AI is supposed to make work easier to manage, but too often it just adds more to manage on top of the thousands of apps the IT department already juggles.
Any business can add AI, but the real breakthrough is being able to scale and manage it.
IBM helps you use AI to change how you do business.
Let's create smarter business.
IBM.
We'll be right back.
Their AI doesn't replace your people.
It unlocks their potential.
If you want to increase your team's efficiency and uncomplicate your business, try Fresh Service for IT and Fresh Desk for customer support.
Learn more at freshworks.com.
Does it ever feel like you're paying for 20 platforms to do the job of what really should be just one?
That's not software as a service or SaaS.
It's SAD, software as a disservice.
Replacing your stitched together tech stack with one platform for all your departments?
Well, that's rippling.
Rippling eliminates the bottlenecks and busy work of legacy tools and point solutions by uniting your global HR IT and spend teams on just one platform.
And right now, you can get six months of Rippling free when you sign up at rippling.com slash scale.
That's R-I-P-P-L-I-N-G dot com slash scale.
Don't get sad, get Rippling.
Terms and conditions apply.
Friction is critical.
And one of the things that Silicon Valley people all the time do is they're like let's be frictionless.
Let's be seamless.
That's their favorite words.
But actually, no.
Friction is how you move forward, right?
That's always the case, including in technology and innovation.
AI is so frictionless.
You live longer if you do things that are hard for you than you do if you do things that are easy.
And my fear, especially with young people, is you never have to try and therefore you atrophy right in so many ways.
Make it hard.
To me, that's where great things happen.
That's Kara Swisher, journalist author, host of the podcast On with Kara Swisher, as well as co-host of Pivot alongside Scott Galloway.
I wanted to check in with Kara about the biggest stories in tech and beyond as 2025 winds down.
She pointedly separates the lessons from the noise at NVIDIA OpenAI Apple Google, Netflix and more.
It is a rich, full conversation.
Kara starts out pretty matter of fact and then quickly turned sparky, whether we're talking about Elon Musk or Mark Zuckerberg.
So let's get to it.
I'm Bob Safian, and this is Rapid Response.
I'm Bob Safian.
I'm here with Cara Swisher, journalist, author, and podcast host.
Cara, great, as always, to get a chance to chat.
Thank you, Bob.
We've both been engaged in tech and the business world for quite a while.
We've seen a lot of cycles and scandals and booms and busts.
And even so, 2025 has felt to me like a nonstop roller coaster.
Yeah, a little bit.
Has it felt that way to you?
No, no.
I just think it's.
I mean, there's just always been tech, has just become more involved in politics.
I guess probably is why.
And it hadn't been before.
There was just a new element that's been entered into it since Trump was inaugurated.
And so you have nonstop seeing of these tech moguls in a way that's really pretty unattractive in a lot of ways, grasping and grabbing for power.
Obviously AI, which has been around for a while, has taken a quantum leap, so people are focused on that.
Crypto has gotten a lot more attention since they got more power.
You know, as they got more power and as the Trump family entered into that area.
So there's sort of new technologies, although they're not that new, sort of becoming more important.
And probably the massive spending on AI is probably the biggest story of this year, although I would argue there are other things that are happening that are more important.
Investment markets often don't like uncertainty.
And there's a lot of talk about different kinds of uncertainty this year.
And yet stocks have just, you know, marched upward.
Yeah.
You know, powered by a handful of these big tech names.
Well, they're spending a lot of money.
It feels like a round tripping.
They're spending money and then the economy is doing better because they're spending money, but they don't have a business.
It's just a cycle that is maybe not sustainable.
Yeah.
You are worried about a bubble, an AI bubble?
No, it's not a bubble necessarily because people are buying it.
You know, I mean, I think there's a lot of promise there.
It's just, are we spending ahead of it?
And then what are the implications?
If they don't find enough consumer results eventually, that'll be a problem.
I mean, but Amazon went on forever, right?
Yeah.
You know, until it finally got a good business.
The same thing with Google or others.
And so, I mean, there'll be one or two big winners here, and we just don't know who they are.
And, you know, it's something like NVIDIA.
Yes, I think that's a bubble because I think they remind me of Cisco back in the day.
Although they are raking in money.
They are.
So is Cisco.
They have customers who are paying them.
So is Cisco.
So is Cisco.
And then it wasn't.
You know, I think ultimately everyone's going to make their own chips.
You know, Apple's entering the picture, Google, everybody's going to make their own chips.
And and that's going to settle off.
It's just this one company.
It's very similar to Cisco.
That, to me, that company is unsustainable at the numbers they have.
But, you know, it's as if there's only going to be one chip maker, as if.
The end users of NVIDIA's chips, they're not making money, right?
No, exactly.
I mean, some of them are, some of them aren't.
I mean, no one's making money.
No, not in the AI space.
They're spending money.
And so some of them are making really interesting money.
It's just not decent compared to Right.
And so the question is if you're not you know, it's sort of like how valuable is real estate in California during the gold rush?
And it was, it just became, right?
And so people have to get there and spend the money and waste the money in order to create California right.
So, you know, some people are going to be left on the sidelines and others aren't.
That's, I mean, that's the natural order of things in the internet space.
Usually there's two or three big winners.
Yeah.
As I'm listening to you, you have this tone that like yeah, this is what happens in technology all the time.
But technology feels like a more central part of the economy now.
It is a central part.
By the way, it's always been a central part since the first IBMs, the big IBM mainframes.
I mean, I think what it is is that they're a bigger part of the stock market, but it was before.
It just wasn't to this extent.
The last bubble, it certainly was.
And it's just entered politics.
I think that's what the issue is.
And Trump has done such a bear hug of these companies that you notice it.
And they, of course.
You know you can't help ignore Elon being part of the government and trying to cut it very badly, as it turned out.
You know, just even last week with the head of Palantir when's the last time we saw a defense person look like he was on drugs, screaming at the New York Times on stage?
I didn't say he was on drugs.
It just looked like he's on drugs to a lot of people.
Or a very joyous person, I guess.
But, you know, when's the last time you saw the CEO of Lockheed doing something like that?
So these people just can't shut up, is the problem.
And so they have to appear on stage, they have to tweet, they've got to be.
You know, if I see one more picture of Jensen Wong in a leather jacket, I'm going to exhaust my Like shut the f up.
My whole prediction for this year is they need to shut the f*** up.
All of them.
And they're not that interesting, except for they're rich, right?
That kind of stuff.
Or you see Sam Altman everywhere.
You see...
Even poor Tim Cook has got to wander into the White House and hand him a gold statue or be at the inauguration.
It's very performative.
And so that's why they just don't seem to go away, because of their proximity to Trump, who is, you know, a really coin operated president.
I don't blame him of all of them.
I don't blame him.
In this case, why wouldn't he take advantage?
They're just like throwing money at him to get what they want.
He went from being sort of seeming like he was anti-tech, or somewhat anti-tech, to now being just hand in glove.
Why wouldn't he?
I mean, he is a politician.
You said just before that there are things that you think are more important or more interesting than AI that people aren't really talking about.
What are they?
The uses of AI and the uses of quantum computing around healthcare is really interesting.
Like a lot of the stuff that's happening with gene editing, CRISPR and even GLP-1s, I think are critically important to cost savings and health and longevity.
You know, right now AI is focused on the stupidest of things, when there's all this really astonishing possibilities.
I'm also really interested in all the electric vehicles and autonomous vehicle stuff.
Take me down the road with electric vehicles.
What is happening in China that people aren't paying attention to?
Well, as Donald Trump says, these tiny cars are so cool.
They're so cute.
There's all, you know, like BYD and the stuff, the innovations.
You know, go anywhere else in the world, you see them everywhere, right?
I mean, this is what Tesla should have been, except for someone with a really problematic mommy-daddy problem and other problems.
The shift of how cars are made and manufactured, and China is leading that. that revolution.
They're going to really go jump ahead of us in terms of autonomy and the uses of it.
I mean, there's some really great stuff going on here with Waymo and things like that, which I love.
I have to say I've been a big fan of that technology for a long time, but it's so scattered that I just think in China or anywhere else you go across the world and you see these Very quickly made, very easily made cars that are much more efficient.
You could see how they could change the way people move around the globe.
And so you can still have your big cars.
But I mean, I think in cities you know how to innovate in cities is really an interesting opportunity for people.
Whether you're talking about the way you talk about electric cars or talking about CRISPR, like you're drawn to the things that are more disruptive about the way our world can be right.
Yes, exactly.
I mean, I've spent a lot of time with Jennifer Dowd, and not just her, but all these people that are working on gene editing and
You know, the solving of cancer.
I mean, think about like the money we would save with people or same thing with GLP-1.
The diabetic industrial complex is a multi-trillion dollar complex that we could just, you know we talk about balancing the budget.
Like health care is like just it's either military or health care.
That's really it.
If you could make people healthier and live better and less sick, like it's an astonishing savings.
You're not as skeptical about some of the applications of whatever, GLP-1s or CRISPR?
No.
Well, yes, of course.
It's got to be regulated correctly.
But, I mean, it's a real opportunity for people not to die of things they don't need to die of.
This is the first year longevity has gone down worldwide.
It's largely due to Elon, as far as I'm concerned, in terms of how we're – killing people across the globe with our pulling back.
But because of the pullback on USAID.
But I think that there's all these opportunities to increase the health span of people and not spend everybody like we live in a world of sick care.
Right.
And so if not health care, it's sick care.
Another area I'm really interested in is building like how we build things.
And uh, materials.
I think we don't spend enough time thinking about how much we, if you think about the way we build housing is artisanal, like you know drywall what, like.
There's so many really interesting ways you can apply ai, in particular, or machine learning, to how you build homes, and You know, one of the biggest problems that we have is we don't have enough homes for people.
And that leads to all manner, of you know, mental illness and insecurity, people feeling unsafe, and societal unrest and everything else.
You know, if I was an ex-presidential candidate which I'm not going to be I'd say 25 minimum wage, everybody gets GLPs and 8 million houses.
Like, everyone just has this collective sigh of relief.
They're not like on this ridiculous...
And then everybody, the more people are in the economy, the better.
How worried are you about AI-fueled layoffs?
We actually have a population decline going on, which is interesting.
Like, it's actually a much more complex issue.
I don't.
I think like, look like, I was just reading a lot about the.
I thought Netflix was going to get Warner.
Now, this is a relatively small business now.
Entertainment is not as big as it used to be, right?
It's not.
So you thought from the beginning Netflix was going to take it.
I just thought that Ellison's overplayed their hand being friends with Trump because Trump likes a winner.
And like, right, the other night, last night, he said, oh, Ted Sarandos is fantastic.
Everyone's like, what?
I'm like, of course he did.
Why would he be with a loser?
There's a story about how everyone in Hollywood hates Netflix.
That may be like, absolutely.
They're very powerful.
But as if they blame Netflix for the state they're in.
I find that fascinating.
Because they're in the state they're in because they didn't modernize, because they didn't lean into tech, because they had these ridiculous ways they did their business.
The economy of Hollywood is so insane, like in terms of costs and everything else.
They didn't listen to consumers.
And then they're blaming Netflix for having a product consumers like.
Like, I'm sorry.
They're mad that they changed the economics.
Too f***ing bad.
Guess what?
And if AI does that again to them or to any other industry, it's sort of too f***ing bad?
No, I think it's, no, it's incumbent on our country, our citizens and our government to figure out what the shift is then.
What do people then do?
Because there are lots of, AI is not going to replace everything.
It's going to replace work first, right?
Which a lot of information work is.
So we were having people just like do things that aren't.
I mean.
I think there's a lot of creative jobs available.
I think you can be very creative in terms of applying AI with new ways to work.
Or let's have UBI.
Like let's be creative of how we want to figure out AI, how humans interact with this stuff, rather than either be on the doom scale or the it's going to solve everything.
Scale because it's not.
Like, think about mechanized farming.
Like, everybody was a farmer.
Farmers are entrepreneurs if you really think about it.
Yeah.
Were.
And mechanized farming It just came in.
Do you want to go back to the plow?
I doubt it.
Like, it's just not going to happen.
Mechanized farming, then we had manufacturing, and then now manufacturing has gotten mechanized.
I'm more interested, by the way, in robotics than I am in.
I think the robotics with AI is sort of a really interesting, not what Elon's doing the optimist.
Nobody wants one of those people wandering around and Robots don't have to look like people.
I don't know why there's that obsession with it.
Robots can look like Amazon bought a company Kiva, many years ago.
That I was really paying attention to.
It moved around boxes, but did it in this using AI, and it knew where things should go.
And that, to me, was like, okay, that's going to replace people.
I went to this Amazon warehouse 10 years ago and I was watching it and I thought, oh goodness sake.
And they were there to show me how much they like people.
I'm like, there's not going to be any people here.
Right.
Like, why?
Why should people put things in boxes?
Like, I don't get it.
Like, when a robot could do it.
And they're like, we love people.
I'm like, yeah, except when it's cheaper to have the robots do it.
It just wasn't cheaper at the time.
Now it is, of course.
So I'm just like what can we do creatively, including our public officials and all of us, to figure out where jobs are?
But let me just tell you, if companies find a way to save costs, they're going to say like I'm sorry.
Like, everyone's like, can you believe they're doing layoffs?
I'm like, absolutely, I can believe it.
I wouldn't do it, but they're going to.
I mean, like a law firm doesn't need this many people to do stuff that AI or whatever version of this does.
Why would you?
They just wouldn't.
They did in the last 26 turns that we had in our economy.
I don't know why you think they're going to do it here.
You mentioned Elon Musk a couple of times.
I mean, he was in the hot center of the action early in the year.
He got himself crossways with the White House.
Now he's got a trillion dollar pay package.
Well, maybe if he makes it.
I don't think he's going to make it, but OK.
Sure, why not?
Like, who cares?
Like, if he makes that, if he makes it that valuable, he should get it.
Like, that's how I feel.
Like, but he's not gonna.
But it has all kinds of hooks.
They'll move the goalposts for him because that's the most ridiculous, feckless board in history.
But he has to do a certain amount of things in order to get it.
He's got to get the valuation up.
And if he manages somehow to get the valuation up, I guess he does deserve it, right?
If he gets it to $8 trillion.
I don't know.
I mean, I start to think it's just an obscene amount of money.
Why not?
Why not?
I get it.
But if he gets, he moves something from whatever one trillion to eight trillion, I guess he deserves it.
If he's the one that does it.
Sure.
Why not?
I feel like that's in some ways that our system has become sort of like there's too much going to these folks at the top.
Like he's doing all the work.
You think I don't agree with that?
I don't know.
It's up to these companies that do.
It's up to these.
I don't really.
You know, if they want to do that and they want that's how they want to run their business.
I don't feel like.
What are we going to tell them?
No, it's their business.
And they want to... By the way, they're running it.
It's about to get shorted big time, I think, again.
Everyone's tried to short... I think the meme stock of Tesla has nearly run its course.
And you're going to see it being valued at what it actually is worth, which is...
Less and less every hour, essentially.
And so eventually, you know, but these meme stocks, they are what they are.
Like, what are you going to do?
You can't stop people from being stupid.
You can't stop stupid.
Like, I've always noticed.
I used the expression I like, you know, intelligence has its limitations, but stupidity is infinite.
I'm curious how you rate Mark Zuckerberg's year.
I mean, he's cozied up to Trump.
Whatever.
He was never nice.
Let's just be clear.
He was never.
I'm not even slightly surprised that he cozied up to Trump.
He doesn't like people, so that's the way that goes.
You know, he spent all this money on meta.
Like, I've never seen someone who made so many f***ing mistakes.
Like, he's done a lot.
Listen, he's done an astonishing job with that company from an ad point of view.
The products are quite good.
Instagram threads is terrific.
Like, he makes some good products, right?
But, like, here's somebody who spent 75, what is it, billion?
On doing his stupid metaverse, which both Scott Galloway and I were like, this is a waste of money.
But he gets to spend it and then declare even though it's a defeat, and then move on.
You know which is sort of like he gets to make mistakes on an awesome scale.
Well, I mean to his credit.
When he sees his mistakes or when he misses something, he goes to the new area.
He does.
But I'm just saying, you know, if I made a mistake like that, I'm not going to be lauded for spending 75 billion on a stupid thing.
It's just, all it said to me is there was no one around him that said, are you f***ing kidding, bro?
Like, what are you doing?
Like, he doesn't.
When you use this phrase founder worship, like, is this what you're talking about?
No one calls bullshit on this?
Yes, it's idolatry is the word we use, is idolatry of innovators.
Everything he does, every shit he makes is golden?
No, no, no.
Like, some of them are.
Some of them are really cool.
But he's starting from a very, you know, successful area.
I don't think he's going to be as successful in AI as people think.
I realize that even by bringing this up with you, I'm falling into the trap of you know founder worship just by asking these questions.
I think these are remarkable people in many ways, but not that remarkable.
I don't again, I don't want to listen to everything he has to say, but I seem to be forced to.
You know, I also blame the media for that, too, is the like the idolatry of innovators.
They can do no wrong.
I don't think that's very.
I mean, it's sort of like raising a bunch of sugar addicted children.
Like they can know, my child is so perfect but they're not like whatever.
Cara has strong convictions about Musk and Zuckerberg, but her critique of idolatry it doesn't come from nowhere.
She's been holding sugar rush CEOs accountable through a lot of shifts.
So what's her take on Google versus OpenAI?
And why does she think both Tim Cook and Bob Iger should move on as CEOs?
We'll talk about that and more after the break.
Stay with us.
This is Mike Nicholas Capital One, business customer and co-founder of Ansett Uncles, a plant-based restaurant and community space in Brooklyn, New York.
And he's telling us how they started a product line.
We already had a space in the community.
The food was an extension of our lifestyle and our values.
So we know we wanted to create something that was an offshoot to that.
Our pepper sauce, that's my grandmother's recipe.
That's like a liquid gold, right?
If someone wants to approach us and ask us, what do we do?
We provide flavor.
Growing a product line is no small investment, but Mike and his wife and co-founder Nicole, were able to manage with the help of their Capital One business card.
Working with Capital One Business, we're able to leverage our limits and utilize those points, making sure we can continue the scale at the speed that we need it to go.
To learn more, go to CapitalOne.com slash business cards.
Most single-function AI tools just gum up your workflow.
Project management becomes a tedious relay race of copying, pasting and switching tabs until you forget what you were even doing.
Say hello to Superhuman, the AI productivity suite that gives you superpowers everywhere you work.
With the intelligence of Grammarly Mail and Coda built right in, you get things done faster and collaborate seamlessly.
Superhuman lets you handle multiple tasks wherever you're working.
No more copy pasting, no more jumping between AI tools, and there's no learning curve.
Superhuman gets what you really need from day one.
It understands your writing style, helps you focus on what matters and proactively offers the next best step.
Unleash your superhuman potential with AI that meets you where you work.
Learn more at superhuman.com slash podcast.
That's superhuman.com slash podcast.
The business world moves fast and you don't have time to wait for your AI to turn into ROI, because any business can use AI.
The real breakthrough is how you use it.
IBM helps you turn AI into more than potential.
It helps you turn it into smarter ways of working and ultimately scaling.
Let's create smarter business, IBM.
Before the break journalist and podcast host Kara Swisher gave her clear-eyed view on Tech Exec's relationship with Trump, Elon Musk's trillion-dollar pay package and Mark Zuckerberg's quote stupid metaverse.
Now she talks about the battle between Google and OpenAI, why Tim Cook should move on as Apple's CEO, and Hollywood's unfolding sagas from Disney to Netflix.
Plus, Kara's unexpected advice on the most important trends to watch in 2026.
Let's jump back in.
One of the twists in the AI wars has been Google sort of bounced back.
This surge by Gemini versus OpenAI's chat GPT.
You know, Sam Altman calling this code red.
Yeah.
You said before it's hard to know who a winner will be.
Interestingly, on Pivot, we thought Google was going to do this because they had all the pieces right.
Like if they didn't, what a bunch of idiots, right?
That kind of thing.
I mean, they were ahead.
They just didn't take the bet because they were afraid of it.
Yeah, of course.
Well, Sundar is a much more less risk.
He's more risk averse.
I think Sergey Brin has re-arrived there.
I think you can feel his influence, right?
He's one of the founders.
So, I think that they had all the elements in place to do it and just had to make it.
It's very hard to jump from one thing to the next and do it.
The one company that does do it is Netflix.
It's like, now we're this.
We're not doing advertising.
Now we are.
We're not doing, we're mailing DVDs.
Now we're not.
Like, I love these guys.
They like every time.
They're like, meh.
Today, we're not buying anything, which was a head fake.
Oh, we're going to buy a studio.
Like, I love it.
It's, like, great.
So, you know, Google just took advantage of its obvious assets.
And it should – like the fact that it wasn't a head was the story, not that it should be by every – you know, they've got the –.
They've got the people.
They've got the data.
They've got the right businesses.
They're the most set up for this era.
Now, look, chat GPT has gotten really far.
OpenAI has gotten very far.
But ultimately, what I kept asking myself is, is it Netscape or is it Google?
Is OpenAI Netscape or Google?
Mm-hmm.
It's feeling a little Netscape-y these days, right?
Like, even though they're way ahead, they're you know, a lot of times in technology, the planes are covered with the bodies of pioneers, right?
Like, there's all kinds of that.
You know that from being around.
You know, there's so many companies that were there and then weren't, but were important companies.
Johnny Ive, the iconic Apple designer, working with Altman and OpenAI on some new device or interface or form factor or whatever.
Big deal, differentiator.
I don't care.
You don't care.
I think these devices are stupid.
I think eventually, the way I see it, it's just going to be around you.
They make such a big deal about these devices you wear.
I think probably what I would see more interesting and this is sort of an opportunity for Apple is Your AirPods, which you wear now comfortably, even though at the time, if you remember, when it rolled out, everyone said how ugly they were.
I think if you put a camera in those and they could see as you go through the world.
I mean, the glasses format is probably the way it's going to go, but does it have to be glasses on your face?
Mm-hmm.
Because not everybody wants to wear those.
But if there was something in your ear that could see as you move through the world?
Who's the company, who's most able to do that?
There's two of them, Google and Apple, right?
Because people are very comfortable in the Apple environment.
So to me, they have a lot of opportunity in this area.
Apple is having a lot of trouble like getting its AI action together, although does it not need to, because you carry it through.
I don't know.
I don't know if they need it.
I think they have to integrate it into its products.
That's for sure.
Right.
So that's that's they don't necessarily have to own the AI.
They didn't have to own maps, did they?
No, they tried and they sort of half failed and then they used Google.
Or they didn't have to make a lot of stuff.
You know, they didn't have to make all those apps.
Everybody else did, right?
And they took advantage of it.
To me, they're a system they can ride upon things.
I think the integration is what's difficult here.
And so how do you integrate AI into the things that you already exist?
To me, I keep obsessing on the AirPods.
I'm like, what if they were just a little more functional?
Like.
I know it sounds crazy, but I still have my pair of Google glasses, which I'm going to keep, so I can sell them someday to send one of my kids to college.
It was directionally the correct idea.
It just didn't have enough functionality.
The same thing with the metaglasses.
I mean, what do they do?
They take a picture.
That's pretty much it, right?
How much functionality is that?
Not much.
And so where can you get more functionality of the things you might do every day, which is information you need right?
I tell them it's dumb, but directions ordering food, getting places, appointment making, things like that.
Like to me, that's where they should focus is on those, honestly, the software rather than the hardware.
At Apple, do you feel like Tim Cook is doing a good job?
He did.
He should leave now.
I mean, that's what I would do if I were him.
Declare victory and move on?
Well, he has that victory.
What an amazing run, right?
So like when Jobs died, everyone was like, oh, it's over.
It was $300 billion company, I think.
I forget.
It's trillions now.
So what Tim Cook has done including around the watch, around the ear people don't give him as much because he doesn't have as much style as Jobs did.
But I got to say, he presided over a lot of great products.
Oh, if Jobs came back, he would be astounded by what his company has become.
He would not recognize it.
Every now and then I look at something like oh, he wouldn't let this happen, like some of the some of the products, but he had taste.
That's a different thing.
But I think you know he's had a great run and he should probably retire.
Now would be.
If I were him I'd be like great job.
I just did.
And, and then put someone in place that understands sort of where it's the next fresh ideas.
Those guys have been together forever.
All that.
They're all the same people.
Which is a good thing, but also a bad thing is you want new, fresh concepts and But they have such a big amount of stuff they've invented that they've got to keep going.
Right.
That's the thing.
They've got the whole ecosystem that has to continue.
And then they have to innovate on top of it.
What about Disney?
I mean, Bob Iger is another one who sort of declared victory and then had to come back.
And now, you know, his contract is ending.
I think, personally, they need to merge with someone or sell.
That's, you know, ultimately, I think he's done an amazing job with that brand, for sure.
I'll get another person, but probably shouldn't have come back.
You know, I think he was bored.
I think you know he retired a little too early because he's so vibrant and intelligent and you know he looks great.
Like everything else, he sort of was like...
At one point, he was sending me a lot of texts from some boat in French Polynesia.
He was sailing or something, and I'm like, oh, you're coming back.
And I joke with him on stage about it.
I'm like, you're bored.
You have more to give, essentially.
I think he probably should find the right – person to take over.
They've got plenty of people, it's just it's still too.
I've always maintained it's it's the biggest of the small things like.
It's too small in today's environment and so they really have to hook up with the tech.
I would think apple would be a very good merger with them, or comcast, or they're just going to have to, given the size problems there.
I think they're number two in streaming, but once they once, if this one passes um, that'll be a problem for them.
I'm just getting a note here that Paramount is potentially back in the action with the cash bid.
Hostile cash bid.
What a bunch of losers, honestly.
You don't see it happening, huh?
Maybe.
Maybe.
I don't know.
Their only argument was we're friends with Donald Trump.
That seems non-economic to me.
I mean, I'm sorry, but Big Daddy and Nepo Baby really have to have a better argument than we're friends with Donald.
I mean, how ridiculous a way to conduct business is that?
I just like.
Look they, by the way, from an existential point of view, they're fed if they don't get this right.
They're going to have to merge with someone else.
I don't care how rich they are.
You still, you know, there's only so much money you're throwing at the yacht.
But you know, one of the things that drove me crazy is they had a thing right when they did the deal.
And they're like, we're going to take technology and make it better.
And I was like, specifically what?
And they're like, technology and make it better.
And I was like, yeah, I'd like a specific.
And they were like, technology.
Like, honestly, Larry, who's 412 years old, like, what?
What are you going to do?
How are you going to save money?
Spell it out for the rest of us.
And it ultimately comes back to, they're rich.
They can spend it.
They can buy, I don't know, all of France and give everyone a glass of wine.
That's not really economics, right?
Right.
They just want to own it.
It's just a toy.
Then it's just a toy.
And then, okay, all right, that's what you're doing.
How much are you willing to pay for your toy is the question.
But they need it.
Let me just tell you from a business point of view, these things need to merge.
I know everybody's all upset in Hollywood getting back to that, but there is no other direction, largely because Hollywood didn't innovate for so long their business model.
I'm curious how you feel like AI and the technology is going to impact Yeah.
I mean, I did an onstage interview with Time CEO Meredith Levy.
I love her.
What a smart lady.
We talked a bit about the sort of risk of deteriorating journalism maybe in the age of AI.
It could.
Do you use AI in your own work?
Do you find yourself caught at all?
No, I use it just for like, I've got this rash.
What is it?
It's just better than Google.
Like, I know here's a picture and it actually is good.
It works.
I have to tell you, Google.
But does that just mean we're being old fashioned because we're not using it?
No, no, no, no, no.
If I found a use for it, you know, I jumped right in, Bob, when I when the Internet started.
I would I just I never find a use for it.
Like, that's the problem for me.
You know what it's good at?
Headlines, I have to say.
I'm like, what would be the headline?
What would be a good headline?
And it comes up with stuff I wouldn't have thought of, some of them.
Like I was looking for – I was trying to do a logo.
It did that really well.
To me, it's a better Google.
That's for me.
For some of journalism –
The problem.
The thing is there's so much great data out there that doesn't get surfaced all the time and give you more to a story.
I like that part.
Like I noticed, the two big Hollywood movies that were very popular this year were all originals or like Pluribus.
You can't make that.
Actually I've decided Pluribus is about.
Even though he didn't say it, I've decided myself it's about AI.
It's about what happens if one difficult person has to deal with a world of AI.
It's always pleasing you.
It's always trying to get you what you want.
It's almost self-defeating in and of itself.
It's lonely, right?
To me, that's what that whole show's about, is a world where AI becomes corporal, right?
It's a hive mind, and they have all the answers, but nothing interesting.
The impact of AI on mental health.
You referred to this earlier.
I know you've done an episode about it.
I mean, it's bizarre.
It's frictionless.
It's frictionless.
Like, we'll talk about cognitive decline.
You start becoming in a relationship with these things, you will have Alzheimer's, no problem.
Because friction is critical to humanity.
Like, everyone always compares the brain to a computer.
It's not a computer a brain is so not a computer it's so random it's it's the neurons firing all like a computer wishes it were as cool as the human brain right they really does but it's good at the things that the human brain isn't which is pattern matching like that's let's use it for that and because we can't do those calculations as fast but they it still isn't It's marginally... It's like literally your least interesting friend.
Like, okay.
But I like you're saying it's about friction.
It's like we need to have conflict and not have a relationship with something, that There's a difference.
Stupid conflict is stupid.
It's bad for your cortisol.
It kills you early and stuff like that.
Stress is bad for you.
It just is.
I'm working on this long series about longevity.
But friction is critical.
And one of the things that Silicon Valley people all the time do is they're like let's be frictionless, let's be seamless that's their favorite words, but actually no, friction is what create.
Friction creates babies, by the way fyi, but um.
But like friction is how you move forward.
Right, that's always the case, including in technology and innovation.
Like the friction creates the idea, that creates the this, and so i think giving up that ai is so frictionless.
It's like, oh god, Like.
You know what I mean.
Like, it's so boring.
It's so pleasing.
The need for friction.
Like you live longer if you do things that are hard for you than you do if you do things that are easy.
And my fear, especially with young people, is they get into these synthetic relationships and you never have to try.
And therefore you atrophy, right, in so many ways.
Make it hard.
And that's where great things, to me, that's where great things happen.
Before I let you go, as our listeners of this show look ahead to 2026.
What do you think they're missing?
They're misunderstanding things.
They should be focused on.
I would pay a lot more attention to healthcare, where this stuff, healthcare is going.
I would pay a lot more attention to robotics.
The second thing is energy, not just that AI uses so much.
By the way, it's so funny that all the tech bros are interested in longevity and then they're like using up all this energy and murdering people across the globe with using like methane or whatever the heck.
Okay.
It's just an interesting disconnect.
But I do think one of the things that's really interesting is energy, of how, like where, the innovation in energy is happening.
I'm fascinated with small nuclear devices.
I'm fascinated with nuclear energy.
It's just like, that is ripe for innovation.
I know everyone goes crazy.
I mean, when Microsoft said it was going to revive Three Mile Island, I was like are you kidding me?
But then I'm like, actually.
When you start to do the research, nuclear is relatively safe compared to fossil fuels.
It's just that the Russians mishandled Chernobyl.
That's what the problem was.
They mishandled it.
And so there's all kinds of safety things we can put into place.
And I think eventually we'll all have these small nuclear devices in our house that will power everything.
And then we can make more trouble because we're friction people.
We'll make other problems for ourselves.
We'll find the friction.
We'll find the friction.
But I think that's really interesting.
And then it really does, again, helps the planet.
Like once we solve the energy situation.
That means we don't have to go to Mars, which we may have to do right.
We may have to live on other planets because we're doing to this planet.
And that to me, we solve the energy issue and the health issue.
You go a long way toward making it a better planet.
That's my feeling.
Cara, you always get my mind moving.
Thanks for doing this.
Bob, thank you.
It's good to see you.
Cara is such a compelling thinker.
The conclusions she reaches are so sharp and pointed, but she also doesn't shy away from nuance and ambiguity.
I love her point that frictionless experiences shouldn't be the goal, that obstacles are what keep our brain engaged and healthy and durable.
In an emerging AI age, it's a powerful reminder that saving a bit of time on a particular task isn't always worth it.
In the long run.
Maybe efficiency and creativity need to be at odds for organizations and for each of us as individuals.
As we head into the holidays, let's enjoy as frictionless a break as possible and be mindful that the obstacles of the season are also worth celebrating.
They're keeping our brains in shape for the inevitable personal and professional challenges awaiting ahead in the new year.
I'm Bob Safian.
Thanks for listening.
Meet Emily Worden.
Capital One business customer and owner of Emily Worden Designs, a handcrafted, fine jewelry store in Richmond Virginia, that got its start in a dorm room.
I said I was going to try it for a year.
I signed up to do craft shows.
Trade shows got into a few local boutiques and then things just picked up from there.
Emily's steady success at trade shows gave her the capital she needed to invest in a storefront.
Every cent that was made was going back into the business.
I was nervous that we weren't going to get enough traffic, but we had a huge turnout.
With Emily Warden Designs firmly establishing itself in the Richmond community, Emily would need to significantly increase inventory in order to keep up with demand.
And she looked to her Capital One business card for support.
The purchases were so high, I needed to get a business credit card.
And I looked at Capital One.
The options and the cash back was so amazing.
It gives me even more of a push to take a leap in getting one or two extra stones because I have that extra cushion.
To learn more, go to CapitalOne.com slash business cards.
Your company's data is everywhere, in systems, in silos, and across teams.
But if your AI can't reach it, then that data isn't working for you.
Every business has unique data.
What really makes a difference is how you use it.
IBM helps your AI access your data wherever it lives to change how you do business.
Let's create smarter business.
IBM.
Rapid Response is a Wait What original.
I'm Bob Safian.
Our executive producer is Eve Troh.
Our producer is Alex Morris.
Associate producer is Mashumaku Tonina.
Mixing and mastering by Aaron Bastinelli and Brian Pugh.
Our theme music is by Ryan Holiday.
Our head of podcasts is Lital Malad.
For more, visit rapidresponseshow.com.
