Geoffrey Cain

Oh, yeah, absolutely. So TikTok is a national security threat, and that's because it gives the Chinese Communist Party enormous algorithmic power in addition to data gathering abilities. The algorithmic power is really the important point that I think people don't emphasize enough.

Oh, yeah, absolutely. So TikTok is a national security threat, and that's because it gives the Chinese Communist Party enormous algorithmic power in addition to data gathering abilities. The algorithmic power is really the important point that I think people don't emphasize enough.

It's the ability to reach billions of people on this app who might be young, who might be impressionable, who might fall under the sway of Chinese Communist Party propaganda and In the event of, say, an invasion of Taiwan, the Chinese government has threatened Taiwan. It has threatened war around the region. And we need to be ready and aware for that possibility.

It's the ability to reach billions of people on this app who might be young, who might be impressionable, who might fall under the sway of Chinese Communist Party propaganda and In the event of, say, an invasion of Taiwan, the Chinese government has threatened Taiwan. It has threatened war around the region. And we need to be ready and aware for that possibility.

It's not out of the realm of what is possible in the coming years. And I'm not being alarmist. That's literally what they say. So deep-seek is not – I wouldn't call it a national security threat yet, but an impending national security threat. And the reason I start on that assumption –

It's not out of the realm of what is possible in the coming years. And I'm not being alarmist. That's literally what they say. So deep-seek is not – I wouldn't call it a national security threat yet, but an impending national security threat. And the reason I start on that assumption –

is because Chinese law requires everybody in China at the demand of the Ministry of State Security, which is China's CIA and FBI rolled into one, to hand over data, to cooperate in intelligence gathering, basically do what the Chinese government says or face jail time. This AI is a part of China's national strategy. It's not merely a matter of

is because Chinese law requires everybody in China at the demand of the Ministry of State Security, which is China's CIA and FBI rolled into one, to hand over data, to cooperate in intelligence gathering, basically do what the Chinese government says or face jail time. This AI is a part of China's national strategy. It's not merely a matter of

making a chat bot and allowing people to play around with it. This is a part of China's national strategy, even though I think we both agree, you know, these were outsiders. This was a startup that wasn't really involved with the Chinese state. They will be soon without a doubt because the Chinese government will require it. And this isn't just about generative AI. There's lots of types of AI.

making a chat bot and allowing people to play around with it. This is a part of China's national strategy, even though I think we both agree, you know, these were outsiders. This was a startup that wasn't really involved with the Chinese state. They will be soon without a doubt because the Chinese government will require it. And this isn't just about generative AI. There's lots of types of AI.

I saw it when I was in China, when I was investigating surveillance AI, so facial recognition technology, a lot of this being developed with the help of software developers who are trained by Microsoft and other American companies being sent out there to set up an AI system, which, by the way, the Chinese government literally called Skynet. I mean, it's like right out of Terminator.

I saw it when I was in China, when I was investigating surveillance AI, so facial recognition technology, a lot of this being developed with the help of software developers who are trained by Microsoft and other American companies being sent out there to set up an AI system, which, by the way, the Chinese government literally called Skynet. I mean, it's like right out of Terminator.

And this is a predictive policing model that they use in Western China They would attempt to predict whether somebody would commit a terrorist act or a crime of any kind, send police to their house, take them away to a concentration camp for what they call re-education, which is a form of psychological torture.

And this is a predictive policing model that they use in Western China They would attempt to predict whether somebody would commit a terrorist act or a crime of any kind, send police to their house, take them away to a concentration camp for what they call re-education, which is a form of psychological torture.

This was being done with the help of a vast AI system gathering data on everybody through their text messages there. their apps, their police observations. So this is the kind of thing that we need to stand on guard for because the Chinese government has been trying to export a lot of this stuff.

This was being done with the help of a vast AI system gathering data on everybody through their text messages there. their apps, their police observations. So this is the kind of thing that we need to stand on guard for because the Chinese government has been trying to export a lot of this stuff.

It's been sanctioned by the U.S., but these are billion-dollar unicorns that are major global companies, and they're involved in vast human rights abuses and vast national security concerns in China. So that's why I'm concerned when the Chinese Communist Party gets involved, it is a national security threat because it simply can't be anything else.

It's been sanctioned by the U.S., but these are billion-dollar unicorns that are major global companies, and they're involved in vast human rights abuses and vast national security concerns in China. So that's why I'm concerned when the Chinese Communist Party gets involved, it is a national security threat because it simply can't be anything else.

Happy to be here. Good to be here, Barry.

Happy to be here. Good to be here, Barry.

I would actually reverse the argument. And I would say that actually it's China that needs to listen to the rest of the world, especially the democratic world, because this is a country where you can envelope yourself in propaganda from morning to night. And it's impossible unless you have a VPN, which is illegal in China. It's impossible to get access to social media outside of the country.

I would actually reverse the argument. And I would say that actually it's China that needs to listen to the rest of the world, especially the democratic world, because this is a country where you can envelope yourself in propaganda from morning to night. And it's impossible unless you have a VPN, which is illegal in China. It's impossible to get access to social media outside of the country.

It's impossible to get access to chat GPT and to other GPTs made in America. So, you know, it's a country that has become enormously inward looking over the past decade that has marched in the steps of past authoritarian and even fascistic governments.

It's impossible to get access to chat GPT and to other GPTs made in America. So, you know, it's a country that has become enormously inward looking over the past decade that has marched in the steps of past authoritarian and even fascistic governments.

I often make the argument that the Chinese Communist Party has more in common with the fascist regimes of the past with Italy and Nazi Germany instead of the communist regimes, which were essentially socialist regimes. The Chinese Communist Party teaches a curriculum that

I often make the argument that the Chinese Communist Party has more in common with the fascist regimes of the past with Italy and Nazi Germany instead of the communist regimes, which were essentially socialist regimes. The Chinese Communist Party teaches a curriculum that

racial nationhood, this idea that the people of the nation come from a master race that's been misunderstood and that seeks to conquer lands around it.

racial nationhood, this idea that the people of the nation come from a master race that's been misunderstood and that seeks to conquer lands around it.

It's very much a dangerous imperial system that we've allowed to get out of control by allowing them to join the World Trade Organization, by allowing the Chinese Communist Party to enter our international organizations, the World Health Organization, which censored and suppressed information originally about COVID because it might anger China.

It's very much a dangerous imperial system that we've allowed to get out of control by allowing them to join the World Trade Organization, by allowing the Chinese Communist Party to enter our international organizations, the World Health Organization, which censored and suppressed information originally about COVID because it might anger China.

We're now dealing with a behemoth, a giant of authoritarian potential worldwide that seeks to undermine democracy. And, you know, as long as our companies, as long as our people here are scared of criticizing China, which many companies are, you go to any big tech company, almost all of them will say nothing bad about China or about the CCP or the human rights abuses there.

We're now dealing with a behemoth, a giant of authoritarian potential worldwide that seeks to undermine democracy. And, you know, as long as our companies, as long as our people here are scared of criticizing China, which many companies are, you go to any big tech company, almost all of them will say nothing bad about China or about the CCP or the human rights abuses there.

the national security concerns there because they've been bought off by market access. They want to be able to manufacture their EVs and their cars and whatever else it is that they're making in China.

the national security concerns there because they've been bought off by market access. They want to be able to manufacture their EVs and their cars and whatever else it is that they're making in China.

So we're now in a situation where we have to contend with a world power, an emerging world power that is antithetical to democracy in almost every single way that has become more authoritarian as they've opened up their markets and that seeks to counter U.S. power all over the world. It's a dangerous situation we're in.

So we're now in a situation where we have to contend with a world power, an emerging world power that is antithetical to democracy in almost every single way that has become more authoritarian as they've opened up their markets and that seeks to counter U.S. power all over the world. It's a dangerous situation we're in.

So nuclear weapons, significantly different technology from AI. We still don't fully understand what AI has the potential to do. Whereas with the nuclear weapon, that became quite obvious with Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the sheer destruction of The guaranteed destruction of World War III was clear and evident right there. But today with AI, you know, this is not a physical bomb.

So nuclear weapons, significantly different technology from AI. We still don't fully understand what AI has the potential to do. Whereas with the nuclear weapon, that became quite obvious with Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the sheer destruction of The guaranteed destruction of World War III was clear and evident right there. But today with AI, you know, this is not a physical bomb.

It's not a physical weapon. It's something that can certainly reshape our society, reshape the way we do things, even the way that we do wage war, but it's not necessarily going to lead to that kind of world cataclysmic event. It could. I mean, I'm not ruling that out, but it's certainly possible.

It's not a physical weapon. It's something that can certainly reshape our society, reshape the way we do things, even the way that we do wage war, but it's not necessarily going to lead to that kind of world cataclysmic event. It could. I mean, I'm not ruling that out, but it's certainly possible.

I do think that there is a key point of significance when making these comparisons between the Cold War I and Cold War II. A lot of Cold War I was won by the U.S. and the West, our allies, because of our technological innovation. And one of the big innovations was in semiconductors with massive government support.

I do think that there is a key point of significance when making these comparisons between the Cold War I and Cold War II. A lot of Cold War I was won by the U.S. and the West, our allies, because of our technological innovation. And one of the big innovations was in semiconductors with massive government support.

The Silicon Valley that we know today did not exist in the same way in the 1950s to the 80s. It was a site of military testing for semiconductors to try to create the most cutting edge technology that then we could use in our tech.

The Silicon Valley that we know today did not exist in the same way in the 1950s to the 80s. It was a site of military testing for semiconductors to try to create the most cutting edge technology that then we could use in our tech.

Guys like Steve Jobs, Bill Gates, the people who invented the Internet and so forth, a lot of them would not have been able to execute their vision, which was moving towards technological change to the miniaturization of technology and PCs without the innovations that had come before that through government funding, through government support. And, you know, just imagine a world today.

Guys like Steve Jobs, Bill Gates, the people who invented the Internet and so forth, a lot of them would not have been able to execute their vision, which was moving towards technological change to the miniaturization of technology and PCs without the innovations that had come before that through government funding, through government support. And, you know, just imagine a world today.

So we're now in Cold War II, as Niall is saying. Imagine if in Cold War I we had all this fantastic technology that was going to win the war, And we signed a free trade agreement with the Soviet Union and just gave it all to them and said, here's our tech. We're giving it to you. Use it well. This is free trade. We're going to help each other. We're going to coexist.

So we're now in Cold War II, as Niall is saying. Imagine if in Cold War I we had all this fantastic technology that was going to win the war, And we signed a free trade agreement with the Soviet Union and just gave it all to them and said, here's our tech. We're giving it to you. Use it well. This is free trade. We're going to help each other. We're going to coexist.

That would have been devastation because they would have been able to unleash all kinds of things that would compete with us, that would guarantee potentially their victory. We're now in a really unusual stage in human history. I has just been unprecedented in our age today, the last 30 years. We've just seen so much in the period that we live in.

That would have been devastation because they would have been able to unleash all kinds of things that would compete with us, that would guarantee potentially their victory. We're now in a really unusual stage in human history. I has just been unprecedented in our age today, the last 30 years. We've just seen so much in the period that we live in.

But now we're at a stage where we're handing a hostile authoritarian government cutting edge technology that they intend to use against us, that they intend to use to dominate the global order. And that's a very dangerous situation to be in.

But now we're at a stage where we're handing a hostile authoritarian government cutting edge technology that they intend to use against us, that they intend to use to dominate the global order. And that's a very dangerous situation to be in.

Well, the big question that everyone is asking is, will we be able to reach what is called a general AI or an AI that's able to essentially think and switch between tasks similar to how the human mind might take care of things? So this would be an AI that could, you know, at the same time, surveil you, gather data on you, and then go to, you know, generative mode and then go to

Well, the big question that everyone is asking is, will we be able to reach what is called a general AI or an AI that's able to essentially think and switch between tasks similar to how the human mind might take care of things? So this would be an AI that could, you know, at the same time, surveil you, gather data on you, and then go to, you know, generative mode and then go to

do this and that, make your dishes, run a tank. General AI is something that can do just about anything in theory, but it's not totally clear yet whether we're ever going to reach that stage of AI that is so all powerful. What I think victory looks like, if it is possible to reach that stage, victory will be whoever hits general AI. And if China is able to reach that stage before the United States

do this and that, make your dishes, run a tank. General AI is something that can do just about anything in theory, but it's not totally clear yet whether we're ever going to reach that stage of AI that is so all powerful. What I think victory looks like, if it is possible to reach that stage, victory will be whoever hits general AI. And if China is able to reach that stage before the United States

it would be very alarming because it would mean that there would be an all-powerful intelligent AI that can hack systems, that can wage cyber warfare, that can maneuver around an American telecommunications infrastructure, that can take control of missiles. Now, I don't mean to sound like it's the movie Terminator or something, or the robots are going to come alive.

it would be very alarming because it would mean that there would be an all-powerful intelligent AI that can hack systems, that can wage cyber warfare, that can maneuver around an American telecommunications infrastructure, that can take control of missiles. Now, I don't mean to sound like it's the movie Terminator or something, or the robots are going to come alive.

I'm not sure that's actually going to happen. But if AI does get that powerful, that it can take on many tasks and exponentially learn from

I'm not sure that's actually going to happen. But if AI does get that powerful, that it can take on many tasks and exponentially learn from

from them and China gets there first or any hostile government gets there first, that would be a serious problem for democracies everywhere because we would have to contend with something that's infinitely smarter than us that even our systems cannot respond to.

from them and China gets there first or any hostile government gets there first, that would be a serious problem for democracies everywhere because we would have to contend with something that's infinitely smarter than us that even our systems cannot respond to.

That's bullshit. Total bullshit. Say more. Yeah, that's the lead up. That's what people said before World War I. It was a time of wonderful flourishing of technology, of free trade, of really the first vestiges of what would today look like globalization. I mean, that was late Belle Epoque.

That's bullshit. Total bullshit. Say more. Yeah, that's the lead up. That's what people said before World War I. It was a time of wonderful flourishing of technology, of free trade, of really the first vestiges of what would today look like globalization. I mean, that was late Belle Epoque.

when the world was becoming more prosperous, more industrialized, and traditional borders were not looking the same as they had in the past. But that was the lead up to World War I. And part of the reason is because of national pride, nationalism. It was the world going to war because, you know, for no particular reason at all, it wasn't even clear why the world was at war.

when the world was becoming more prosperous, more industrialized, and traditional borders were not looking the same as they had in the past. But that was the lead up to World War I. And part of the reason is because of national pride, nationalism. It was the world going to war because, you know, for no particular reason at all, it wasn't even clear why the world was at war.

But that pride that comes before the fall is something to certainly be wary of.

But that pride that comes before the fall is something to certainly be wary of.

I don't necessarily think that we should ban it. I wouldn't use the word ban, but I do believe in reciprocity when it comes to trade. And I do think that we should look at finding ways to separate Chinese AI companies that are accessible in the US. Those should ultimately be controlled by either friendly countries or US companies. And the reason is because of reciprocity.

I don't necessarily think that we should ban it. I wouldn't use the word ban, but I do believe in reciprocity when it comes to trade. And I do think that we should look at finding ways to separate Chinese AI companies that are accessible in the US. Those should ultimately be controlled by either friendly countries or US companies. And the reason is because of reciprocity.

Almost everything that we produce online is blocked in China. When Americans like us go to China, and say free trade is great, that only works if both sides are playing by the same rule. This is an example of one side.

Almost everything that we produce online is blocked in China. When Americans like us go to China, and say free trade is great, that only works if both sides are playing by the same rule. This is an example of one side.

And when I say this, I'm talking about before the recent tariffs that went up, but one side largely playing by the rules of free trade and one side essentially creating a closed market and exporting dumping materials on the rest of the world. So it's a completely unbalanced system. It doesn't work in anybody's favor outside of China.

And when I say this, I'm talking about before the recent tariffs that went up, but one side largely playing by the rules of free trade and one side essentially creating a closed market and exporting dumping materials on the rest of the world. So it's a completely unbalanced system. It doesn't work in anybody's favor outside of China.

And we need to do what we can to separate some of these industries to ensure that what's happening in China is reciprocal to what's available in the U.S.

And we need to do what we can to separate some of these industries to ensure that what's happening in China is reciprocal to what's available in the U.S.

It's a false equivalence, and it's something that a lot of people do say, but it's just it's flat out wrong. American companies do take data. And there are terms in the agreement that are guardrails against how your data is used. On top of that, we have a system of checks and balances of courts and independent judiciary in America. So if something were to happen, you do have some kind of recourse.

It's a false equivalence, and it's something that a lot of people do say, but it's just it's flat out wrong. American companies do take data. And there are terms in the agreement that are guardrails against how your data is used. On top of that, we have a system of checks and balances of courts and independent judiciary in America. So if something were to happen, you do have some kind of recourse.

To say that the United States, the government, the democracy of the United States is comparable to a one-party authoritarian regime is just flat out wrong. And the thing about China is that that data that you put in, whether it's in DeepSeek or it's in TikTok or whatever it might be, that data is accessible in China. The Chinese Communist Party, if they want it, they can get their hands on it.

To say that the United States, the government, the democracy of the United States is comparable to a one-party authoritarian regime is just flat out wrong. And the thing about China is that that data that you put in, whether it's in DeepSeek or it's in TikTok or whatever it might be, that data is accessible in China. The Chinese Communist Party, if they want it, they can get their hands on it.

You don't know how they're using it, but we do know that this is a party that puts millions of people in concentration camps. Do you want those people having access to your data, to your kids' data? Whether or not you know what they're doing with it, you can see that this is a pretty evil regime, and we do want to separate... the data that exists here in America versus what's accessible in China.

You don't know how they're using it, but we do know that this is a party that puts millions of people in concentration camps. Do you want those people having access to your data, to your kids' data? Whether or not you know what they're doing with it, you can see that this is a pretty evil regime, and we do want to separate... the data that exists here in America versus what's accessible in China.

I have been using it and I'm also a big user of AI. I do enjoy using these chatbots and seeing what comes of them. DeepSeek, it is a step forward in AI technology, but the problem here is that this is about much more than AI itself. This is companies in China going to an old playbook that they've been using for a while. against the United States and its companies.

I have been using it and I'm also a big user of AI. I do enjoy using these chatbots and seeing what comes of them. DeepSeek, it is a step forward in AI technology, but the problem here is that this is about much more than AI itself. This is companies in China going to an old playbook that they've been using for a while. against the United States and its companies.

It is incredible. So just to interject one thing, I've been working on a PhD for a long time, and seeing these advances, it feels as if You know, that years and years of work on a PhD, it's like, oh, man, you know, a chatbot can do this. What was the point? Yeah, what was the point of all that?

It is incredible. So just to interject one thing, I've been working on a PhD for a long time, and seeing these advances, it feels as if You know, that years and years of work on a PhD, it's like, oh, man, you know, a chatbot can do this. What was the point? Yeah, what was the point of all that?

And this playbook is taking technologies that already exist where the U.S. and its allies are on the leading edge and refining them, trying to find ways to execute them better, to incrementally improve them, to make them cheaper, easier to use, and then releasing them on the mass market, in this case, in an open source way.

And this playbook is taking technologies that already exist where the U.S. and its allies are on the leading edge and refining them, trying to find ways to execute them better, to incrementally improve them, to make them cheaper, easier to use, and then releasing them on the mass market, in this case, in an open source way.

So I think that's a good policy on China because that's the best tool that we have now to offset the effects of China's forced technology transfers of U.S. companies. It's dumping of products on the U.S. market and the various... forms of trade trickery that the Chinese government has used over the last 30 years. The tariff is good because it offsets all that while keeping the dollar strong.

So I think that's a good policy on China because that's the best tool that we have now to offset the effects of China's forced technology transfers of U.S. companies. It's dumping of products on the U.S. market and the various... forms of trade trickery that the Chinese government has used over the last 30 years. The tariff is good because it offsets all that while keeping the dollar strong.

That's one of the reasons why the Trump administration does like tariffs. And I should also add, we have done a lot to sanction certain industries in China. We've also gone after Chinese banks with sanctions that are operating in Mexico that are involved in getting the base chemicals for fentanyl across the border. So there's been a lot of that done already, the targeted work.

That's one of the reasons why the Trump administration does like tariffs. And I should also add, we have done a lot to sanction certain industries in China. We've also gone after Chinese banks with sanctions that are operating in Mexico that are involved in getting the base chemicals for fentanyl across the border. So there's been a lot of that done already, the targeted work.

But now, because we're starting to reach the limits of what's possible with those sanctions, it's time to put a tax on Chinese products that are being unfairly dumped, that are forcing these technology transfers, stealing American tech. That's the way to offset all this.

But now, because we're starting to reach the limits of what's possible with those sanctions, it's time to put a tax on Chinese products that are being unfairly dumped, that are forcing these technology transfers, stealing American tech. That's the way to offset all this.

So this is an example of China using that old playbook and trying to catch up and overtake U.S. technology and When I say this, I'm talking about so much more than just Gen I. This is only one example of this technology leaping forward.

So this is an example of China using that old playbook and trying to catch up and overtake U.S. technology and When I say this, I'm talking about so much more than just Gen I. This is only one example of this technology leaping forward.

Jeff, I think it's to get concessions. And we've seen how quickly the Mexican government just sent 10,000 troops to the border. Now, I agree with Tyler that a lot of this is potentially bluster. Maybe it won't last. Maybe in a month or two, everyone's going to forget about this.

Jeff, I think it's to get concessions. And we've seen how quickly the Mexican government just sent 10,000 troops to the border. Now, I agree with Tyler that a lot of this is potentially bluster. Maybe it won't last. Maybe in a month or two, everyone's going to forget about this.

But I do have to say it is interesting how quickly the Mexican government was able was willing to accede to his demands once that tariff went on. And the reason is because America, one of the biggest consumer markets of the world, Mexico depends a lot more on America than America depends on Mexico. Same for Canada.

But I do have to say it is interesting how quickly the Mexican government was able was willing to accede to his demands once that tariff went on. And the reason is because America, one of the biggest consumer markets of the world, Mexico depends a lot more on America than America depends on Mexico. Same for Canada.

Bill Bishop is the best writer about China, and I get a lot of news from his newsletter, Sinicism, which is excellent.

Bill Bishop is the best writer about China, and I get a lot of news from his newsletter, Sinicism, which is excellent.

I don't think we're going to get there. I think that it will advance, and it already is advancing far. It is incredible what AI can already do, but the amount of compute that's going to be needed for that I think is just going to be off the charts.

I don't think we're going to get there. I think that it will advance, and it already is advancing far. It is incredible what AI can already do, but the amount of compute that's going to be needed for that I think is just going to be off the charts.

I read a lot, so sometimes I even forget. So I'm actually, I just finished reading this book right here, which is Dostoevsky. It's Demons. And this is a wonderful novel about what happens when a society tries to replace the idea of God with ideologies, in this particular case, communism.

I read a lot, so sometimes I even forget. So I'm actually, I just finished reading this book right here, which is Dostoevsky. It's Demons. And this is a wonderful novel about what happens when a society tries to replace the idea of God with ideologies, in this particular case, communism.

I think that we have the potential to, and I think that we already are doing that in many ways, and we need to keep the human aspect in the AI.

I think that we have the potential to, and I think that we already are doing that in many ways, and we need to keep the human aspect in the AI.

Thank you, Jeff. Thank you, Barry. Good to see you, Barry. Thank you, Tyler.

Thank you, Jeff. Thank you, Barry. Good to see you, Barry. Thank you, Tyler.

So there is evidence that they did get chips from NVIDIA that may have been smuggled through Singapore. This is according to one government report. And then on top of that, there's also evidence that surfaced that's been published in the Financial Times, which shows that they may have trained their chatbot, their Gen AI with ChatGPT with an OpenAI product.

So there is evidence that they did get chips from NVIDIA that may have been smuggled through Singapore. This is according to one government report. And then on top of that, there's also evidence that surfaced that's been published in the Financial Times, which shows that they may have trained their chatbot, their Gen AI with ChatGPT with an OpenAI product.

Now, this would actually be against the license agreement agreement.

Now, this would actually be against the license agreement agreement.

of chat gpt so they would have been breaking the rules in that case but on top of that the other problem here is that chat gpt and most american social media and ai websites are not available in china they're banned ostensibly because of censorship concerns the chinese government wants to be able to control what these ai can say about tiananmen square and the uighur genocide and so forth and so we now have a situation where china is making a breakthrough but the us can't even compete with china on its own turf

of chat gpt so they would have been breaking the rules in that case but on top of that the other problem here is that chat gpt and most american social media and ai websites are not available in china they're banned ostensibly because of censorship concerns the chinese government wants to be able to control what these ai can say about tiananmen square and the uighur genocide and so forth and so we now have a situation where china is making a breakthrough but the us can't even compete with china on its own turf

So that's the problem here. It's the borrowing of American ideas, of American technology, the imitation of it, but then also shutting out American companies from a vast consumer market that is China.

So that's the problem here. It's the borrowing of American ideas, of American technology, the imitation of it, but then also shutting out American companies from a vast consumer market that is China.

I would say it's a breakthrough in the sense that they can do it cheaper. They certainly need less computing power, as we call it in the field, compute. But I wouldn't call it a major breakthrough. And as Tyler said, they haven't overtaken American technology. They haven't leapt forward above open AI and what we're doing in America.

I would say it's a breakthrough in the sense that they can do it cheaper. They certainly need less computing power, as we call it in the field, compute. But I wouldn't call it a major breakthrough. And as Tyler said, they haven't overtaken American technology. They haven't leapt forward above open AI and what we're doing in America.

But they are catching up fast, and they're finding ways to do it cheaper, faster, and in more imitative ways that could be very damaging one day to American industry.

But they are catching up fast, and they're finding ways to do it cheaper, faster, and in more imitative ways that could be very damaging one day to American industry.

Well, the way I understood that news was that people might have assumed that, yes, they did it without the chips or they didn't need as much compute to create the AI. But that didn't really come as a surprise to me because there are a number of hedge funds, a number of these Wall Street funds that have been looking at AI recently and have been shorting. some of these stocks.

Well, the way I understood that news was that people might have assumed that, yes, they did it without the chips or they didn't need as much compute to create the AI. But that didn't really come as a surprise to me because there are a number of hedge funds, a number of these Wall Street funds that have been looking at AI recently and have been shorting. some of these stocks.

There are questions over, you know, does the earth even have enough natural resources and energy and compute to allow the next generation models to even exist in the future? I mean, 10 years down the line, are we going to run into the barrier, the barrier that does not allow us to proceed further with this AI technology, which is so energy intensive.

There are questions over, you know, does the earth even have enough natural resources and energy and compute to allow the next generation models to even exist in the future? I mean, 10 years down the line, are we going to run into the barrier, the barrier that does not allow us to proceed further with this AI technology, which is so energy intensive.

Personally, I think that we will find ways to make the computing needs less and less over time. I don't think that this is going to be a problem in the end. And I'm more of an advocate for staying ahead of the curve. I do think that we need a lot more government investment in the chip sector. We need a lot more drive in that area, the reshoring of American manufacturing.

Personally, I think that we will find ways to make the computing needs less and less over time. I don't think that this is going to be a problem in the end. And I'm more of an advocate for staying ahead of the curve. I do think that we need a lot more government investment in the chip sector. We need a lot more drive in that area, the reshoring of American manufacturing.

So this is the problem where we stand now. We're now in a situation where compute is going down, where these chatbots are easier to make. And as Tyler said, the tech will spread. It's hard to contain. It can't really be contained. But we can do what we can to stay at the leading edge to ensure that the world hopefully one day is using American AI instead of Chinese AI.

So this is the problem where we stand now. We're now in a situation where compute is going down, where these chatbots are easier to make. And as Tyler said, the tech will spread. It's hard to contain. It can't really be contained. But we can do what we can to stay at the leading edge to ensure that the world hopefully one day is using American AI instead of Chinese AI.

So we do live in an age of technological democratization. We're seeing this with SpaceX. SpaceX, by the way, still a very resource-intensive company. It's not as if their investments are small by any means. We're seeing it in AI. We're seeing it in all kinds of technologies. Another big area where there have been massive advances, and especially in military technology, is drones. We saw a

So we do live in an age of technological democratization. We're seeing this with SpaceX. SpaceX, by the way, still a very resource-intensive company. It's not as if their investments are small by any means. We're seeing it in AI. We're seeing it in all kinds of technologies. Another big area where there have been massive advances, and especially in military technology, is drones. We saw a

cheap homemade drones coming out in Ukraine, some of them made in Turkey. And, you know, these are drones that anybody can snap a grenade on and you can, you know, fly it over a tank column and unleash weaponry destroy tank column.

cheap homemade drones coming out in Ukraine, some of them made in Turkey. And, you know, these are drones that anybody can snap a grenade on and you can, you know, fly it over a tank column and unleash weaponry destroy tank column.

So what this means in the big picture is that the traditional forms of industrial organization, of infrastructure, of warfare, military defense are potentially going to crumble in our age. We're seeing a new age where, you know, anybody can get their hands on these technologies. Anybody can innovate with them, find ways to make them cheaper and less intensive ways.

So what this means in the big picture is that the traditional forms of industrial organization, of infrastructure, of warfare, military defense are potentially going to crumble in our age. We're seeing a new age where, you know, anybody can get their hands on these technologies. Anybody can innovate with them, find ways to make them cheaper and less intensive ways.

But then the question is, how do you respond to all that? And it might simply be that chips are getting smaller and smaller and smaller. And what that means is that we're starting to hit some of the limits into what we can do in the physical realm with chips.

But then the question is, how do you respond to all that? And it might simply be that chips are getting smaller and smaller and smaller. And what that means is that we're starting to hit some of the limits into what we can do in the physical realm with chips.

But we still have to find ways to stay ahead of that curve because the way to respond to these innovations to ensure that we're safe at home is to find ways to respond to these innovations. So for example, if there are drones attacking tank columns, making tanks obsolete. We need to find a way to respond to those drones. And that's not necessarily going to be a cheaper way of doing things.

But we still have to find ways to stay ahead of that curve because the way to respond to these innovations to ensure that we're safe at home is to find ways to respond to these innovations. So for example, if there are drones attacking tank columns, making tanks obsolete. We need to find a way to respond to those drones. And that's not necessarily going to be a cheaper way of doing things.

We have to stay ahead of that curve.

We have to stay ahead of that curve.

Oh, yeah, absolutely. So TikTok is a national security threat, and that's because it gives the Chinese Communist Party enormous algorithmic power in addition to data gathering abilities. The algorithmic power is really the important point that I think people don't emphasize enough.

It's the ability to reach billions of people on this app who might be young, who might be impressionable, who might fall under the sway of Chinese Communist Party propaganda and In the event of, say, an invasion of Taiwan, the Chinese government has threatened Taiwan. It has threatened war around the region. And we need to be ready and aware for that possibility.

It's not out of the realm of what is possible in the coming years. And I'm not being alarmist. That's literally what they say. So deep-seek is not – I wouldn't call it a national security threat yet, but an impending national security threat. And the reason I start on that assumption –

is because Chinese law requires everybody in China at the demand of the Ministry of State Security, which is China's CIA and FBI rolled into one, to hand over data, to cooperate in intelligence gathering, basically do what the Chinese government says or face jail time. This AI is a part of China's national strategy. It's not merely a matter of

making a chat bot and allowing people to play around with it. This is a part of China's national strategy, even though I think we both agree, you know, these were outsiders. This was a startup that wasn't really involved with the Chinese state. They will be soon without a doubt because the Chinese government will require it. And this isn't just about generative AI. There's lots of types of AI.

I saw it when I was in China, when I was investigating surveillance AI, so facial recognition technology, a lot of this being developed with the help of software developers who are trained by Microsoft and other American companies being sent out there to set up an AI system, which, by the way, the Chinese government literally called Skynet. I mean, it's like right out of Terminator.

And this is a predictive policing model that they use in Western China They would attempt to predict whether somebody would commit a terrorist act or a crime of any kind, send police to their house, take them away to a concentration camp for what they call re-education, which is a form of psychological torture.

This was being done with the help of a vast AI system gathering data on everybody through their text messages there. their apps, their police observations. So this is the kind of thing that we need to stand on guard for because the Chinese government has been trying to export a lot of this stuff.

It's been sanctioned by the U.S., but these are billion-dollar unicorns that are major global companies, and they're involved in vast human rights abuses and vast national security concerns in China. So that's why I'm concerned when the Chinese Communist Party gets involved, it is a national security threat because it simply can't be anything else.

Happy to be here. Good to be here, Barry.

I would actually reverse the argument. And I would say that actually it's China that needs to listen to the rest of the world, especially the democratic world, because this is a country where you can envelope yourself in propaganda from morning to night. And it's impossible unless you have a VPN, which is illegal in China. It's impossible to get access to social media outside of the country.

It's impossible to get access to chat GPT and to other GPTs made in America. So, you know, it's a country that has become enormously inward looking over the past decade that has marched in the steps of past authoritarian and even fascistic governments.

I often make the argument that the Chinese Communist Party has more in common with the fascist regimes of the past with Italy and Nazi Germany instead of the communist regimes, which were essentially socialist regimes. The Chinese Communist Party teaches a curriculum that

racial nationhood, this idea that the people of the nation come from a master race that's been misunderstood and that seeks to conquer lands around it.

It's very much a dangerous imperial system that we've allowed to get out of control by allowing them to join the World Trade Organization, by allowing the Chinese Communist Party to enter our international organizations, the World Health Organization, which censored and suppressed information originally about COVID because it might anger China.

We're now dealing with a behemoth, a giant of authoritarian potential worldwide that seeks to undermine democracy. And, you know, as long as our companies, as long as our people here are scared of criticizing China, which many companies are, you go to any big tech company, almost all of them will say nothing bad about China or about the CCP or the human rights abuses there.

the national security concerns there because they've been bought off by market access. They want to be able to manufacture their EVs and their cars and whatever else it is that they're making in China.

So we're now in a situation where we have to contend with a world power, an emerging world power that is antithetical to democracy in almost every single way that has become more authoritarian as they've opened up their markets and that seeks to counter U.S. power all over the world. It's a dangerous situation we're in.

So nuclear weapons, significantly different technology from AI. We still don't fully understand what AI has the potential to do. Whereas with the nuclear weapon, that became quite obvious with Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the sheer destruction of The guaranteed destruction of World War III was clear and evident right there. But today with AI, you know, this is not a physical bomb.

It's not a physical weapon. It's something that can certainly reshape our society, reshape the way we do things, even the way that we do wage war, but it's not necessarily going to lead to that kind of world cataclysmic event. It could. I mean, I'm not ruling that out, but it's certainly possible.

I do think that there is a key point of significance when making these comparisons between the Cold War I and Cold War II. A lot of Cold War I was won by the U.S. and the West, our allies, because of our technological innovation. And one of the big innovations was in semiconductors with massive government support.

The Silicon Valley that we know today did not exist in the same way in the 1950s to the 80s. It was a site of military testing for semiconductors to try to create the most cutting edge technology that then we could use in our tech.

Guys like Steve Jobs, Bill Gates, the people who invented the Internet and so forth, a lot of them would not have been able to execute their vision, which was moving towards technological change to the miniaturization of technology and PCs without the innovations that had come before that through government funding, through government support. And, you know, just imagine a world today.

So we're now in Cold War II, as Niall is saying. Imagine if in Cold War I we had all this fantastic technology that was going to win the war, And we signed a free trade agreement with the Soviet Union and just gave it all to them and said, here's our tech. We're giving it to you. Use it well. This is free trade. We're going to help each other. We're going to coexist.

That would have been devastation because they would have been able to unleash all kinds of things that would compete with us, that would guarantee potentially their victory. We're now in a really unusual stage in human history. I has just been unprecedented in our age today, the last 30 years. We've just seen so much in the period that we live in.

But now we're at a stage where we're handing a hostile authoritarian government cutting edge technology that they intend to use against us, that they intend to use to dominate the global order. And that's a very dangerous situation to be in.

Well, the big question that everyone is asking is, will we be able to reach what is called a general AI or an AI that's able to essentially think and switch between tasks similar to how the human mind might take care of things? So this would be an AI that could, you know, at the same time, surveil you, gather data on you, and then go to, you know, generative mode and then go to

do this and that, make your dishes, run a tank. General AI is something that can do just about anything in theory, but it's not totally clear yet whether we're ever going to reach that stage of AI that is so all powerful. What I think victory looks like, if it is possible to reach that stage, victory will be whoever hits general AI. And if China is able to reach that stage before the United States

it would be very alarming because it would mean that there would be an all-powerful intelligent AI that can hack systems, that can wage cyber warfare, that can maneuver around an American telecommunications infrastructure, that can take control of missiles. Now, I don't mean to sound like it's the movie Terminator or something, or the robots are going to come alive.

I'm not sure that's actually going to happen. But if AI does get that powerful, that it can take on many tasks and exponentially learn from

from them and China gets there first or any hostile government gets there first, that would be a serious problem for democracies everywhere because we would have to contend with something that's infinitely smarter than us that even our systems cannot respond to.

That's bullshit. Total bullshit. Say more. Yeah, that's the lead up. That's what people said before World War I. It was a time of wonderful flourishing of technology, of free trade, of really the first vestiges of what would today look like globalization. I mean, that was late Belle Epoque.

when the world was becoming more prosperous, more industrialized, and traditional borders were not looking the same as they had in the past. But that was the lead up to World War I. And part of the reason is because of national pride, nationalism. It was the world going to war because, you know, for no particular reason at all, it wasn't even clear why the world was at war.

But that pride that comes before the fall is something to certainly be wary of.

I don't necessarily think that we should ban it. I wouldn't use the word ban, but I do believe in reciprocity when it comes to trade. And I do think that we should look at finding ways to separate Chinese AI companies that are accessible in the US. Those should ultimately be controlled by either friendly countries or US companies. And the reason is because of reciprocity.

Almost everything that we produce online is blocked in China. When Americans like us go to China, and say free trade is great, that only works if both sides are playing by the same rule. This is an example of one side.

And when I say this, I'm talking about before the recent tariffs that went up, but one side largely playing by the rules of free trade and one side essentially creating a closed market and exporting dumping materials on the rest of the world. So it's a completely unbalanced system. It doesn't work in anybody's favor outside of China.

And we need to do what we can to separate some of these industries to ensure that what's happening in China is reciprocal to what's available in the U.S.

It's a false equivalence, and it's something that a lot of people do say, but it's just it's flat out wrong. American companies do take data. And there are terms in the agreement that are guardrails against how your data is used. On top of that, we have a system of checks and balances of courts and independent judiciary in America. So if something were to happen, you do have some kind of recourse.

To say that the United States, the government, the democracy of the United States is comparable to a one-party authoritarian regime is just flat out wrong. And the thing about China is that that data that you put in, whether it's in DeepSeek or it's in TikTok or whatever it might be, that data is accessible in China. The Chinese Communist Party, if they want it, they can get their hands on it.

You don't know how they're using it, but we do know that this is a party that puts millions of people in concentration camps. Do you want those people having access to your data, to your kids' data? Whether or not you know what they're doing with it, you can see that this is a pretty evil regime, and we do want to separate... the data that exists here in America versus what's accessible in China.

I have been using it and I'm also a big user of AI. I do enjoy using these chatbots and seeing what comes of them. DeepSeek, it is a step forward in AI technology, but the problem here is that this is about much more than AI itself. This is companies in China going to an old playbook that they've been using for a while. against the United States and its companies.

It is incredible. So just to interject one thing, I've been working on a PhD for a long time, and seeing these advances, it feels as if You know, that years and years of work on a PhD, it's like, oh, man, you know, a chatbot can do this. What was the point? Yeah, what was the point of all that?

And this playbook is taking technologies that already exist where the U.S. and its allies are on the leading edge and refining them, trying to find ways to execute them better, to incrementally improve them, to make them cheaper, easier to use, and then releasing them on the mass market, in this case, in an open source way.

So I think that's a good policy on China because that's the best tool that we have now to offset the effects of China's forced technology transfers of U.S. companies. It's dumping of products on the U.S. market and the various... forms of trade trickery that the Chinese government has used over the last 30 years. The tariff is good because it offsets all that while keeping the dollar strong.

That's one of the reasons why the Trump administration does like tariffs. And I should also add, we have done a lot to sanction certain industries in China. We've also gone after Chinese banks with sanctions that are operating in Mexico that are involved in getting the base chemicals for fentanyl across the border. So there's been a lot of that done already, the targeted work.

But now, because we're starting to reach the limits of what's possible with those sanctions, it's time to put a tax on Chinese products that are being unfairly dumped, that are forcing these technology transfers, stealing American tech. That's the way to offset all this.

So this is an example of China using that old playbook and trying to catch up and overtake U.S. technology and When I say this, I'm talking about so much more than just Gen I. This is only one example of this technology leaping forward.

Jeff, I think it's to get concessions. And we've seen how quickly the Mexican government just sent 10,000 troops to the border. Now, I agree with Tyler that a lot of this is potentially bluster. Maybe it won't last. Maybe in a month or two, everyone's going to forget about this.

But I do have to say it is interesting how quickly the Mexican government was able was willing to accede to his demands once that tariff went on. And the reason is because America, one of the biggest consumer markets of the world, Mexico depends a lot more on America than America depends on Mexico. Same for Canada.

Bill Bishop is the best writer about China, and I get a lot of news from his newsletter, Sinicism, which is excellent.

I don't think we're going to get there. I think that it will advance, and it already is advancing far. It is incredible what AI can already do, but the amount of compute that's going to be needed for that I think is just going to be off the charts.

I read a lot, so sometimes I even forget. So I'm actually, I just finished reading this book right here, which is Dostoevsky. It's Demons. And this is a wonderful novel about what happens when a society tries to replace the idea of God with ideologies, in this particular case, communism.

I think that we have the potential to, and I think that we already are doing that in many ways, and we need to keep the human aspect in the AI.

Thank you, Jeff. Thank you, Barry. Good to see you, Barry. Thank you, Tyler.

So there is evidence that they did get chips from NVIDIA that may have been smuggled through Singapore. This is according to one government report. And then on top of that, there's also evidence that surfaced that's been published in the Financial Times, which shows that they may have trained their chatbot, their Gen AI with ChatGPT with an OpenAI product.

Now, this would actually be against the license agreement agreement.

of chat gpt so they would have been breaking the rules in that case but on top of that the other problem here is that chat gpt and most american social media and ai websites are not available in china they're banned ostensibly because of censorship concerns the chinese government wants to be able to control what these ai can say about tiananmen square and the uighur genocide and so forth and so we now have a situation where china is making a breakthrough but the us can't even compete with china on its own turf

So that's the problem here. It's the borrowing of American ideas, of American technology, the imitation of it, but then also shutting out American companies from a vast consumer market that is China.

I would say it's a breakthrough in the sense that they can do it cheaper. They certainly need less computing power, as we call it in the field, compute. But I wouldn't call it a major breakthrough. And as Tyler said, they haven't overtaken American technology. They haven't leapt forward above open AI and what we're doing in America.

But they are catching up fast, and they're finding ways to do it cheaper, faster, and in more imitative ways that could be very damaging one day to American industry.

Well, the way I understood that news was that people might have assumed that, yes, they did it without the chips or they didn't need as much compute to create the AI. But that didn't really come as a surprise to me because there are a number of hedge funds, a number of these Wall Street funds that have been looking at AI recently and have been shorting. some of these stocks.

There are questions over, you know, does the earth even have enough natural resources and energy and compute to allow the next generation models to even exist in the future? I mean, 10 years down the line, are we going to run into the barrier, the barrier that does not allow us to proceed further with this AI technology, which is so energy intensive.

Personally, I think that we will find ways to make the computing needs less and less over time. I don't think that this is going to be a problem in the end. And I'm more of an advocate for staying ahead of the curve. I do think that we need a lot more government investment in the chip sector. We need a lot more drive in that area, the reshoring of American manufacturing.

So this is the problem where we stand now. We're now in a situation where compute is going down, where these chatbots are easier to make. And as Tyler said, the tech will spread. It's hard to contain. It can't really be contained. But we can do what we can to stay at the leading edge to ensure that the world hopefully one day is using American AI instead of Chinese AI.

So we do live in an age of technological democratization. We're seeing this with SpaceX. SpaceX, by the way, still a very resource-intensive company. It's not as if their investments are small by any means. We're seeing it in AI. We're seeing it in all kinds of technologies. Another big area where there have been massive advances, and especially in military technology, is drones. We saw a

cheap homemade drones coming out in Ukraine, some of them made in Turkey. And, you know, these are drones that anybody can snap a grenade on and you can, you know, fly it over a tank column and unleash weaponry destroy tank column.

So what this means in the big picture is that the traditional forms of industrial organization, of infrastructure, of warfare, military defense are potentially going to crumble in our age. We're seeing a new age where, you know, anybody can get their hands on these technologies. Anybody can innovate with them, find ways to make them cheaper and less intensive ways.

But then the question is, how do you respond to all that? And it might simply be that chips are getting smaller and smaller and smaller. And what that means is that we're starting to hit some of the limits into what we can do in the physical realm with chips.

But we still have to find ways to stay ahead of that curve because the way to respond to these innovations to ensure that we're safe at home is to find ways to respond to these innovations. So for example, if there are drones attacking tank columns, making tanks obsolete. We need to find a way to respond to those drones. And that's not necessarily going to be a cheaper way of doing things.

We have to stay ahead of that curve.