OpenAI Under Fire, AWS Expands AI and Anthropic Backs Carbon Cleanup

Hey everyone. I'm a little delayed, I think, and hearing an echo, but welcome to techstrong Gang, where it's Thursday. It's a short week this week.

Tomorrow is Juneteenth, and it's Friday. It happens to be a holiday, Juneteenth, and we are not going to be doing our normal techstrong Gang show in the honor of Juneteenth. I think that's a great way to honor the holiday by doing something else enjoyable, maybe not here at techstrong.

But for all of you celebrating Juneteenth tomorrow, enjoy your celebration as well. Speaking of celebrations, there's a big one going on in New York City today for our Knicks. There he is, Mr.

Knick shirt himself, Mike Vizard. It's the lucky shirt. Congratulations to the New York Knickerbockers.

And we've covered it. Every day we talk about it, but still, I'm basking in the glow of my Knicks. Guys, welcome to Thursday's edition of the Gang, though, which will be the weekend edition, I guess.

Let me introduce you to our panel for today's panelists of the Gang. We've got from Texas, where it feels like 115 degrees, I hear, Gina Rosenthal. Gina, good to see you.

Good to see you too. Absolutely. Out west, our man about town, John Swartz.

Hey, John, good to see you. Hi. Good to see you.

And of course, hiding out because he just didn't want to wait on the line or get stuck in the subway for the Knick party, and he'd rather be here. Mike Vizard. I thought we were going to have a live from the parade report.

No laptops allowed in the parade or any bags of any kind. You can't blame him. Yeah.

But Mike Vizard. Hey, Gang, welcome. So let's jump into things for today.

You know, Mike, one of the first things they teach you in law school, go for the deep pockets. Go for the deep pockets. And when you've got a company that's talking about IPO-ing at a trillion dollar plus valuation, well, that's a pretty deep pocket, boy.

That's like a Grand Canyon pocket, and so it don't take long. It don't take long for the usual suspects to try to put their hand in your pocket, and that's what's going on, I'm afraid, a little bit with OpenAI. Or maybe they're right.

What do we got, Mike? You're calling the state of- ... attorneys generals of various states suspects.

Okay, I'll go with that. I suspect you. All right.

But here seems to be what is at the core of this issue is they are looking at the way OpenAI kind of engages with people, at least if I understood the reading of this correctly, and they're looking into the same issues that we have with social media companies and did they entice end users and are they presenting themselves as, I don't know, maybe experts in particular fields when they are not. But John, you wrote this story. What's your read here?

Yeah. So up top, IPOs do bring us more scrutiny in companies, especially ones that are about to be valued at a trillion dollars. And we're going to be looking at their business practices, their financial records, the risk factors involved in these companies.

And so are a bunch of attorneys general, including those from New York, Pennsylvania, Florida, California. So the news here is that there's a coalition of state attorneys general who are looking into OpenAI on a number of fronts. This is being led by Letitia James, the New York AG, according to a Wall Street Journal report.

So she's seeking internal documents on the company's advertising, user retention strategies, handling of consumer and health data, which set off an alarm for me, safety policies around minors and seniors, which is the social media kind of comparison or parallel, and some of this technical phenomenon called model syncopancy. However you pronounce that, where the AI system basically prioritizes generating responses that match your beliefs, your expectations, or your emotional states. So you've got that going on.

There are other AG actions in action. There's one in Florida against OpenAI and Sam Altman, the CEO, accusing them of aggressively marketing ChatGPT to the public, especially children, while suppressing internal safety warnings and concealing known risks. AGs in Pennsylvania and California are looking at similar items, and the scrutiny's on.

And it's interesting, yesterday I was watching part of the G7 summit, and interestingly enough, when Trump was having problems with his chair, you know who he was having try to assist him with his chair was Sam Altman, who was sitting right next to him. So given the background of what's going on in the scrutiny and regulatory actions on the state level, Sam Altman has his bread buttered on the federal level for now. So, I'll pass it on to the lawyer because this to me is very interesting, and I think it is justified in a number of these actions or a number of these investigations.

Alan, what's wrong with a little scrutiny? Nothing. What's the matter with peace, love, and understanding?

But let me address a couple of the points that my distinguished colleagues brought up. I think the problem was the president may need one of those heavy duty chairs because I don't think he's the same weight they say he is from his doctor's health report. And just a regular chair ain't going to cut it, and the man can't get up and down.

But, and while we're on the subject, let's look at this Florida attorney general. I think the Florida suit's a little different than you've put forth here, John. The Florida suit, I think, was about that the ChatGPT encouraged a teenager with suicide.

Yeah. That's-- Right. You're right.

And let me just tell you. Gina, hear me out on this one. For the Florida AG to accuse ChatGPT about taking one person's life is the height of hypocrisy.

Or as we'd say in New York, what a set of balls. What a set of balls from a state that is doing away with vaccines, and how many children are going to die because they're not vaccinated? How many children are going to die because they're not being taught proper hygiene and so forth?

How many elderly people are dying in this state because they don't want to give out real data? How many did die during COVID because they wouldn't share real COVID data? And they have the balls to come in here and sue OpenAI about one incident that happened?

Take a good look in the mirror. If anyone should be sued and brought up on charges, it's the guy who's in charge of the Florida Department of Health and the governor who put him there. Okay.

Well, I'm not going to argue with those two points right there. But I do want to bring up that it's not just the one kid that attempted suicide. The mass shooter- Yes ...

that killed so many people at Florida State, my alma mater, used ChatGPT to plan his attack. Mm-hmm. So I'm not going to argue with you about...

because I agree with everything else that you said about the State of Florida, being a native Floridian trapped in Texas. But I do think that we finally-- It feels like there's 42 AGs. 42 of the states have filed some sort of legal things against ChatGPT.

So it almost feels like they've learned their lesson that it took them so long to learn about social media in general. And how when we had social media, when it was all the big craze, when it was crazy, it didn't matter about anything else except for getting people to sign up, and to getting all of their data, and to doing their things. And so now maybe, just maybe, they're seeing instead of-- I'll take the non-cynical side this time.

Maybe they're seeing that there's a way that we should be trying to protect the citizens. I do think there's probably something else at play since they individually filed against Sam Altman in Florida, and that's how Florida politics works. There's always something else.

But as a Florida State alum, yeah, something has to be done about the way they're marketing it. But is it just ChatGPT? Boy, you can't do this with Anthropic or Gemini or Copilot?

You can. I guess you could, but why go after- Why not join all of them? From a legal standpoint, everybody's using ChatGPT.

ChatGPT was very aggressively marketed earlier than the rest of them. Claude's got commercials running. Why go everywhere?

Why not go after the one that was the leader and had so much- Well, they're the leading consumer brand right now. Yeah. Exactly.

That's why. Right. That's why.

So again, the thing you learned in law school about deep pockets, don't stop at one pocket. Yes. You never have enough pockets.

A trillion dollars is a lot of legal horsepower, and if you add all those other companies, they might have more horsepower than all the combined attorney generals. So- Well, but at some point, look, I will tell you, there will be individuals who are going to seek to file suit against these others and join into one big kind of class action. Because that's the way the legal system will deal with this.

It'll be a class action suit, and- One thing that, when Mike mentioned social media, another one thing that keeps coming across my mind is that I wonder if we're going to have a similar situation with OpenAI eventually that is similar to what happened with Facebook/Meta, where there are going to be whistleblowers, or there are going to be internal documents that reveal that engineers flagged these risks, like chatbots manipulating vulnerable users or outputting harmful medical advice, and the executives chose to ignore it and push the product forward to beat the competitors and go- Of course ... and go public. I think that's inevitably going to happen, and I think we're going to see the same situation with Altman that we saw with Zuckerberg.

But I don't think it's going to further tarnish him already, but I think he knows this, and that's why he's got somebody in his corner who's willing to help him out. Well, let's look at that. We already have an executive order preempting state action on AI.

Would this be covered under that executive order? Given the current Supreme Court, why not? Why not?

Yeah. Gina's not here on that side. Pretty sad.

You know who's going to read all this stuff very closely is those folks in the European Union, who will look at all this trial data and documents that come out, and then they will just sit around and make up their own rules as appropriate based on what they're seeing in the docs. So at the very least, transparency will be had. So this is, in my mind, a good thing.

Yeah. I do, too. I think it's absolutely.

I'm wondering how institutional investors are going to react to this, but I think they don't really care. Yeah. They file that under potential liabilities.

But here's the thing. Again, having gone to law school, practiced law, a lot of people are against tort lawyers. The Republicans historically always preached tort reform Product liability laws.

Oh my God, it was so hard to put out a product that as soon as you do, someone sues you because a baby got caught in it, or a dog, or a cat, or a bird, or something. But if you talk to the product liability lawyers, they will tell you that they were the biggest force for good, for change in a good way, in making sure that products are safe, and making sure that the toys our kids play with are safe, and making sure our computers and everything are tested, UL licensed, or Underwriter Lab tested. And that's a function in our country, there's two places where that kind of protection gets done.

Legislatively, via a legislative action, via laws, or via the courts. And in the absence of legislation, the courts become your decider of safety, your decider of what the public should accept, what's reasonable. And that's what it's supposed to do.

So it's doing exactly what it was designed to do. So I did a separate story yesterday about OpenAI. It's kind of somewhat related to this, but the thing that is interesting to me is the numbers are leaking out about their financials, which aren't very pretty in terms of their spending, capital expenditures, the amount of revenue they're bringing in.

So the kimono is opening up on OpenAI, and it is not a very pretty picture, but there's so much money here in play that people are going to be willing to overlook a lot of their flaws and their scars. Well, also, the whole circle jerk, right? How does this affect Oracle?

How does it affect Microsoft? How does it affect Nvidia? The only thing to do is make it a government entity.

I'm kidding. Well, work with Intel. Yeah.

But to John's point, did they skip or ignore all these same things? I'm sure they did. Because it was costing them a fortune, and they couldn't possibly support it anyway.

And if they had to add that- No, they didn't have time. This was- Yeah, look at their models. I mean, look how they just pump these things out every five or six weeks.

And then as soon as Anthropic got close, these guys were in a race. This is like a space race. They go not because it's easy, but because it's hard.

I'm not quite clear how the fact that I have competitors creates a scenario where it's okay for me to deploy and expose- I didn't say it was okay, but your ethics may be different than their ethics. Oh. They have them?

Oh. Sorry. You're not throwing Molotov cocktails at his house, are you, John?

No, Comrade Swartz is not doing that. No. Exactly.

Others are doing it. Yes, we remember saying they did, yeah. I don't know who did it, but there was actually another story.

I didn't read this, but Anthropic employees feel endangered? I saw that, too. Oh my gosh.

Yes, I saw that. Crazy. Well, they feel endangered from their own government.

Yes, that's true. I guess, out of all this, whatever the rules might wind up being, I think what we really just want is for the end user, the average person, to be more cognizant of what it is that they're engaging with. And if they choose to engage, great, but they should at the very least make an informed decision versus I think today they're just kind of sometimes willy-nilly going down the path without realizing exactly what it is that they are being enticed to be a part of.

And the record is in all the folks who've left this company over their qualms or their concerns about Anthropic. Not just the founding of Anthropic and other companies, but there are a number of people who are hemorrhaging from that company who have some real anxiety issues about what they did and how far they did it. And we're going to find out a lot more about it as they get closer to going public.

And the other thing is, Mike, it sounded like you were talking about just the consumer version. Look at all these people from the business world who have put all of their eggs in the basket of generative AI and these tools, and all of a sudden it's like, okay, maybe that's not the way we should be using AI. There is a use for it, but is throwing everything at generative AI the right way?

Is that the right way for my business? And they're just now starting to back up and use their business sense to understand what's actually going on. So a lot of people were fooled by the marketing, the aggressive marketing of these companies.

Were they fooled or they just closed their eyes to it? That's a good question. Yep.

Ethical question. It's a question for another day, though, because we're over time on this section. Well, actually, it's a question for the next subject, so we'll get there.

All right. Mike, you spent the day down in New York City, a day early for the parade, I'm afraid, but there was something else going on there, wasn't there? Yeah.

So AWS had a big event here in New York at the Javits Center, and they were talking about a lot of things. But ultimately, they were moving to deposition the providers of LLMs. So when you think about it, it went something like this.

First, they made available their own harness, but that harness is independent of any LLM. And what they're moving towards is that you can be able to swap out LLMs dynamically over time and just use them for the one that's best for the job task, and which one costs the less to actually use. Then they went a step further and launched a context service that says, well, you can now get to your data to inform the AI agent about what it is that it should be doing without having to shove everything into memory.

So the idea here is that the cost of using the AI agents will drop because we're going to use them more efficiently, and we won't be filling up their context windows with data that is available readily elsewhere that they can just point to Then they went another step further and said that they are building out essentially agentic engineering framework for building software and testing it and making sure it's secure and deploying it. That will essentially be a system of AI agents. And the idea here is that the agents, when they're building software, will communicate to other agents that will test it and also make it secure, and then another set of AI agents will deploy it, and it will become this virtuous loop, continuous, that every time there's an update, all these agents will be talking to each other to make sure that all these things are secure.

And then finally, on one last thing, they kind of like also were talking up Amazon Quark, which is their AI assistant, which can now be used by your average end user to build their own AI agents. So they're saying you don't really need a separate motion for AI agents. It's going to be part of your AI assistance capability, and we will all become much more AI fluent as we use these apps to manage our email and to monitor various tasks and issues as we go along.

And the level of toil will be a lot less. But when you put it all together, they have this whole motion in play that goes from the end user all the way back through software engineering and everything in between that is all tied around the AWS cloud service. But one of the things they are saying with no bones about it is that LLMs are commodities.

This goes back to what we were talking about on yesterday's show about the becoming utility. Intelligence, base LLM intelligence becomes commodity and utility. You know what's interesting, Mike, though, listening to you describe this, isn't this Bedrock?

Isn't that what's supposed to be what Bedrock was? Yeah. Bedrock is at the core of it, and then they have Agent Core that sits kind of on top of Bedrock, and Agent Core is their platform for building and deploying your own AI agents.

But they're also, Quark is just an app that you download, and you can build your own agents yourself. So there's going to be agents from one end to the other on this whole setup, but it's an entire framework. But at the end of the day, despite their investments in Anthropic or whatever else, they're going out of their way to make sure that everybody kind of understands that, yeah, that LLM is just some backend service API thing that you call, and you can call any one of them you want.

And they don't really care which one you wind up using. So I guess part of my soul starts to wonder, well, are the valuations of these LLMs in the right place when I'm looking at players like AWS are going to be pretty much taking control of the whole workflow and the motion? John, what do you think?

Yeah, that's interesting. We've talked about this before, I think. Like eventually, this is where it's headed, and I find it so intriguing.

We see this dance not just between Amazon and Anthropic, between Microsoft and OpenAI. They have vested interests in these companies. They've invested billions of dollars in them, but they're also competing with them and in a sense not marginalizing them, but trying to narrow their general success.

I don't know. I'm just kind of speaking off the top of my head, but I just find this whole dynamic completely interesting in where it's headed. I think it makes perfect sense though, John, and it goes back to the utility model.

Mm-hmm. They want to invest in the utility because they need electricity. They need intelligence.

They don't want that utility to move up the stack on them because they want to own that stack, or they want to play in that stack. So they're happy to invest in the infrastructure, in the grid. Mm-hmm.

They don't want the electricity company turning into General Electric, too. Right. Right.

So Gina, let me ask you this. So clearly other providers who are cloud service providers will do something similar, and we'll probably see Google and Microsoft moving down that path already, and you can already see signals from Microsoft to that degree. So the question becomes, is the devil you know better than the one you don't, or which?

I think it's probably going to turn into being how are you running things and where are you running things and where is your data, and really what's kind of your business point for it? Because the first thing I thought about was like, hey, this is great to get you locked in to AWS, but what if you have a requirement to keep your data on-prem, whether it's a governmental regulation or your data is all sitting in mainframes in a data center? So I think it's more going to be back to computer science, back to ops world, like where are these different pieces going to be located, and is that the best place for your business where your regulatory requirements allow you to do that?

But what happens to all of the on-prem and the edge use cases, and what happens to all of those? And is it the best idea to go to AWS? And it may well be for a lot of companies, but maybe it's not, and I'm sure that there's lots of vendors, infrastructure vendors that will have a thing to say.

But I do think there probably needs to be some kind of orchestration layer that will look at that and say, "Okay, look, you've got this in AWS, and this part of your AI pipeline is going there. But then when you turn it out and you want it to be working on the edge, you're going to use this type of product, and you're going to use Slurm like you already have," like whatever's going to happen. Where are all the different pieces and parts going to go?

So there probably needs to be some kind of layer sitting on top of all that that can orchestrate it that makes the best sense to you. There is great irony in what you said. So when I was much younger, everybody was taught, bring the compute to the data.

And then the cloud came along, and we basically started putting everything up in the cloud or moving data into the cloud. " And so now we're getting to a point now where I think as we evolve, it won't matter. The data will stay wherever it was created, and we'll apply the AI to wherever it is.

So if there's an app running in the cloud and it creates data, fine. But if there's an on-premise environment or an edge computing environment, we're not going to be moving all that data to some model somewhere. We're going to let that sit where it is, and we're going to let the fundamentals of computer science rule.

What do you think, Gina? Is that where we're heading with all this? I totally agree with that.

I think we have to start thinking about this from a workload for your business. What is the AI workload? And we start to turn it into that kind of language that you have this AI pipeline, that's great.

It's a workload. So architects understand how to build the right environment for it. And if the desired environment is for part of it to go to AWS and part of it to stay on the ground, the architect will figure out what it's going to take to do that.

But I think there needs to be a way that architects can include some kind of automation layer in that design so it's not dragging us back 10 years, but it's putting us forward 20. There you go. Or something called a control plane has to exist that's in the hands of the IT people and not in the hands of your service provider.

Depending, maybe you want it in the service provider's hands. I mean, it just kind of depends. Where do you want it?

True that. I'm all about it depends. Mike, tell us more about the release management DevOps agent, though.

So this is kind of an extension of their DevOps portfolio, and if you were watching the show last fall when we were at their conference, they launched a penetration testing agent. And they positioned that as kind of part of a first in a series of what will become AI agents for DevOps and DevSecOps workflows. And now they're adding a release management tool or agent that sits there and looks at your code and evaluates it against the production environment and deems whether it is worthy to be promoted.

So this used to be a function that was very manual and something that was in the eye of the beholder, and maybe the AI agent will be biased, and maybe the AI agent will have a more informed opinion because it can see the entire production environment. But a lot of what used to be, shall we say, DevOps guesswork, will become more automated and maybe more scientific? We'll see.

But Alan, you've been around DevOps a long time. How do you think this whole thing is evolving? Because they're using phrases like agentic engineering now is the way we're headed.

Yeah, no, there's a lot of these new engineering roles that you said, was it forward-facing engineering or something? There's all kinds of these roles. It's interesting, we don't see a lot of news around agentic and DevOps.

But make no mistake, what they're talking about here is what's happening up and down, in that we are continuing to automate release engineering. Yeah. Which at the end of the day is kind of DevOps, right?

That CI/CD pipeline and release engineering. And that was always one of the principles of DevOps. Let's automate it if we can, and it makes sense.

Of course, just because you can doesn't mean you should. And that is the question I think you got to look at some of these AI DevOps agents is, are they improving the flow? Yeah.

Or are they impeding it? I think part of the issue too is, I think CI has been great, and it's much more of a, in my mind, it leans to the developer. The CD part of the equation has never been quite as fulfilled as it should've been, and it's still very manual in a lot of organizations.

And I'm thinking, in the age of agentic AI, we'll finally automate the CD side of this equation. But I don't know how this plays out at the end of the day, because do I just need a CI platform and a separate CD platform and the agents will talk to each other, or do I need this integrated CI/CD platform that comes from a single vendor? I don't know how that's going to play out.

Neither do I. I guess we'll have to wait and see. Mike, I wanted to move on to our next section.

And it seems as the, I don't know if it's the media, the government, the public, or whatever, but we've got our hero and villain, right? And OpenAI seems to play the villain. Everybody's suing them and blaming them.

And here comes the good guys, Anthropic, our Dudley Do-Rights rescuing the gal off the train tracks. What have they done now? Well, they're contributing money to this initiative that's going to clean up the carbon that a lot of these AI factories are now generating.

Of course they are. And so the idea here is that there's a bunch of folks who are going to help clean up the carbon and create better infrastructure for generating the outputs from AI that don't necessarily destroy the environment as much. Now, I don't know, 915 million collectively sounds like maybe a drop in the bucket of what's required here, but I'm going to leave it to Gina.

Is this a serious initiative, or is this kind of a PR move to make it seem like we're doing something about something that we might get beat up on later? Maybe. I think it's interesting, and I think there's two things, right?

There's this big race to create these ginormous data centers, and I've been saying the whole time, "Do we need that? " And you don't see a lot of the different pushbacks to say, "Okay, we're causing this big old mess here, and we've caused it for the last 20, 30 years. " I think the doing something is good, and I had to look it up.

So how are they actually getting the carbon? What kind of things are they looking at? So they basically turn CO2 into rock and store it someplace.

They weather the rocks, so they spread them out over the beach, and the CO2 naturally gets sucked into them. And then direct air capture. So there's a whole bunch of ways that they can do it.

So the money is for building companies that can actually go out there and do more, and do something with the CO2. Now, what happens when our grandchildren have to deal with all the stored CO2? That I'm not sure.

And would it turn into oil? That just kind of popped into my head. I'm not really sure.

And maybe that's the conspiracy theorist in me thinking, well, maybe they're trying to find ways to artificially make new oil without having to drill for it. I don't know. That's kind of just craziness.

But I think ways to naturally try to find a balance in what we're doing to the environment and bring it back, that should be great. Would it be great if it was more money towards it and more focused on actually the outputs of what's happening, and how many startups have they funded, and how are those startups doing, and what kind of measurable difference have they made? That would all be kind of cool to see, but I guess that's going to come down the road.

I don't know. It is crazy, but now that you mention it, I was like, "All right, so now we're fracking for AI oil. " Well, they'll have it all in one place.

So they stick all those rocks in one contained place, and then they can just turn on the drip. I don't know. I don't know.

I am optimistic about one thing, Alan, and I'll throw it your way. There is this emerging industry around carbon removal, and it seems like that's going to be a thing, and that's probably a good thing for the environment. But I don't think it gets the play it should.

But I don't know. Do you think this is going to be an industry? I got to be honest with you.

So I'm no alchemist. I don't see how you turn CO2 into oil or capture it. I don't know.

But- We were just thinking about that one ... that being said- ... " Or you go on an airplane, and you could pay an extra dollar or two to be carbon neutral on this flight.

It's wrapped around all this green goodness, but I don't know how many of us even know what the hell they're talking about. Yeah. And what are we collecting the carbon for?

Is this to help make Jeeps for the war effort? What are we... Right.

At some point, this is why we could sit here like, "This, this, and this," while our government says climate change doesn't exist because we don't really understand the carbon cycle, if you will, and how this affects us. And what does it really mean to pull carbon out and be carbon neutral? And put it in seawater, put it in limestone, do something, send it off-planet.

I don't know what you do with it. But as a society, as a nation, we need to understand this stuff better so that... Because it seems like the rest of the world's pretty sure that we're screwing up the environment pretty terribly, right?

We're the lone holdouts who say, "Bah, humbug. Pay no attention outside your window. " It'll make for better video.

Wait, I give kudos, though, to Frontier's AMC project. At least they're doing something, but the cynic in me also tells me that Anthropic, hey, they're also going public. And this is a little bit of a kind of PR place in their PR build out.

No, it reinforces their brand. They're the good guys. Yeah, it reinforces their brand as the good guy.

But then again, the standard approach to corporate sustainability has historically relied on buying cheap, existing carbon offsets, so any type of progress. But then again, how much are these companies spending on data centers over the next few years? Billions.

8 billion? Yes. I mean...

I say we take all the carbon rocks, and we ship them over to SpaceX. They put them up on Mars, and then we can discover carbon-based life forms on Mars. What do you say?

Well, if Elon Musk goes to Mars- Because of home turf ... with this project, then I'm all for it, yeah. What makes you think SpaceX could get to Mars?

I saw somewhere where they talked about how the stock is overvalued by 94%. Yeah. That's it?

What? What's that saying about aim for the stars and be happy when you land on the moon? Is that it?

I don't know if they get to the moon, but we'll never get to the moon. Yeah. But no, seriously, it's a thing.

This is like something out of the WWE wrestling book, right? Where Sam is the heel, Dario is the hero. And I'm telling you- It's the baby face ...

there's going to be movies about it. I'm going to ask my AI to write a movie for this. Oh, no.

That's a good column. It's hanging out. It's more than-- Yeah.

Can you ask your AI how many carbon credits you need to offset to write that? I'm sure it would know too, because they're up on this stuff. But guys, we're about out of time for today, so I wanted to wrap it up.

If you couldn't tell, I'm a big supporter here of the attorney general, the guy who runs the Florida Department of Health. Really upstanding people. What you may not know is the guy who runs the Florida Department of Health, in addition to his six-figure salary as the head of the Florida Department of Health, also collects a nice hefty salary from the University of Florida system as an adjunct professor for classes he doesn't teach.

But it's just another way of lining his pockets. And our governor here- Ah ... Ron DeSantis, has done this with many people within his cabinet.

Right? They're all professors who don't teach anything, and they're collecting salaries, driving up our tuitions. So, just another nice thing about the state of Florida, Gina.

You're not trapped in Texas. You don't want to be trapped here. I love my home state.

I will tell you that. I love it, and I have faith in the people of Florida, not the leaders. No.

But anyway, enough of ranting and raving. I'll come down about that. An interesting week here on Techstrong gang.

AI continues to push, pull, stretch, break so many things that we are doing day to day, and it shows no sign of letting up. In fact, it looks like it's accelerating even. It'll be interesting next week.

Enjoy your day off for Juneteenth tomorrow. John, Gina, Mike, thank you for joining in. Thank you for watching.

As usual, we got Techstrong TV. tv, on our Techstrong YouTube channel, OTT, on just about any screen you like to watch videos on. But until then, have a great weekend, a great holiday.

We'll be back Monday with more. You've just watched the Techstrong gang.