nefarious ways. So, they may
open source part of these models but not
the multimodality, which I think is
interesting. Um, but yeah, he's not like
he wants to be out there as the open
source leader, but he doesn't want to be
dogmatic about it, which I think is
actually a nuanced position that um I
don't know it I'd rather him be thinking
about it that way than being like
dogmatic about it and going to open
source no matter what.
Yep. And it's been interesting like the
financial impact on the company. The
stock jumped a bunch uh yesterday when
they released the model and today down
three and a half%. So um we'll see. I
think just to recap, looks like this
model definitely puts them in
conversation uh as as one of the
providers of the best models out there.
I mean we'll see what happens when GPT5
comes out. You're right. There might be
this race. They get the distribution in
the product. it's good for recruiting
and um and again it just kind of shows
that like it's got to be productized. If
it's productized well, it's valuable. If
it's not productized well, you're not
you're not left with much.
Yeah. I mean, I think you nailed it. I
remains to be seen if they will if
they'll make it a good product. That's
kind of what they have to do now. And if
they don't, this is a massive overreach
in terms of what they thought they were
going to be able to do. Is there like
reality lab spending going from VR to
AI?
I don't think I don't think it's that
simple. Um
um we actually I talked about when he
bought all the GPUs he did. So they're I
think maybe the first or second largest
customer for Nvidia. I think they're
maybe tied with Microsoft.
650,000 GPU equivalents by the end of
this year. So
he bought all of those like at the very
end of I think 2022. So before GPT4 even
came out. And this was when Meta's stock
was at like $90. It had bottomed out and
he was placing this massive
multi-billion dollar GPU order. And he
said it was actually for reals um for
doing recommendation videos for reals.
They were crunched on that and they
needed more compute. And he was like,
but I just doubled the order because I
didn't want to be in this position again
where there was a big new thing that we
needed to build for. We didn't have the
compute we needed for it.
That turned out to be pretty smart.
Turned out to be pretty smart. something
that really only like a company at that
scale with like founder control, founder
control could do. I could imagine at
Google that getting shot down by like
the CFO. Um
but he made the call, they did it and
yeah, I now they have all this compute
um that that they're using for Llama 3
and four and five. Um and it was
pressing it to to to kind of get that
compute because now it's very hard to
get H100s. Um, and so yeah, I don't
know. They they're definitely well
resourced. Um, they just they need to be
seen as the leading place for the best
talent in the industry to come. And I
think that's part of why you see him so
out there doing all these interviews
with me and others is I mean he was open
about this with me, you know, that the
best people want to work on the biggest
problems with the most impact, right?
And so he wants Meta to be that place.
Yep. Ed, so you mentioned the Gemini
thing and obviously Google has been
working behind the scenes to try to
clean that up, clean up the structure,
right? They promised structural changes
and those structural changes came this
week. Uh, and there was a number of
things that happened. First of all, uh,
Sunnai had this like pretty remarkable
uh, memo that he sent out to Google and
they published it which means they want
the world to see it. It's called
building for our AI future. And uh one
of the sort of least noted things that I
think is really important is they're
moving this responsible AI team in
research to Google DeepMind and Sundar
says it's to be closer to where the
models are built and scaled. Now I don't
know this for sure, but if I was to take
a guess, I think this group had a lot to
do with some of like the safety things
that were placed into uh Gemini after
the after it was built within Google
Deep Mine. At least that's what I've
heard. uh and sort of
led to this uh you know embarrassing
moment for Google where this thing was
just like getting in terms of its image
generation. So now like that group is
going to have a boss in Demis the head
of Google Deepmind and
won't be able to have such a big imprint
obviously will do some checks on the
product but won't be able to like guide
the product before it ships. So I
thought that was pretty interesting from
Sundar. And then there was another thing
that he put it seems like he kind of end
wrote this in the last uh few days like
as he was like putting this together but
he had these four components. The shifts
in AI were one. They also merged like
Chrome and and hardware and Android
together. But he ends this note uh with
this statement called mission first. And
I've never seen this from Sundar and I
think it's pretty important. I'm just
going to read it. He says one fi one one
final note all the changes referenced
above will help us work with greater
focus and clarity towards our mission.
However, we also need to be more focused
in how we work, collaborate, discuss and
even disagree. We have a culture of
vibrant open discussion that enables us
to create amazing products and turn
great ideas into action. That's
important to preserve. But ultimately,
we are a workplace and our policies and
expectations are clear. This is a
business and not a place to act in a way
that disrupts co-workers or makes them
feel unsafe to attempt to use the
company as a personal platform or to
fight over disruptive issues or debate
politics. This is too important moment
as a company for us to be distracted. Uh
that's obviously kind of him putting his
foot down in terms of all the like the
internal political debate that's
happened within Google. I'm curious what
you think a about these changes, the
structural changes, and b this kind of
like new tone that Sundar seems to be
taking.
I don't know, man. I don't know if I
agree that it's a new tone. It's fairly
it's fairly normal for him, which is
like I don't know. Um,
milk toast, I guess. Like, it's like
it's it's kind of it feels a little I
know he probably wrote it, but it feels
a little written by committee.
Um, I know Googlers feel this way,
Google employees. um when they get memos
from him. Um I mean, we're skating
around why he wrote that, which is that
they fired 28 employees. Um this
maybe not skating around setting.
Well, I just that's I mean,
let's talk about it though.
That didn't come out of nowhere, right?
Like I thought the more remarkable memo
was the one that came out the day before
from Google's head of security um
announcing to the whole company that
they fired 28 people which to my
knowledge for a sit in protests over
Google Cloud's Israel contract. Um I've
never seen anything like that. I don't
know if you have in covering tech for as
long as we have. I've ne I've never seen
uh a tech company fire that many people
at once, especially in connection with
um a protest over something like this.
Um definitely was meant to send a
message. And the way the memo was worded
was very stern and had this
warning saying uh for those of you
basically who are thinking of maybe
doing something similar like this is
going to be your fate as well. and there
were nine of them arrested um to be
physically dragged out of the offices
they were sitting in uh the you know a
couple days before. So yeah, I mean
Sundar's flicking at that in that memo
which is really about a reorg um uh of
of parts of the company, but I don't
know man, Google just feels so I mean I
know you've been covering this as well.
Um they it feels like so precarious
right now and so um the culture is just
very uh very tense and
um a lot of dissenting in the ranks, a
lot of frustrations with management at
how the layoffs, the rolling layoffs
have been handled, the Gemini stuff, um
the general just kind of slowness around
um adapting to to new technology, the
fact that Google invented the
Transformer, the T and Chat GPT, and
that they kind of missed this wave and
are now playing catchup. Uh, even though
they have arguably the best research
group in the world. Um, it's it's tough.
Sunders's in a really tough place. And,
um, I think he feels like he's got to
get his arms around the rank and file.
And I think that's part of what that
memo was saying. But um
the employees definitely feel more
emboldened than ever. I mean Google's
also I mean it's always been a pretty um
I don't know like bottoms up culture um
especially when Larry and Sergey were
there and you know there's been many
protests over the years. You know they
got Google to stop working with the
Pentagon um years ago. But now it's
you've got the this this
pot of all this stuff happening and
people already mad about the layoffs and
things just feel really heightened and
um I don't know what's your take on it.
I mean, I'm going to make the argument
I'm going to push back here and make the
argument that this is a new culture for
Google. And I think that you can read
Sundar's lines as a pretty powerful uh
exclamation of where he wants this
company to go. Now, from Larry and
Sergey days, Google's always been this
place for free expression. Bring your
whole self to work. Sort of setting the
tone for that in Silicon Valley. And
that includes political stuff. I mean
you remember in the leaked video that we
have from after the Trump election the
Larry at Ser Sergey especially I think
was up there talking about how
devastated he was that Trump was elected
and that was sending a signal to the
employee base that Google was a place
for you know effectively to do exactly
what Sundar is saying that you can't do
right now saying that you can't um use
the company as a personal platform right
that's exactly what they were doing uh
Sergey was doing at after the election
and here we are now the employees have
done it and I think that for maybe the
past I don't know seven years Google has
had a tremendous amount of political
advocacy happen within the company and
trying to use the company for political
advoc advocacy uh and maybe even to the
extent that some people within that
Gemini group built their own political
views into the product and sort of that
backfired in a way
and I think this is a moment where
Sundara said you know this has kind of
gone too are and that's why both him and
Chris Rakau as head of security have to
emphasize that it's a place of business
and in the past where they might have
tolerated employees um sort of taking
over offices and and making political
statements about Google's projects.
They're not doing that anymore. I mean,
that's a shift. And you're right to
reference this memo from uh Chris Chris
Rako, the head of security. Here's the
paragraph where he really tells people
enough is enough. He goes, "We are a
place of business and every Googler is
expected to read our policies and apply
them to how they conduct themselves and
communicate in our workplace. The
overwhelming majority of our employees
do the right thing. If you're one of the
few who are tempted to think we're going
to overlook conduct that violates our
policies, think again. The company takes
this extremely seriously and we will
continue to apply our long-standing
policies to take take action against
disruptive behavior up to and including
termination." I mean basically what
happened is they called the cops on the
people that were occupying these offices
offices including the CEO of Google
Cloud uh including yeah Google Cloud
CEOs Thomas Curian's office and they got
them arrested and then they fired them
and they might have even gone a little
too far like there's an Allison talked
about people who were outside the
building as part of this protest but not
inside the offices might have also been
canned. Uh but this definitely seems
like a shift from the Google we've known
under Sundar which would tolerate this
stuff and just doesn't seem like it's
going to tolerate it anymore. Um so
that's my perspective on it. I
I agree with that. I guess my point was
more just that tonally
Sundar is not becoming
like on the spectrum of Zuckerberg to I
don't know pick your most docile CEO
imaginable. I don't think Sundar is
getting closer to Zuckerberg. He's
definitely putting his foot down, as you
said, in in the way of just saying, you
know, we're not going to allow this
stuff. But I don't know, man. I think I
think he hasn't gotten his hands around
the company and the the cultural
backlash there that uh is so strong and
could maybe mean more Frank and more uh
take charge. I don't know. This this
line was buried
underneath a long thing about a reorg,
you know? It's
it's a good point.
So So
yeah, I don't know. Sundar, I'm really
curious to see what happens with Google
uh in the next, you know, 12 months
because
they have so much advantage, strategic
advantage that they built up over the
years
and it's really like theirs for the
losing um all of this. So
yeah, I don't think they're out of the
woods yet at all. No, but I do think
that this is my perspective is that this
is a good thing for the company. And by
the way, I think also for the employees
like lots of employees don't want to be
distracted by the stuff and the ones
that want to enact politics through the
company are going to realize that it's
actually not the most effective way to
do things and that the ballot box just
speaking about this this week with some
folks who asked me about like how
political stories are going to play out
through these companies. It's actually
the ballot box and mainstream political
organizing that actually ends ends up
being the most impactful. You know, not
not trying to do stuff like this within
companies.
Yeah, I agree with that. I mean, I think
there's a place for workers being able
to protest things that they disagree
with at the company, but at the end of
the day, like your ultimate protest is
quitting, is taking your effort and your
time to another company and not thinking
that like you're actually going to be
able to change the highlevel strategic
decisions of a multi- trillion dollar
conglomerate. Um, it's just not going to
happen. I know that they got the
Pentagon project cancelled. That was a
different era. That was the era where
Sergey was crying about Trump in front
of the whole company
and now we're past that. I think you're
totally right to point that out. And
this is also just a bigger cultural
shift in corporate America that I think
is happening.
But ultimately,
I don't know. Yeah, that's how I feel. I
feel like if I if if I really disagree
with something my employer is doing, I
can push behind the scenes for change,
but ultimately my what I can do is is
leave.
Yeah. And it seems like these employees
were surprised they got fired. And that
to me is also surprising because it's
like your job is to you know do do your
work for the company not to sort of take
over your executives's offices. Uh and
it's also by the way it goes to the same
thing with this uh NPR editor Berliner
who you know was suspended for writing
this memo about how NPR is too woke and
then eventually quit when he didn't like
what the CEO said about him. Like what
was your expectation there exactly? Like
you're going to go to another
publication and you're going to write
about how your publication is too woke
and expect to stay employed and like
good standing there. Like that's also
crazy.
Media is insane right now, man. I don't
that's God. I don't know if I can say
anything that won't get me in trouble.
Um I Yeah, I think there's a lot of It'd
be good for everyone to focus on what
their jobs are. I agree with you on
that. Yeah. And like but it's it's good
to push for change. It's good to push
for things you care you like you want to
stand up for. I'm not saying like muzzle
yourself, but like find the right avenue
for it. I guess I guess there's a lot of
misplaced energy. I'm not saying the
energy itself is bad. It just seems
misplaced.
No, the energy itself is democracy. like
that's like being part part of the
political process is important, but I
guess my my main point is uh trying to,
you know, pull a paycheck from a place
that hired you to do one thing and
instead, you know, doing political
advocacy is never going to end well.
Yeah.
For you. And if that's that's the case,
like maybe that's okay, like maybe you
can actually go full-time and dedicate
yourself to the cause. So anyway, uh
let's talk again about uh how media is
crazy and what what media should and
shouldn't do when we discuss this big
debate over Marcus Brownley aka MKBHD's
negative review of both the main pin and
Fisker and the backlash that he's gotten
uh for effectively what people say is
trying to kill a company. That's coming
up right after this. And we're back here
on Big Technology Podcast with Alex
Heath. He's the deputy editor of The
Verge and he's the author of Command
line. We talked in the first half a
little bit about how Facebook and Google
uh have both been, you know, uh trying
to develop AI and the cultural
challenges they've had. And now on our
front door is another sort of
controversy, if you could call it that,
um, surrounding Marcus Brownley, who is
a YouTuber, a reviewer who has wr has
produced two pretty negative reviews in
the past year. One about this Fisker
car, which has effectively kneecaped
Fisker. It was that bad. Uh, and then he
said that this Humane PIN, which is this
AI device that we talked about last
week, um, that this device was the worst
product he'd ever reviewed yet. And
there was a debate about whether it was
appropriate for someone with such a
large audience. He has millions of I
think 12 million followers on YouTube um
to to um whether it was appropriate for
him to write such a negative review.
There was this ex AWS engineer tweeted
this tweet that's been dunked on
ruthlessly. Um, I find it distasteful,
almost unethical to say this when you
have 18 million subscribers. Uh, hard to
explain why, but with great reach comes
great responsibility, potentially
killing someone else's nent project
reeks of carelessness. First, do no
harm. So this large debate about
whether, you know, and Marquez Brownley
should be should be, you know, producing
these incredibly negative reviews about
products that have have like, let's be
honest, have not been good. Um, and it's
also interesting because it's like some
of this criticism about that's gone to
the media, oh, they're too negative,
they're out to kill, is now like going
to YouTubers and where does it end? Are
you allowed to criticize at all these
days? What What's been your perspective
watching this play out?
I just laugh, man. This is so
ridiculous. Like,
yeah.
Um, I do think this whole media cycle
around this is because just some a
couple tech bros got really mad online
and had some viral posts. Um, I don't
think most people
uh if you were to seriously ask them, do
you think reviewers should be positive
about products even when they don't feel
that they are positive products? Like I
don't think most people would be like,
yes, that makes sense. Like no, it's
actually like it's Marquez's job to
honestly review these products. It's why
he has such a huge platform. It's why we
at the Verge uh people trust our
reviews. It's because we are honest
about our opinions. You know, our David
Pierce for us also trashed the Humane
Pin. Um gave it a four out of 10.
That was a fun review.
He gave it a four out of 10. And
arguably, I think he wishes he gave it a
three out of 10. Um so yeah, I reviews
don't kill products. Bad products kill
products. And that's always been the
case. It will always be the case. Um,
and I just thought that post that you
read by the former Amazon guy was
hilarious. It shows a complete lack of
understanding of what journalism
actually is. Um, why people seek it out,
why people watch Marquez's reviews. I
think he addressed this in a follow-up
video, which I thought was very good.
Um,
but yeah, the humane humane, it's a bad
product. I mean, they'll figure it out
or they won't and they'll they'll go
under. That's like that's has happened
so many times. Like also it's not like
it shouldn't matter, but Humane um has
brought a lot of hubris onto this like
from them. You know, they debuted
themselves through a TED talk. They talk
very grandiosely about replacing the
smartphone. you know, if you're going to
set expectations as high as they have,
um, don't be surprised if the product
doesn't cut it and you get torn down.
That's like just how it is, you know,
and that's not personal. It's just this
is a 7 $800 hyped gadget that um,
reviewers have an obligation to be
honest about. Uh, it helps people make
purchasing decisions, helps the industry
move forward, make better products. Um,
and so yeah, if you're mad that MKBHD
didn't like the Humane Pen, I mean, I I
don't know what to tell you. Like,
well, okay, but for the sake of
argument, let me throw this out there,
right? He his his headline was the worst
product I've ever reviewed.
Something like that.
That's his opinion.
He has he has this platform of 18
million people. Don't you think you
could just
do you think that I mean there's a way
to write it as saying it's negative or
and there's a way to write it that you
know it may be a kill shot for a
company.
I'm just throwing this out there like
let's debate this because this is
effectively the idea behind this AWS ex
AWS engineers post.
It is an ill it's an illogical argument
to think that a review is going to kill
a company because the review is
reviewing the product. The product is
what is killing a company if it's bad.
So, if the product was good, he would
have said it was good because he's a
good reviewer and it would be fine.
Like, blaming him for potentially
killing a product in the crib is
ridiculous because if he was lying,
everyone would know it because other
reviewers would be saying that the
Humane Pen is great. You will notice
like there are no good reviews of the
Humane Pen. Like, find me one. I dare
you. So,
yeah. No, I can't find any. So knowing
that to be true,
um he can't kill humane. Only humane can
kill humane or a competitor who makes a
better product.
So um journalists don't take like the
hypocratic oath like this like first do
no harm.
Do no harm thing was really ridiculous.
I missed that in J school. Like we
that's not what we're here to do. We're
not doctors. Um and we're not Spider-Man
either. So yes, with great great power
comes great responsibility, but your
responsibility is to be honest and fair
to the companies you cover and to your
audience. And MK saying that this is the
worst product I've ever reviewed is
honest and fair. Uh he's not saying also
like the people humane are are horrible.
Right. Right.
He's talking about the product.
Do you think he's a journalist?
I mean I don't know. sort of the line is
blurring a little bit.
Yeah, the line is blurring, man. I mean,
I would think you would call yourself a
journalist. You don't work for a
traditional
Oh, I I definitely am for sure.
Yeah. You don't you don't work for a
newsroom. You don't work for a what a
like a traditional media brand, right?
You're
No, I'm an independent journalist.
You're independent. He is independent as
well.
I think the line gets blurry when money
is involved. So when you're reading ads
for companies you cover, if you're
investing in companies you cover, I
think what journalism is versus like
commentary is impartiality,
right?
And so if you're able to keep
impartiality and you know he said that
in his videos like my first and only
responsibility is to the viewer and I
think that's right and I think that's
why he has such a large audience is
because people trust him. If anything,
this makes him more credible in terms of
I know like people think he's
differential to Tesla or something
because he likes the Cybert truck or
whatever. I don't know. I know other
people who like the Cybert truck. Um I
know plenty of people who hate it too.
But um as long as he's being honest and
disclosing conflicts and that's why like
all this like direct to audience stuff
with VCs, the all-in guys, people like
that like saying people can be citizen
journalists like um that you can't do
that like like really for it to be
journalism it has to be um not I think
there you have to remove that financial
piece of it. you can have opinion, but
if you're swayed behind the scenes in
ways that influence coverage, then
you're just like a commentator or a
pundant at best.
Um, so as long as like his reviews are
sound and he's not,
you know, there's not a condition from
an advertiser that he has to say a
certain and I don't think he would do
that, then yeah, I think he's a
journalist. Um,
yeah,
I mean, he's interviewing CEOs. He's
interviewing CEOs of huge companies and
um I don't know it's it's tough when
um
I don't know there's a lot of conflicts.
It's a messy thing but I I don't I don't
think it's fair to call him not a
journalist I guess.
Right. We have one comment here that
sums it all up which is the horse was
already dead.
Yeah. That's what I'm saying. Like
reviews don't kill products. Bad
products kill products. And who knows,
maybe they'll turn it around or maybe
they will fold.
Maybe they will.
That's what makes this fun.
Yeah.
All right, Alex. Do you want to uh let
people know where to find command line?
Oh, yeah. Thanks so much. Um yeah, I
send it once a week. Um I think anyone
who listens to the show will enjoy it.
It's just the verge.commandline.
All one word is where you can find it
and sign up. Um part of the interview
with Zuck is in there this week. Um and
yeah, otherwise on the Verge Threads X,
all that stuff. Um, but yeah, really
appreciate you having me, Alex. This was
fun.
Awesome stuff. Thanks so much for coming
on. Thanks for the great stories this
week. It was fun to read them and
especially to speak with you about them,
and we hope you come back soon, Alex.
Yeah. No, I appreciate it.
All right, everybody. Thank you so much
for listening. We will be back on
Wednesday with a new show uh with MG
Seagler talking about Apple's AI play.
So, that'll be a fun one. And of course,
we'll be back here next Friday breaking
down the week news, the week's news.
Until next time, we will see you then on
Big Technology Podcast.