reSee.it - Related Video Feed

We partnered with Google to address the issue of distorted information on climate change. Now, when you search for climate change on Google, you'll find reliable UN resources at the top. We believe it's important for people to have access to accurate scientific information, and we're taking a proactive approach. This is a significant challenge that requires the involvement of all sectors of society.

The speaker will use their 17 years of experience at T-Mobile to illustrate how corporate America has turned against the American people. While many news sources cover Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DE&I) and Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG), the speaker aims to show how these initiatives have personally impacted their career. The speaker is passionate about exposing the Great Reset and the World Economic Forum. They claim that these entities are significantly influencing the future of individuals and their children, even more so than American politicians.

I've been fortunate as vice president to see people of all ages and genders realize that being the first at something shows they don't have to be limited by others' narrow views of what is possible.

Well, thanks for for hosting us, and this is quite a group to get together. It's a great honor to, to work here at the White House and to to work for you. Very grateful for your administration's support. We look forward to working together, and thanks for your leadership. We're so grateful for that support. Thank you so much, obviously, for bringing us all together and the policies, that you have put in place. I wanna thank you for including me this evening. It's incredible to be among everyone here, particularly you and the first lady. I also want to thank you for helping American companies around the world. First of all, to echo the comments of Tim and others, thank you so much for getting us all together, and thank you for being such a pro business, pro innovation president. Thank you for everything you're doing. Thank you for incredible leadership, including getting this group together.

We are pledging an extra $1 billion to this cause. We witnessed a new version of Bill Gates, someone unfamiliar to you.

I am grateful to Brad and Microsoft for their support. Microsoft is known for partnering with initiatives that make a positive impact in the world. They understand the importance of economic development, digitization, climate change adaptation, and strengthening democracy. It's not just about preaching to the choir; it's about showing up and taking action. I appreciate their involvement.

Speaker 0 expresses a strong warning against working with Sam Altman and OpenAI, stating they would never collaborate with them as a developer. They emphasize that this is a warning and note that others may clip the remark. The speaker asserts that OpenAI is studying how developers use the API and points out that Altman and the company are “studying it,” implying ongoing scrutiny of API usage. They describe Sam Altman as someone who has “been around the block,” claiming the speaker has known him since “loop.” The speaker characterizes Altman as “incredibly savvy” and asserts that Altman “wants every bit of revenue from the ecosystem” and “isn’t taking no prisoners.” According to the speaker, Altman intends to study how developers are using the API and believes Altman has “the right to do” so. The speaker then pivots to a broader narrative about Altman’s perceived philosophy, stating that Altman “comes from the Zuckerberg School of Business,” which, in the speaker’s claim, is defined as giving naive people access to tools, studying them, and, “like the Borg,” stealing every innovation they have. The speaker claims Zuckerberg adopted this approach from Bill Gates and Microsoft. The narrative continues with Microsoft’s historical pattern: Microsoft had a platform and operating system, allowed third-party developers to create software such as Lotus 1-2-3, and later produced Microsoft Excel. The speaker also mentions that Microsoft allowed creation of WordPerfect and WordStar, and then built Microsoft Word. The speaker interjects “RIP,” signaling a judgment about that progression. The speaker asserts that Microsoft was “more than happy” to have a broad developer community attending their conferences, showcasing work and receiving awards, explicitly stating they are talking about Microsoft in this context. The parallels are drawn to Facebook, with the speaker claiming Zuckerberg did the same thing with Facebook’s platform, suggesting a similar dynamic of platform growth through external developers and partners. The narrative closes with a mention of Zynga as a significant partner within Zuckerberg’s ecosystem and ends with the assertion that the approach then shifted, implying a change in strategy or emphasis after the initial period.

Microsoft and USAID are joining forces to address the crisis facing journalism and independent media. Brad Smith from Microsoft emphasizes the importance of businesses standing up for democracy, as it benefits both society and the economy. Samantha Power from USAID highlights the need for sustainable business models for independent media, given the dominance of digital platforms in advertising and subscription revenue. She shares examples of successful initiatives in Moldova and Nicaragua, where support and restructuring have led to increased revenue and online reach for independent media outlets. Power calls for more partnerships between government, civil society, and the private sector to ensure the sustainability of independent media.

Microsoft and USAID are joining forces to address the crisis facing journalism and independent media. Brad Smith from Microsoft emphasizes the importance of businesses standing up for and promoting healthy democracy. Samantha Power from USAID discusses the Media Viability Accelerator program, which aims to support sustainable business models for independent media. She highlights the impact of independent media on citizen welfare and the need for financial support in the face of digital platforms dominating advertising and subscription revenue. Power shares success stories from Moldova and Nicaragua, where support from USAID has led to increased revenue and online reach for independent media outlets. She calls for more partners to join the initiative and emphasizes the importance of a partnership between government, civil society, and the private sector.

The speaker emphasizes that the primary aim is to harness the benefits and promise of migration. They believe that by collaborating with communities and governments, it is possible to develop approaches that create opportunities for people on the move rather than treating migration merely as a problem to be solved. Achieving this requires substantial collaborative effort across multiple levels and sectors. The speaker notes that this is not easy work. It demands active engagement not only from member states but also from partners across different sectors of society. This broad participation is essential to move beyond a purely national or governmental focus toward a more integrated and multisectoral approach to migration. A key part of the proposed approach is expanding collaboration with the private sector. The speaker asserts that the private sector benefits when migration is well managed, highlighting the positive incentives for businesses to engage constructively in migration governance and outcomes. This underscores the idea that organized, well-managed migration can create opportunities for employment, investment, and economic development. In addition to private-sector engagement, the speaker emphasizes the importance of working with civil society. This implies leveraging the strengths and insights of NGOs, community organizations, and advocacy groups to support migrants and the communities that receive them. Civil society involvement is presented as a crucial element of building a robust ecosystem around migration. Ultimately, the goal is to build an ecosystem where vulnerable people on the move can find opportunities. At the same time, the communities where migrants settle should also benefit from their presence. The speaker suggests that a well-structured, inclusive approach to migration can generate mutual gains for migrants and host communities, reinforcing the value of collaboration across governments, private sector actors, civil society, and other partners. In sum, the message centers on reframing migration as a collaborative opportunity—one that requires multi-stakeholder engagement, inclusive partnerships, and a focus on creating durable opportunities for migrants while delivering benefits to the communities they join.

I have spent four years at USAID and am more convinced than ever of the impact of American compassion and ingenuity, alongside our foreign service nationals. While we face new challenges, we also have fresh insights, tools, and partners. In my travels to communities where USAID operates, I hear stories of transformation—people receiving capital to start businesses, recovering from disasters, or gaining education to achieve their goals. These individuals are eager to collaborate with the United States to tackle future challenges. By becoming more responsive, efficient, and catalytic, we can harness the power of these partnerships and drive progress in this new era.

The speaker states that they partnered with Google because, initially, Googling "climate change" yielded "incredibly distorted information" at the top of search results. As a result of the partnership, UN resources now appear at the top of Google searches for climate change. The speaker asserts that they "own the science" related to climate change and believe "the world should know it." The speaker also indicates that the platforms themselves are taking action on this issue.

Our free market system has lifted people out of poverty, but I believe in equality of opportunity, not outcome. While it's concerning that 26 billionaires own as much as half the world, some, like Bill and Melinda Gates, do good work with their wealth. I've met Bill Gates at the Microsoft CEO Forum and find their global health and education efforts inspiring. I support reducing inequality. Translation: I believe in equal opportunities, not equal outcomes. While it's concerning that 26 billionaires own as much as half the world, some, like Bill and Melinda Gates, do good work with their wealth. I've met Bill Gates and find their global health and education efforts inspiring. I support reducing inequality.

The speaker outlines the range of stakeholders that are important to their work, emphasizing a broad and diverse audience. They identify business as a very important audience, alongside politics, highlighting the role of ongoing engagement across multiple governmental contexts through continuous partnerships with many governments around the world. The speaker also notes NGOs and trade unions as key groups to consider, along with media, which is acknowledged as an important stakeholder category. Further, the speaker highlights that experts, scientists, and academia are crucial for informing a forward-looking perspective, particularly when considering future directions and solutions. The statement underscores the belief that the future will be shaped largely by technological developments, implying a need to incorporate cutting-edge innovations and technical expertise in strategic discussions and decision-making. In addition to these conventional sectors, the speaker mentions religious leaders as part of the stakeholder landscape, signaling recognition of faith-based perspectives and moral or ethical considerations in broader dialogues. Social entrepreneurs are singled out as well, described as very important, suggesting that venture-driven approaches to social impact are seen as a significant component of the ecosystem. Overall, the speaker communicates a philosophy of inclusivity and broad collaboration, integrating political, business, civil society, media, scientific, religious, and entrepreneurial voices. The emphasis on continuous partnerships with governments worldwide indicates an ongoing, collaborative approach to governance, policy, and implementation across different regions. The repeated references to a future oriented by technological development signal a strategic priority placed on innovation and science as drivers of forthcoming solutions, informing how they engage with the various stakeholder groups and respondents to emerging challenges. In sum, the speaker presents a multi-stakeholder framework that spans business, politics, governments, NGOs, trade unions, media, experts, scientists, academia, religious leaders, and social entrepreneurs, all contributing to a future shaped by technological progress and collaborative problem-solving.

Speaker 0 asks Will about his legacy in light of his transition to a new function, and what he would like to see as his legacy in ten to fifteen years. Speaker 1 responds with ambitious goals, expressing optimism. He notes the Global Health Program targets about 20 diseases and hopes that within fifteen years, over half of those could have a very dramatic impact. He acknowledges AIDS will likely see an improvement, but probably not a dramatic one within that timeframe, and malaria might also show progress. He mentions that several other diseases have pipelines in development, enabling a substantial reduction in mortality rates in developing countries, which in turn is expected to influence population growth by easing demands on education and nutrition. He explains that the foundation uses dashboards internally to keep the work highly numeric and rigorous, and that these dashboards are shared so people can see whether goals were met, be able to explain any shortfalls, and extract lessons that could be learned from other foundations. He emphasizes that there are learnings about how they conduct their work that he hopes can have an impact beyond their own divisions. Regarding the scope and scale, he describes specific work in the health, development, and U.S. Education divisions, noting that fifteen years from now, the foundation will have spent a substantial amount of money—around $3,000,000,000 per year. He asserts that because of this level of investment, people should have a very high expectation of what the foundation can achieve. Speaker 0 closes by thanking Will for sharing an enlightened view of capitalism, expressing hope that many will follow, and states that the World Economic Forum will facilitate this mission. He looks forward to welcoming Will back in his new incarnation next year. Speaker 1 thanks him.

The speaker states they were asked to supply their product philanthropically, essentially for free. The speaker was in favor of this because their primary mission is to set a global standard for behavior.

We partnered with Google to address the issue of distorted information on climate change. When searching for climate change, Google now provides UN resources at the top of the results. We believe it is important to be proactive in sharing accurate scientific information. This is a significant challenge that requires active involvement from all sectors of society.

We need to provide better tools to poor farmers to combat climate change. I became aware of this issue while visiting Africa and witnessing the devastating effects of temperature increase on crops, leading to malnutrition and increased deaths. By utilizing gene sequencing, AI, and satellite data, we can enhance the productivity and resilience of all crops, not just mainstream ones. This will greatly improve the lives of over 500 million farmers. Scaling up these improvements is crucial, and prioritizing high-impact interventions, similar to how we prioritize health interventions, is essential. Today marks a significant milestone in accelerating innovation for climate adaptation.

Our theory of change is to ensure that everyone, not just top leaders, has the resources and training to do this work. We have partnered with progressive companies like Ikea, Spotify, Ericsson, and Google, who not only sponsor this initiative but also train all their employees. Some companies even aim to spread this in society. We are in talks with Apple to have this in every iPhone, although it may take 1 or 2 years due to internal bureaucracy. To establish credibility, we have collaborated with universities such as Stockholm University, Stockholm School of Economics, Lund University, Harvard, Atmos, Paris University, and Danish Technical University.

- The conversation centers on how AI progress has evolved over the last few years, what is surprising, and what the near future might look like in terms of capabilities, diffusion, and economic impact. - Big picture of progress - Speaker 1 argues that the underlying exponential progression of AI tech has followed expectations, with models advancing from “smart high school student” to “smart college student” to capabilities approaching PhD/professional levels, and code-related tasks extending beyond that frontier. The pace is roughly as anticipated, with some variance in direction for specific tasks. - The most surprising aspect, per Speaker 1, is the lack of public recognition of how close we are to the end of the exponential growth curve. He notes that public discourse remains focused on political controversies while the technology is approaching a phase where the exponential growth tapers or ends. - What “the exponential” looks like now - There is a shared hypothesis dating back to 2017 (the big blob of compute hypothesis) that what matters most for progress are a small handful of factors: compute, data quantity, data quality/distribution, training duration, scalable objective functions, and normalization/conditioning for stability. - Pretraining scaling has continued to yield gains, and now RL shows a similar pattern: pretraining followed by RL phases can scale with long-term training data and objectives. Tasks like math contests have shown log-linear improvements with training time in RL, and this pattern mirrors pretraining. - The discussion emphasizes that RL and pretraining are not fundamentally different in their relation to scaling; RL is seen as an RL-like extension atop the same scaling principles already observed in pretraining. - On the nature of learning and generalization - There is debate about whether the best path to generalization is “human-like” learning (continual on-the-job learning) or large-scale pretraining plus RL. Speaker 1 argues the generalization observed in pretraining on massive, diverse data (e.g., Common Crawl) is what enables the broad capabilities, and RL similarly benefits from broad, varied data and tasks. - The in-context learning capacity is described as a form of short- to mid-term learning that sits between long-term human learning and evolution, suggesting a spectrum rather than a binary gap between AI learning and human learning. - On the end state and timeline to AGI-like capabilities - Speaker 1 expresses high confidence (~90% or higher) that within ten years we will reach capabilities where a country-of-geniuses-level model in a data center could handle end-to-end tasks (including coding) and generalize across many domains. He places a strong emphasis on timing: “one to three years” for on-the-job, end-to-end coding and related tasks; “three to five” or “five to ten” years for broader, high-ability AI integration into real work. - A central caution is the diffusion problem: even if the technology is advancing rapidly, the economic uptake and deployment into real-world tasks take time due to organizational, regulatory, and operational frictions. He envisions two overlapping fast exponential curves: one for model capability and one for diffusion into the economy, with the latter slower but still rapid compared with historical tech diffusion. - On coding and software engineering - The conversation explores whether the near-term future could see 90% or even 100% of coding tasks done by AI. Speaker 1 clarifies his forecast as a spectrum: - 90% of code written by models is already seen in some places. - 90% of end-to-end SWE tasks (including environment setup, testing, deployment, and even writing memos) might be handled by models; 100% is still a broader claim. - The distinction is between what can be automated now and the broader productivity impact across teams. Even with high automation, human roles in software design and project management may shift rather than disappear. - The value of coding-specific products like Claude Code is discussed as a result of internal experimentation becoming externally marketable; adoption is rapid in the coding domain, both internally and externally. - On product strategy and economics - The economics of frontier AI are discussed in depth. The industry is characterized as a few large players with steep compute needs and a dynamic where training costs grow rapidly while inference margins are substantial. This creates a cycle: training costs are enormous, but inference revenue plus margins can be significant; the industry’s profitability depends on accurately forecasting future demand for compute and managing investment in training versus inference. - The concept of a “country of geniuses in a data center” is used to describe the point at which frontier AI capabilities become so powerful that they unlock large-scale economic value. The timing is uncertain and depends on both technical progress and the diffusion of benefits through the economy. - There is a nuanced view on profitability: in a multi-firm equilibrium, each model may be profitable on its own, but the cost of training new models can outpace current profits if demand does not grow as fast as the compute investments. The balance is described in terms of a distribution where roughly half of compute is used for training and half for inference, with margins on inference driving profitability while training remains a cost center. - On governance, safety, and society - The conversation ventures into governance and international dynamics. The world may evolve toward an “AI governance architecture” with preemption or standard-setting at the federal level, to avoid an unhelpful patchwork of state laws. The idea is to establish standards for transparency, safety, and alignment while balancing innovation. - There is concern about autocracies and the potential for AI to exacerbate geopolitical tensions. The idea is that the post-AGI world may require new governance structures that preserve human freedoms, while enabling competitive but safe AI development. Speaker 1 contemplates scenarios in which authoritarian regimes could become destabilized by powerful AI-enabled information and privacy tools, though cautions that practical governance approaches would be required. - The role of philanthropy is acknowledged, but there is emphasis on endogenous growth and the dissemination of benefits globally. Building AI-enabled health, drug discovery, and other critical sectors in the developing world is seen as essential for broad distribution of AI benefits. - The role of safety tools and alignments - Anthropic’s approach to model governance includes a constitution-like framework for AI behavior, focusing on principles rather than just prohibitions. The idea is to train models to act according to high-level principles with guardrails, enabling better handling of edge cases and greater alignment with human values. - The constitution is viewed as an evolving set of guidelines that can be iterated within the company, compared across different organizations, and subject to broader societal input. This iterative approach is intended to improve alignment while preserving safety and corrigibility. - Specific topics and examples - Video editing and content workflows illustrate how an AI with long-context capabilities and computer-use ability could perform complex tasks, such as reviewing interviews, identifying where to edit, and generating a final cut with context-aware decisions. - There is a discussion of long-context capacity (from thousands of tokens to potentially millions) and the engineering challenges of serving such long contexts, including memory management and inference efficiency. The conversation stresses that these are engineering problems tied to system design rather than fundamental limits of the model’s capabilities. - Final outlook and strategy - The timeline for a country-of-geniuses in a data center is framed as potentially within one to three years for end-to-end on-the-job capabilities, and by 2028-2030 for broader societal diffusion and economic impact. The probability of reaching fundamental capabilities that enable trillions of dollars in revenue is asserted as high within the next decade, with 2030 as a plausible horizon. - There is ongoing emphasis on responsible scaling: the pace of compute expansion must be balanced with thoughtful investment and risk management to ensure long-term stability and safety. The broader vision includes global distribution of benefits, governance mechanisms that preserve civil liberties, and a cautious but optimistic expectation that AI progress will transform many sectors while requiring careful policy and institutional responses. - Mentions of concrete topics - Claude Code as a notable Anthropic product rising from internal use to external adoption. - The idea of a “collective intelligence” approach to shaping AI constitutions with input from multiple stakeholders, including potential future government-level processes. - The role of continual learning, model governance, and the interplay between technology progression and regulatory development. - The broader existential and geopolitical questions—how the world navigates diffusion, governance, and potential misalignment—are acknowledged as central to both policy and industry strategy. - In sum, the dialogue canvasses (a) the expected trajectory of AI progress and the surprising proximity to exponential endpoints, (b) how scaling, pretraining, and RL interact to yield generalization, (c) the practical timelines for on-the-job competencies and automation of complex professional tasks, (d) the economics of compute and the diffusion of frontier AI across the economy, (e) governance, safety, and the potential for a governance architecture (constitutions, preemption, and multi-stakeholder input), and (f) the strategic moves of Anthropic (including Claude Code) within this evolving landscape.

The transcript presents a highly critical, conspiratorial portrayal of Bill Gates, intertwining business, philanthropy, public health influence, and controversial associations. It traces Gates’s background, career moves, and the foundation’s global activities, while alleging manipulation, lack of transparency, and moral hazard. Key points and allegations: - Background and rise to power: - Gates is described as born into wealth and privilege; his father, William Gates Sr., was a prominent Seattle lawyer and political lobbyist, shaping Gates’s exposure to law, politics, and influence over governance. - He dropped out of college to start Microsoft and is credited with Windows, though it’s claimed he bought an existing operating system from Seattle Computer Products, had it modified, then licensed it to IBM, taking credit for the achievement. - Corporate conduct and personality perceptions: - Gates is portrayed by some as an opportunist rather than a creative innovator. - While Paul Allen faced illness, Gates allegedly sought to dilute Allen’s share of Microsoft, described as a “shocking and disheartening moment.” - Antitrust scrutiny and deposition: - Microsoft faced a 1998 DOJ antitrust lawsuit over anti-competitive practices intended to maintain its PC operating system monopoly. - Deposition excerpts are cited, including questions about non-Microsoft browsers in 1996 and Gates’s reactions during the proceedings. - Philanthropy and public image: - In response to negative press, Gates funded the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation with large donations, transforming his image to a generous philanthropist. - The foundation is described as rapidly expanding into a vertically integrated multinational operation, controlling supply chains from Seattle to Africa and Asia. - Gates is depicted as stating in various contexts that vaccines are a central investment; a Wall Street Journal quote claims a significant return on vaccination investments. - Vaccination programs and controversy: - The foundation’s vaccination work is criticized for alleged harmful outcomes, including claims of coercive or exploitative vaccination campaigns in India (HPV vaccine trials with tribal girls, alleged lack of informed consent, injuries, and deaths). - Parliaments and governments are described as taking action against these initiatives, including investigations and dismissals of the Gates Foundation’s involvement. - The narrative asserts that vaccines, programs, and surveillance are used to exert political and financial power, including references to “digital immunity proof” and vaccine certificates. - Claims include that the Gates Foundation has investments in polluting companies and that some vaccine programs caused paralysis, deaths, or other harms, with alleged media suppression of these issues. - Global health influence and controversial projects: - The transcript lists numerous controversial or conspiratorial assertions about Gates’s influence over global health policy, including partnerships with WHO and CDC, and involvement in a broad array of projects (stratospheric aerosol injections, Earth Now, genetic modifications and surveillance, NADs like quantum dot tattoos). - It mentions the Epstein association, alleging Gates met Jeffrey Epstein multiple times and co-founded a charitable fund with him, prompting questions about philanthropy versus personal network and influence. - Conclusion and framing: - The text closes by juxtaposing the possibility that Gates could be a benevolent benefactor or a malevolent opportunist, expressing a desire to believe in the benevolent version but acknowledging pervasive doubts about the impact of his work.

And I I think that that AI, in my case, is creating jobs. It causes us to be able to create things that other people would customers would like to buy. It drives more growth. It drives more jobs. The other thing that that to remember is that AI is the greatest technology equalizer of all time.

I see my companies and my work as positive forces. Even with the criticisms I receive on X, the platform has become a public discussion forum. SpaceX is set to rescue stranded astronauts. My other companies, like Starlink, are providing crucial services, such as saving the day in many countries by providing internet service, now even connected to mobile phones. The Boring Company, while the name suggests otherwise, is doing great work. Looking ahead, initiatives like going to Mars are positive for humanity. Tesla and EVs are also a leap forward, offering clean transportation that doesn't rely on fuel. Overall, I believe my contributions are a positive influence on the international community and global peace.