Organ of the votes cast the flagship pod cast of semi conductor found reconstruction. I'm your friend eve appears I am currently in union station in. Do you see it just often amtrak home from connecticut big weekend family time and, ironically alot of technology. There was a floppy disk adapter involved I got to tell my mom all about the wonders of veal, see media player, and we did an falada password Chang nobody's on netflix. Anyway, we have a great show for you today. Technically ezra. Listening to this, the? U S, men terms were yesterday, but we still want to spend some time this week. Talking about politics, sorted I talk about how political news works on the internet and whether anyone can build tools to make it work better. We're also going to talk with eddie robertson about this. a free speech in america and on the internet. Fair warning is pretty bleak and then mechanic He is going to come on to talk to us about that, send science act and which you are this might turn out to be the next big tech hubs. All that is

in just a second, but I gotta get out of this train station and into a cab and get home. Wish me luck. This is the verge guess seen the second. This podcast is brought to you by post are designing and suv for the electric age means redesigning wooden s. U can be introducing the pole star three designed to go farther with up to three hundred miles of range designed to protect with advanced safety systems and designed to look and sound like nothing else on the road paul star, three, the suv for the electric age visit, pole, star, dot com, to learn more in design. Yours today, first sweetheart stared to combine sweet ants heart, but they didn't stop there. Now they have combined soft and bound see to bring you knew, sweetheart these rudy split a unique We delicious dual cited gummy with one side. Sweet and the other side decks chart

entirely smooth and squash. A powerfully perfect, combat sweethearts, dare to combat what ak. I want to tell you about the slider I'm looking at, so I'm on niva dot com niva, if you didn't know, is a search engine which is built by a bunch of ex Google is who think they can build a better ad free privacy, respecting search engine interesting company? Organ talk a lot more about it in a later episode, but anyway, I'm only that I come and I search for but say twenty twenty two midterms their happening right now. Going on. I click on the news tab and I get some news mid term, elections latest news, which is a stream of stuff from the washington post, midterms. Twenty two Do the ultimate insiders guide from newsweek, Charlie Kirk, the hidden parents votes sway mid term elections from foxes. There's the westlake picking June, which is a local newspaper from Texas that here so as the houston chronicle,

the Saint Louis post, dispatch, NBC news ABC dallas morning, news yahoo, fox, reuters, fairly standard new stuff, but then there's the slighter at the top right. It's like a third of the page wide and it goes from dark blue on the left to a sort of faded weight in the middle to it. Red on the right. If I grabbed the black arrows in the middle and pull them all the way left the whole thing tilts toward blue and the news changes- now for seven, my search results is the daily bees says geo peace then a few money in blue seats as poles till their way for mid term elections, then the guardian Democrat, insist. Joe Biden, low midterms profile is smart strategy than theirs. Sorry about JD vans and tim ryan in ohio rolling stone story with an snl cold, open making fun of republicans? My name is herschel walker, Texas.

President of the united airlines. You get the idea right. This is deep, blue pro democratic news, a beast accordingly. give up now. Let's go all the way, the other way grabbed the arrow slide into the right. The whole thing: tilts dark red, Now I have a story from framework says Paul, independent voters swing eighteen points towards european generic ballot. One from news Cbs is moderate. Brennan tries to pin political violence on republican wraps tweet, for the daily mail, new gingrich says, Biden likely doomed mid terms by inviting dylan mulvaney to white house. The daily collar is on here. The federalist is on here. This is like the who's who of far right new sources. If I tell back slightly tor middle now, I'm getting than your post and fox news in the washington examiner and the epoch times it still very rightly,

and obviously with headlines about big tech and democrats being in bed with each other and china's suppose it attempt to undermine the midterms and then, if I grab it again and flip slightly left, I get a yahoo story about the senate race in pennsylvania and a politico story about democrats leading obama to help them had a bunch of cnn and NBC. This slider is called bias buster and it's neve as attempts to get people out of their echo members and filter bubbles and showed them new information and new perspectives. Fears of a vat ragamuffin neves cofounder described it to me, this kind of thing has never existed before you sure you can copper? Quite you like inflation reduction, act or election results and add, like fox news or I'd like a mother

or add like having to boast, and you can get like views from across the spectrum by what we are really trying to do with both buster is to dramatically reduce the bar. The sampling, diverse points of opinions from all sides of the speck, and so we build that into the product design from the ground up, for example, this I buster resets itself on every search. We don't want it to be a setting that kind of remembers itself as you go up. We want you to try out and sample different points of the same opinion, my media first question on seeing this or even hearing about it was basically says who Is this just someone one at niva, looking at a bunch of new sources and articles and saying one centre right that one super left the vex hold me

no in a way, it's actually simpler than that, and there are a number of third party publications out there that have you not publish point of view of where we thought this land on various parts of the spectrum they often used falling and other techniques that involve like serving users, to create a map of the readers, new sources and barely land the spectrum we are using, those as guides to design where various publications land on various parts of the spectrum. Okay, wait hang on quick diversion here. The deck also told the that neither tried to not just categorize everything in one specific place, because publications aren't the same all the time which makes us. But it got me wondering how he's ranking systems work it. This kind of sound, like someone is just out their reading news articles in going. Oh mother jones, super left, AP very centre right by ultra right is weird to me that its that simple or that it's possible to boil it all the way down like

So I called up julie, mystery me: who's, the director of media, biased ratings at all sites, which is one of the best known companies doing this kind of work here. So she explained the process. So if we have high confidence in a rating, it means that we have applied multiple high confidence methodologies to the new sources content, and that typically means its undergone two things and editor. A review by a panel of people on the left center and right who are actually looking at the news sources, content and assessing it for bias and then coming to a consensus on a rating and a blind, biased survey of americans. So that is when we strip news reporting content of any branding. So people don't know that it's coming from cnn or fox, we send it out to thousands of americans and we asked them to tell us what they think. The bias of the media outlet is after reading headlines and news reports from the outlet, so we're kind of mixing. You know expert panels of people

who are trained spot bias with everyday americans to get the perception of the country. She said this process involves a lot of new wants and publications change over time, but I definitely don't think this is a perfect system, but it is at least a consistent one and an approach. I've heard from a few people building tools like neve us I definitely think this is better than trying to do like some really complicated personalized a I analysis of every article to figure out where it falls politically that something a lot of tat companies are trying. I don't think it would work and in neither case keeping it simple, is probably the right call, because with a tool like this giving people a transparent understanding of what their seeing and why is actually a really big deal reading any personalization users do should be explicit. We should not be doing implicit, personal vision on there and we ve been doing it at the level of landlady d. Understand in this case or says, is very important to building that trust and transparency. Look

I think this is going to instantly solve all problems of polarization on the internet. No training stuff like this worth trying absolutely but honestly, my biggest quest with all of this is: will anyone use it? sure, there's a subset of people who say they like to read widely and understand other arguments, all that cuts off its own nice put it human nature, to seek out stuff. We know and stuff that agrees with us and the sources that we feel like get us and were most comfortable with it even possible. To expose people to new things. This way, especially, such a high stakes and constantly argumentative space like politics christian de sean munson, whose a professor at the university of washington and in twenty twelve he created a tool called balance, or that was meant to do something very similar to what leave us doing now. It was a chrome extension design. Help. You see a wider spectrum of information about the news we thought about the kind of his whole range of options. Perversion folks are given

none of this knowledge, or at least feedback some included. Maybe we actually redirect them right, sir, if you ve read from in a left, leaning or right, leaning source too often, maybe when you go to read an article on a topic on the back end, there's something that actually takes you to that, an article on the same topic, maybe on a source. You wouldn't choose that last bit actually changing the articles. You see felt like a bridge too far surveillance her. Eventually settled on just giving you feedback on your activity the goal he says now was fairly simple and matches. What vivek told me about niva, if I were to have continued to work, metrics for success would have been things like. Are people more aware of other arguments? Are they able to cite the range of opinions that might support another opinion, even if they still don't agree with it rights? Are they basically more prepared to have conversations with people who hold different views because they kind of understand a bit of where they're coming from or understand some of the background, and it might not?

many mines, but at least kindness, the shared understanding, our shared reality. You might have noticed that at the beginning of that sean said if I were to have continued the work spoiler alert, he didn't continue the work important he didn't because he felt like he was actually pressing at the most important information problem we have found her is a tool that works articles exist in a mostly shared reality. They just have different opinions about what to do about their ability and if we look at where the information space has gone these days, it's not a shared reality. The misinformation disinformation are much bigger threats and I don't think something like balancer could really possibly address them. I asked the vec about this too, because one thing that jumped out to me using bias. Buster was the tools like this seem to think that everything as a matter of what right and left believe and does not set up a few.

stick dichotomy like oh reasonable people can disagree when in reality, some things are true and some people are just wrong. Facts exist. My consensus and the veracity of information is a in or total access to political opinion. There is legitimate political opinion on both sides, but rather something is true or not. Is like the next level of we don't gotta clean opera me. I don't feel equipped to tackle misinformation other completely by myself and the current moment until it in view of the biased buster we are not attempting to tackle. The lack of information campaign attempting to tackle different opinions are different sides of the political spectrum. That strikes me as a tiny bit of a cop out, but honestly also the right call the Neither goal is to match what google and being and others are doing right now to push to be, as torres hated and correct, as they are, without trying to reinvent the wheel and solve everything all at once, after playing with it for a future,

Something about leave us biased, bustard does feel valuable to me, and I am clearly not the only one. Over the years, lots of folks have tried to figure out how to do this kind of thing. Responsible way. Exposing users to new ideas and sources without just causing flame wars seems good right, but still Come back to this idea. Is this a problem worth solving There are such bigger ones out there. I am torn on all of this, but billy diverges, addy Robertson has been paying attention to this kind of speech issue of lot longer than I have so figure this cholera benefits at a gallop. Thank you for being here I don't even have a question for you. Just like tell me tell me how to feel about tools like this, as someone has been paying attention this for a long time. On one hand, anything that lets you filter and sort information is kind of just a good. I think that's its neat. From that perspective, I think also you can. I want to be clear eyed about its limitations, though so. The first thing I think of is that this doesn't really control for a super key

issue in search bias, which is your input, so it as a scholar Francesca proputty, has done a lot of work on this, which is that the way you phrase, a key word or the topic that you're dealing with their just inherently different ways that different sites cover that information so if you are in her example, you put an immigrant voting rights, then it doesn't matter how far right you slide the spectrum there's going to be a lot more coverage on the left, because that's just how the issue is framed, and how it just written about, whereas if you write illegal immigrants voting, then you're just going to get something. That's inherently right, biased because that's not terminology that the new york times or mother Jones is going to use and the same token like there are topics that just there's one side of the political spectrum is going to write a billion essays and news stories about them, like I don't know, hunter Biden's, laptop and other.

if they're going to cover them, but there's just not that not as much data there that super initially cause I'm now thinking about the way I tested this and a lot of that has been very sort of generic rate. You search terms like inflation and Joe Biden and mid Worms twenty twenty two, and I think some of that is like how people use the internet, but for the most part it is the stuff you're describing it's like. Here's a story about hunter Biden's laptop and see you, Google hunter Biden's laptop and just by virtue of looking for that thing, there are places like the new york post has covered hunter Biden's laptop. to like the nth degree search is, by definition, are more likely to get stuck with that kind of biased. Just because of the fact that you're searching for that thing with those words, and there are some stories where it's just there's, almost a complete data void on one side of the spectrum, because this is kind of the problem with describing any news coverage as objective, which is that the stories you decide to cover are sort of inherently from a viewpoint. So that's the first thing. The second thing is that I think that it is increasingly limited to describe the political spectrum as left versus right

I hate that I think, there's a lot of intersection now between say issues that matter to the left and issues that matter to the right, they're, just motivated by different things and framed, sometimes in a different way, and I think that a lot of the sources there are also from what you've described. They seem like source sort of a kind of well known subset of sources. So yes, maybe you do you usually don't watch fox news or read fox news and you're going to get more fox news, but you're not really going to burst the bubble of a specific subset of media like you're, not as far as I can tell going to get. You know unicorn riot results from like a leftist collective right, like if you're going to get things that are still pretty firmly within a specific media bubble. Yeah well and that's one of the things I've been thinking a lot about too, is like I wound up sort of deep down this rabbit hole of these companies that rate media bias and

It ends up setting up this weird dichotomy where, like I've, talked to a lot of people over the years who say like you know, I watch fox news for one side of the political spectrum and I watch cnn for the other side of the political spectrum, and I say let's get the impulse, but like I would not. I would not agree with the assertion that those are equal but opposite platforms, and then it's like ok, what what is the like left version of part- and it just ends up in this- like really messy complicated, had space where, like these things, are not equally waited, and I think even the idea that there is like a centrist take on everything is not true anymore. then we want to turn this crazy road of, like is q and on a political question. Like is the earth flat, a political question and I do know. This is just where my head starts to spend about like where it is truth versus fiction and where does right versus left and where does politics verses, just nonsense, All of the all these lines feel so blurry that it to me it's like this is a valiant attempt, but I

most wonder like how deep towards that solving the real problems here can a tool actually go. Eight, also kind of cuts against one of the key purposes of sir engine which is to give you correct information, but then what is correct? This is the world we live in now. None of this makes any sense, but that's the thing is: Google and search engines are comfortable trying to make these judgments for some things like. If you ask me what year did snoopy assassinate Abraham lincoln, which is a real thing that Google, at one white powder to correct for no. This is obviously incorrect. There are things that are just beyond debate endurance. These things were failing. If we don't deliver these things, but then I think that as soon as something enters a specific culture we're frame. Then suddenly people are really afraid to say that something is true. No, I think it is right, and I think that question is sort of forever more complicated and from some of the votes have talked to even talking about this stuff is the bigger sort of more important question right. It's like we can talk,

but political bias, but only if we sort of exists in this shared reality when we all agree on what is real and true, and we don't anymore- and that feels problematic yes a lot of ways to frame stories that evolve, agreeing with specific baseline facts, but then just spinning them in a completely different way like if you read the new york times versus fox. Even if the facts are right, you can come away with a really different impression, but that still to some extent that just a matter of opinion- and I think that that is clearly distinguishable from sites that just say very clearly wrong. Factual things with no back of rain.

this is helpful. This means we federal. We need to take a break, but you should stick around because I want to spend a bunch of time talking about your story about the first amendment. To have fewer minutes. You wanna hang out. I do ok cool, we will be writing support for this. Podcast comes from slack. When are you listening to this podcast, your home, in transit at your job, it's nice to have the ability to to some of your favorite content from anywhere. If only work could be a simple when they be nice for you and your team members to solve problems from anywhere instead of going through the hassle, fining thirty three minutes on everyone's calendar. Well, with slack, you can easily connect with teammates with simple to use tools to help work feel less like work sites as a product of a platform that connects all your team members together instantly its built to help your team.

a host of features like huddles for quick check, ins and clips for recording and sharing video slack also makes it easy to search and find the right information you need. You can even integrate these Are you using your normal workflow? Like your calendar, or product management tools. So you stay focused on the work that matters and get more done so check out slack because its built to make work simpler and more connected mention more pleasant, learn: more sacked our com, sash productivity, most enterprises use disparate systems to manage, spend the result. A reactive manual approach see opposing controllers. You deserve better. You deserve a unified spend a platform from Rex rex makes it easy to proactively control, spend with cards, spend management, travel and bill pay in one place. You can create budgets with controls built in track and adjust in real time to keep teams accountable and automate compliance to close the books faster, ready to control. You spend with one unified platform visit rex

a calm, slash, podcast, we're back at you still here. Thank you for second round at the end of it. So I want to talk about this big story wrote called how america turn against the first amendment and I wrote down the way would summarised the thesis of your peace, and I want to know if how good a job I did summarizing the thesis of your pc re, yeah. Ok, my summary of the thesis of your piece is basically because a bunch of politicians and people on both sides, the aisle, want to score political points by capitalizing on the backlash against big tech. They are in section two thirty as a wedge through which they can stick government speed. Regulation into the internet and that's a huge problem in an actual threat to the first amendment which guarantees free speech, and even if we acknowledge all of that to be true and agree that it's bad our legal system. Basically is not equipped to handle it has at how to do this. Pretty fair, yeah anthem, absolute brought us

Well, it's that everyone claims to love the first amendment by everyone, I'm a muslim talking about politicians and courts, and then they increasingly just try to undercut it by claiming a bunch of other things that are not first. Amendment related are somehow creating problems, and so they are using all these things as smoke screens to kind of get around freely. What they want to do is change. What speech is legal? You point out that it's basically politically ridiculous to say you don't like the first amendment like just no one would do that in america to say I am against free speech- is just political suicide and yet to come out and say you know we should be. moderating these companies, I'm remaining books all these issues, picking the fight with big tech and in this Specific ways seems to work in a way that saying I am against free speech doesn't work. Why is that part of this Is that free speech in the first amendment are kind of different things that the first amendment is the specific legal doctrine that says that the government cannot do this thing.

and has been interpreted in various ways over the years, but then free speech also it's this much broader question and I think that the internet has made it increasingly weird, which is that its harder and harder to tell what speech and its harder and harder to tell what is free like in a world say with almost infinite information. If you bury a bunch of speech in a bunch of harassment and weird nonsense is speech, meaning free. I think that there are really useful intermediaries for a lot of people. There is a version of this where it's that a lot of speech- america now is mediated by these corporations. So if you really want to put your thumb on the scale and make speech either want to change the way that these sites work and you want to force them to carry certain information or you want to say that they should ban certain information makin, a quite say that should be illegal, you're, just gonna say it would be really hard to put up that. I think that that's, it's kind of a way to work around the first amendment and make it kind of meaningless

right, ok, you! You can sort of kneecap the first amendment without ever actually saying I am against the first amendment, which is, as established a bonkers thing, to do We know a lot of places in the world, don't think it's a bonkers thing to do a lot of places in the world look at short a moment ago that ridiculous. Why would you not banned hate speech, reboot and america, it's more or less a foundational principle of just how speech works, the economic sense of ok and then one more concept. I went spain, because I was actually reading the comments on your story in this came up a bunch and there's a bunch of debate about it, and I think it's one of the things about section. Two: thirty, specifically the people, wilfully or otherwise, misunderstand alot, which is that what section to thirty this is actually allow companies to moderate their platforms, not forces them to be neutral, not forces them to have one specific point of It allows them to do the things that a lot of people are actually asking them to do, and that's a good thing, you just explain powder,

actually operates like what. What a section two thirty allow these companies to do. That is good and useful invaluable. If you are a regular for just listen or maybe already know this, but the reason section two thirty exists as that there were these two cases involving, I think, libel that were involving is two separate companies like very early internet service providers. One of these places did not moderate things. It was just this free for all, and somebody said something that was illegal and defamatory and somebody suit over it. and then the other one was trying to be family friendly. It was actively moderating things. It was looking at this content and then someone also said something illegally. Defend worry allegedly and they got sued and the principle. At that point, the way the court's decided it was thinking. Alright, let's compare this to a book store,

or a newspaper and lets say that you cannot reasonably expect somebody who runs a big bookstore to have read literally every book. That's ridiculous, they're! Just these sellers, they don't really have a great knowledge of everything that's in here, so they shouldn't be responsible for selling it but say if you're, a newspaper and you're publishing a thing and you're just curating, absolutely everything. Then you have control over this, but you should be responsible for it, and then they looked at this in the context of the internet and went with this is actually really counter productive, because what it says is that if you bother to figure out what's going on on your site and make it better, then we're going to punish you for it by saying that you are responsible for anything illegal that happens and what is illegal is often not clear, especially with speech law that something that is defamatory. You actually have these really long, complicated legal cases,

bout it and so it's very very hard for a website to make something. That is a judgment that often courts have trouble making and so section. Two thirty basically says that you are, to run your site? How you one and you don't have to deal with- trying to figure out? What's legal and illegal, with some exceptions and that flip side be- and I think this is this- is the concept that it took me a really long time to wrap my head around. I think it's hard for a lot of people is that the flip side would be that the expedient thing for all these companies to do, would be to just bury their head in the sand and not try, because then you have clauses, my ability that says. Oh, we didn't, even though this was here, it's her wearable we're? So sorry, you can't sue us about we we didn't know we didn't do it right. It's basically saying you're, an internet service provider, whatever you're were dumb pipes. We do nothing here to moderate, and so devices either way too much moderation or none at all right exactly what a lot of people perceive, as that without section two thirty, these companies would be forced to do a really, really really really good job of moderating and

The actual reality of the fact is that it's impossible to do it well enough without section two thirty, if not impossible, it is like massively difficult to do it well enough without section two thirty to be like legally safe. so the easy response than would be to do absolutely nothing and just turned the blind, possible? I too everything happening and just let chaos, and that is what companies would do, rather than actually invest d like asked, article resources you would have to in order to do this successfully here

on their do a really well side, I think, and hopeful comparison here is that one of the things the second to thirty doesn't protect in the same way as everything else is copyrighted. Information is piracy, so their distinct laws in the digital millennium, copyright act. You have to actually make this serious effort to try to take down copyrighted stuff, that's being put up illegally. No one likes this on the internet. The internet is full of stories about saying, look out, look terrible! You two deals with this. Like look at the fact that it takes down, you don't burn songs because it thinks the bird songs are copyrighted. People typically do not think that this situation has turned out well in the way that they often one try to make it work for other caprices of content yet and it, if it's possible to do this successfully. We certainly have never seen it right and, like facebook has talked about this forever there, like we invest more resources into this than anybody like wasn't it facebook that said like our moderation staff is the size of twitter. Daisy

It's just crazy. They put all these resources into it and they still have this like earth shattering gigantic set of problems, The only consistent answer I have heard for this is that if you are not able to moderate well, you should not exist at the scale that you do, which I think is the kind of the only feasible and consistent way to say this, and I'm not sure a lot of people want to go there right. That changes. I think a lot more than people realize, if that it ends up being the decision that a lot of these hopes have to make. But ok, that's about it as we take, because one of the things that I think underlies alot of your story? Is this idea that there is a bunch of sneaky? political manoeuvring going on here and it's hard to sort out what is actual desire for governments be tribulation verses. What is sort of a police Nicole response to the cultural backlash against big tech verses. What is just about of relatively out of touch, politicians, not understanding the unita. inches of the internet and my mit

I being the jumble there are correctly do. Do you feel like one of those things is a bigger push for some of it happening here. Yeah, I think that's right. This is people may be genuinely not understanding the internet. Part of this is people identifying real problems with the internet and wanting them to work differently, but in ways that conflict with a lot of basic american law and then part of it, is what I would just call bad faith. Okay, I don't like to assume that, but it's really hard to look at a lot of these projects and see anything except I don't like the way that these companies work politically and I don't like whether or not they take down things that I like, and so I'm gonna work, the refs and I'm going to punish them right and that's You see things like the laws in florida and tax rate, and I feel like when you look at these. Like blanket social media moderation bans, it feels very

hard to assign anything other than bad faith to this at this point and other very, very clear about their purpose that they're all they start with these preamble about, isn't really terrible the big taxes censoring republicans, which there are, I think it was the florida decision that starts with just saying there is the first amendment. not protected. You specifically having your particular ideology included on something which is I like it. I don't want to go too far with this like there are. Obviously the first amendment means that you should not try to create laws that sensing specific viewpoints, the fact that a private company is doing something that ends up, incidentally, causing collateral damage that it's not even clear if it disproportionately affect republicans they remove it. one of content, that in itself is not inherently a first amendment problem. Like this

situation where maybe it would be, but it's not enough. There's a back and forth that you just described that I think is super insane because, like we, we are reporters which I think, probably by definition, is going to make us pro free speech, people write like it is better to do the job that we do it in a world where free speech is protected. We also just like believe it. It generally, and I I knowing you for a long time. You are a free speech person. More than most, I would, I would say to his country am wrong. That's very that's fair, but it's also true. I think- and I think you will agree with us- that we both sit here and say there are things that to happen social media that are bad and wouldn't it be great if they didn't happen, and so I think how to look at those two things simultaneously and sort of the part of this. I guess it's just like acknowledging that the world is complicated and you can't have it both ways all the time, but to look at it and say these are places that people live a lot of their lives and we have entered into like up a style of conversation that, like we ass humans, are clearly not ready for, and we probably do need,

to work slightly differently than it is, but also to change. These things in these phenomena. Ways break this other thing that we believe in really strongly. I don't know you just like sit here and wrestle between those two. all the time in your head, because it feels like I have to do that more and more of a type yeah Yes, it emerged from the ways. The first is trying to figure out what a speech which was part of the peace, which is that, if you just say anything that runs in code is speech than like air being these speech, like amazon selling poison his speech and there's some real legal evidence that that is speech rightly god is. That is a definition. So people really adhere to worry and in some places of complicated If amazon recommends you buy something. Is that speech like? Maybe I don't know, but it feels kind of wrong to say that if it happens on the internet, it has to be speech that feels like it just cuts against the intent of the first amendment, which is that expressing ideas is among among other parts of the first amendment it is important to my idea- is that you should by toilet paper. That is my that's my political family. My idea,

literally settling you toil is goods and services that feels weird and the other part of it is the legalism of what does speech law say and the practical aspects of like what is actually letting people speak like world, where you can say anything, but its literally impossible for any one to find it, because it's buried under huge amounts of harassment does does feels like it also doesn't fit the spirit of the law like the world, where you can say something, but the internet also makes it incredibly easy to retaliate against you and to make you afraid for your life. That also that doesn't really work either like if there's a world where the law makes sense and the laws consistent, but I don't want to get in a position where they're, if the law isn't doing the thing that it's supposed to. What is the point of the law right? Well, yeah, one of the questions, that comes up about the internet in in a lot of ways is on the way. about the internet different then some of the things in the past

everybody says you know there is a moral panic that newspapers there was a moral panic about radio and there is a moral panic about television. It's like all these. Are true does seem like an especially to your point like the scale of the internet does seem different and it seems like politically and legally that's been an incredibly hard thing to keep up with that like it's, it's cross borders, it's more people it's just happening at such great pace that it does, even if we haven't yet perfectly defined, why it's different. It feels like a different question about speech. Let you go back and the newspapers also crazy shit about each other, and most of it was nonsense because it was all politically motivated and the first amendment allow that to happen. Rightly that was not done even though some people amount about it. But there is something about this and scale of which it's happening now, and especially that has concentrated into these couple of platforms across the world that makes it feel differently as that.

why this is so much harder for anyone to wrap their heads around just because it's so much bigger. Now yeah and I have always have trouble with this, because, among other things, you know, I'm not one hundred fifty years but I think it is also that every new medium has created problems and trade offs that people have had to deal with germany, radio its. I think a lot of people accept radio was one of the things that help nazi ism grow that radio, what helped instigate the genocide in rwanda that radio, really all of these things, have caused terrible problems that it's just that we decided. That speech was important enough and that this technology did enough good things that it's worth those trade offs and that really any kind of technology is going to create a set of trade offs. And we have to evaluate those. And so I think the internet has a bunch indistinct

problems that a lot of these things didn't have and the internet has a bunch of opportunities that these things didn't create. I don't know, I think one of the issues is that coming just going back to what his speech on the internet that I think there's a world where our lives, like you know, our bank account information and our physical addresses and their specific other things that we must decide for coordinating off that those aren't going to take place in this world. Where we also just argue with each other. All the time, because, arguing with each other all the time sometimes has value, but it also, I think that, when our entire lives are consumed by it and its incredibly frictionless to tie that to people's real safety, that starts getting really the cult okay, so before I let you go, let's come back to these laws in florida and texas because it feels like in in Legal system, which has, I think, historically, as you point out, not done a great job of figuring out how another such work

those two laws. One of them seems like it is probably going to end up in front of the supreme court rights. We're gonna get this big reckoning about what the gun, can do to social media and how we feel about speech and moderation and like this is gonna get its moment in the true son. Great that's coming. It feels like yeah, almost certainly there's others also another case: that's gonna re evaluate part of section two. Thirty, that's already come up, but it there's no way getting are you? Are you hopeful, terrified night Who cares burn it all down somewhere in the middle? How you feel about all of the people I ve talked to, or maybe more hopeful than I had expected- that the coming too, that there still five supreme court us this is that looked at the texas line, when you should not be able to enforce that of the four that did not vote for it. It's there's really only one who seems very, very clearly weird about it and anti the thing we would describe as free speech, which is clarence thomas, and so I guess I want to take part in that. I am also just increasing

worried about the legitimacy of courts in general and the way that any part of civic life in america functions, and so I think, speeches part of that, and that is not encouraging. So reading your peace, its hard for me? Do not end up in this lake. Deep were all screwed every this disaster, it's all totally hopeless. Nobody knows anything. This is gonna get worse before it gets better place. What does the hope or reason for optimism? Look like? Do we have a plan, toward figuring out how to handle this in a way that actually makes logical sense or our things about you. in bigger, more fundamental ways than they even have so far as it feels like one of those has to be the case, I'll optimism,

thing that I am the worst I buy it. I don't know. I think that there are people who are, even if I disagree with them on some points really seriously considering this issue is their people like Daniel citroen, who is proposed changes to two thirty that I dont necessary again agree with that that I think, are really thoughtful, and so I think that if you listen to a lot of these people and if you really try to identify the trade offs and try to figure out where we want to make changes, if we do, I think that is where I would pick. My hope is people who look at these problems and are willing to seriously admit where the problems and trade offs in what we think of his american free speech are and try to you're out what you do about them, like, I think, specificity is maybe the way I think things may get better yet will end to that point. Actually, one of the things I thought was really interesting about the way described. The text for the laws is

they're. So, like hysterically, broad that, I think the point you made was that it would make it illegal to reject it. Just on wikipedia based on Wikipedia zone community standards. Yet this is, It applies to large websites and it applies to anything that involves viewpoints and I don't know. Maybe they soon, maybe they discover that it's not part of the law, but who knows because the laws terribly written, yeah, that's viruses, specificity is a good thing, but We also feel like this has become so black and white, for so many people that it's like section, two thirty and protect there is like you're, either you're, either in it or you're out on an end, I am increase in wondering if there is even a middle ground that we're going to find, but it sounds like maybe somewhere there is one. I think there are corners okay, I don't know if it's

it'll ground, because I don't even know if the middle is really where we want to be fair, but I think that there are pockets of people who are serious and I just want to try to grow those pockets. I like it will thank you eddie. I appreciate it are we need to think of break and then, when we come back, we're gonna talk to the verges mechanic kelly about the chips and sciences bill that was passed over the summer and what that and all of the billions of dollars that come from it mean for the future of chip manufacturing and the tech industry as a whole will be. I backed. right now, someone's listening to songs about parties travel in get away without ever planning and for themselves. They need a change of two real north carolina at simply safe? We design award winning security to protect every inch of your home, it's easy to

it up yourself, and now there is an even easier option: have an expert do it for you, I would simply say: probably storm always protecting, never contract to easy installation options, backed by twenty four seven professional monitoring for less than a dollar a day, get twenty first, any new system with interactive monitoring at simply said dot com, slash, spotify, there's! No, Blake simply safe. Welcome back, so. On august ninth of this year, president Joe Biden signed into law, the chips and science act a two hundred and The billion dollar package meant to invest in american, scientific and technological research and progress, big bill lots of money, but one of the biggest chunks of that money. Fifty two billion dollars is specifically meant to boost semiconductor manufacturing in the united states, the future. The chip temperature is going to be made in america. This law is a big deal and it could start to reshape

just how chips get made in america, but the whole tech industry in this country, and there are big political consequences in how all of that shakes that's what the verges mechanically has been looking into. She talked to a number of folks over the recent months about the bill and its effects, including newark senator trucks humor she's here to give us breakdown, how Mckenna day David it's great to be here, its mid term season. Twenty two about you of thick emotionally and spiritually right now. Hailed, not honestly, I ve been talking to sources all is weakened. always has been like hey. How are you you're staying alive, but then there are like hope, you're staying alive to actually I'm dying or gonna get through it. This has been a wild Y yeah, I would say so for purposes? They were gonna talk mostly about the chips and sciences bill, which is like, I think everybody just cause it chips now re, like all cats chips, kept their yelling is the best thing to happen, consumer taken so checks? Can you put exclamation? once in law names. Now, it should say, like shifts exclamation emma,

be that it took so long to do. Everyone is really excited about when it finally got over the finish line. Ok, and it has these sort of big wide, ranging ramifications of like the few or attack in america and geopolitics and all the stuff that I think is really interesting, but that story. Part of this, I think, is really interesting. I was reading your most recent stories about it and realising that some version of this bill chips exclamation point it's in negotiation since twenty nineteen, if I'm remembering correctly so rewind me all the way back to the beginning before the pandemic, before chip shortages and the crazy supply chain stuff in the last couple of years like what was this supposed to do in twenty nineteen, oh eight, so this is prior to that, like you said, and when I was talking to chuck Schumer, he was talking about the time when he walked into this, Jim, which is something that exists, and he went to do whatever he does. Aerobics weightlifting, I don't know it shimmered, as in there now

the bike panting away or on the bike. Next to me, with a guy todd, young, a senator from Indiana republican- and I was talking to embed the that I had the same anxiety about him. Losing ground here, we gotta do something, and so we agreed to come together and we put together the science and ships built had been looking for some kind of partner to bring in the economic success and mean funding and money. That was, you know, mostly sent a silicon valley and like software, facebook, etc and bring night do you know more industrial parts of the united states we've seen a lot of industries fail over the past twenty years, there's been a change. enjoy in you know what people, by where things are manufactured. The auto industry in detroit is very good example of a place that could really benefit from that kind of money, but there's This land talk about syracuse new york. Talk about detroit talk about, idaho, ohio. There has been a manufacturing.

centre for the united states, but with a lot of things going overseas manufacturing businesses, I think humor and a lot of votes are thinking about. How can we ridge, just our manufacturing sector in a way that positions the united states in a competitive way for the next year. if two years and they targeted chips, are which is something that the EU s used to do really well, but has become ever more You know necessary and literally every product that we have like when I was talking to humor my very thing I open it up, him if he was using his foot phone, which she infamously uses a flip found still amazing. Let me tell you my full blown people ask with a fifty fifty majority. How do you get things done and I am talking into it? Might work found every senator democratic than earn some republicans? my phone number they talk to me directly: they don't go to stamp it out, do email and its away. you can, we give a coalition together. Everything from like dumb tack, flip sound

You know when it comes to a ers things like that all the way to like artificial intelligence its computing. All these things rely on these semiconductor chips than I think. That's why humor and everyone really targeted that sector for the spell, and obviously like the this underlying theme of a lot of that is china right that, like that, there is very much this global thing happening, but so much of it is concentrated in china and it feels like over the last. I don't know long time, but especially kind of over the course of the trumpet illustration and into the bite administration. China has become a big focus and like remembering how to compete with china, and not be so reliant on china like was it about china? The whole time right? I think the first name of the before I, of course this is just these bills change the time. Changes the name change. The person was like at the endless frontier act, oh boy, and had very much to do with competitiveness with china in forlorn I am worried that america is losing ground on investments inside

and in high in manufacturing and the union of the two, and that, if we continue to lose ground, our economy would suffer if they more authoritarian country like China got ahead of us. They could set the rules which wouldn't be in the open entrepreneurial free market, way that we like to do things here in america and that we would suffer in many different ways, so much of american manufacturing is gone overseas. Let leads the united states right at an inn competitive advantage. If supply chains fail, if we now for some reason down the line. China becomes ino, a a major economic, a monarch, rage, power, and so it seems that no national security risk concern about being able to digest genome american excellence, all that stuff of a national, secure, thicket right, so

ships, of course, with their military necessity and then also just like daily life. They become such an important factor in such an important piece of equipment for the. U s to have. This seems like what you're describing would be the kind of thing that all every american politicians, would immediately get behind rate like its pro america, its pro business, everybody wins get a yell about. You know nationalism in america being great in the future and technology, and yet there was this massive political battle that made this thing. Take forever walk me through a little bit of that, like what was the big fight about in getting this bill actually done. Let me work our way from beginning to end tonight at first course he was twenty nineteen. There is an election coming off the twenty twenty election, all the productive activity, congress is coming out of the house it remains a legislative graveyard for so many different issues. Now one impeachment this letter, I felt like aids

history they are described? I now think I guess it doesn't necessarily a priority at the time and then, of course, that also comes down too well. Who is this going to benefit? You know when it comes to senator they want to bring stuff home to their constituency to Billy k. I got you. Jobs in the spill So there's a little bit of discussion back and forth on that to make sure that you know this benefits, everyone stayed the majority of folks and then of course, slows down twenty twenty election and then the pandemic heads right and all of a sudden. It is impossible to get your hand it's on consumer tech, goods and then, of course, like just semiconductors period, like look when we were in the middle of a pandemic gosh, it's like it's so weird to think back to two thousand and twenty. But at the time do you remember when, like don't get an invidious graphics card. Oh yeah, do remember one like the peers,

I have you, couldn't get that like mrs than all that stuff was rolling out at the same time, and people were stuck inside, so we have all these new products. People stuck inside people working from home, maybe investing a new laptops, investing in tablets investing in all stack equipment and so demand surges, bitten supply chains break because of you know, covered restrictions, and things like that. So it became this absolute explosion. Of a just, as became an explosion of mess right that all of a sudden you needed to clean up, and I think, that's why you know got to be twenty twenty and then the bill really got a lotta folks behind it, and but of course it wasn't until this year that it was exe, past. Was it less about everybody, picking fights about this bill and more about it, just being, maybe not deep most immediately, important thing, as we were dealing with all of this other stuff going on in the world. It's a conflict there's so much going on, I mean does look like look at what else the senate dead and, like a congress dead during the pandemic, it was

passing the by partisan infrastructure law. Remember when we got some money they were fighting over that you know it's happening, and then it's also like a confluence of that factor, but also the fact that everyone wants something in that you have. The ohio law makers who are like we have all this land, we need jobs. We want to be resilient in the future. Let's make sure that this gets everyone equipped, and I think the important thing in writing, something we don't talk about the bill. Enough of courses subsidies for like the chip manufacturers, but it also includes money through the commerce department, for states in localities to make pitches for funding to create these national tech hubs which lets localities in states fight tina, basically pitch to be like hey. We

iD use this funding and really make good work with it? And so there is also that which I think was a part of the negotiations and making sure that everyone is, you know benefiting from the bill. We want you to be part of the country that had not benefited from advanced manufacturing and die of the game. I was thinking of upstate new york, buffalo rochester, syracuse albany. He was thinking of indianapolis and fort wayne and felt then- and there was another unifying factor for us. I can imagine this got like crazily competitive, because everybody is looking at this being like we can be the next silicon valley, which everybody has been trying to be for forty years and now, if you'll there's more money being put to that use kind of than ever right. Yeah I mean that in nebraska- and I remember it got towards the end of me- graduating college and everyone was using the phrase: silicon prairie, oh yeah, and so everyone's fighting over you know being the next big tech hub. Silicon slopes was always my favorite for salt lake city. Oh, I hadn't even heard that one it didn't work, spoiler, alert right in so

silicon valley, you know, of course, got all this investment costs folks are met, where there is the whole vc craze still going on in this just was kind of like the focus where you went to silicon valley. If you are interested in tack and now tat has become so and you know omnipresent and our lives that it could benefit everyone if they just kind of shake lose being the holds can valley has on the industry when new need such a huge amount of space or these cheap ferry companies. You all We need adequate water. She power. It tends to benefit some areas that haven't seen those benefits before. and if you have a little bit of subsidizing money and little bit of incentive to do it, these can crop up everywhere. At the end of it did everybody get what they want? chuck shimmer get what he wanted like? Who kind of came out head in the way that the chips bill actually ended up being written in past the corporation supra has always the way it is

it's like towards the end of the negotiating phase. He had Bernie sanders, similar progress that is being like. We need some are checks and balances on how this subsidy money is being handed out because, again its touted as this revolutionary thing for the american economy, but who is the money going to it's going to intel it's going to my crime and they're gonna be the ones you see the benefit of this faster than one else and we're talking about the mid terms right. This is ben, something that happen You got a lot of lot of the economic work that the Biden administration is done, whether it's a bipartisan infrastructure law, whether it's the chips bill all these things, take time you now to go into effect and they they do have the ability you know to be really revolutionary, but people are really hurting right now and so as much as we talk about the benefits of this bill ever people aren't seeing it in their pocket book straight now, and so it's hard to see whether or not it will have that kind of effect on the voter base. Yet,

there is that amazing Bernie sanders quartet was basically like. Why are so many people congress willing to basically bribe intel to stay in the united states, the all of a major cooperation which made nearly twenty billion dollars in profits last year is the congress that, if you don't give my industry, the microchip industry, seventy six billion that by their profound love for our country and their respect for american workers in order to make more profits. They are prepared to what europe and asia that was the president- and I am thankfully not a lawyer without sure- sounds like extortion to me, and that strikes me as a fair criticism. Right, like I think, as pat gelsinger was on the the decoder podcast talking about this, that, like maybe intel, should have done better. If, if intel, what would be successful without government intervention, maybe until should have been six

without government intervention, and I think there is this funny thing that I feel like this trying to deal, which is, on the one hand like build new things and prop up new innovation and there's like money for the national science foundation. I think in there- and so it's it's like we want to we start new stuff, but also the lion's share of the money is going to like you said. This small handful of really big corporations that like intel, didn't, do a good job and for not doing a good job got billions of dollars to stay in the united states and that that seems messy. What Are they going to do right, they'll create their manufacturing plants there fabs and stuff in china, which then, of course, really hurts the united states have got into this where china, as because we are so reliant on china for semi conductors ships in manufacturing that there is no reason for each of these companies to come back and for the by an administration. When we talk about how this could take a really long time to be effect is partly the fastest way to get this.

especially like over the last five years when you've seen you know chinese at companies, chinese military, you we ve seen this rise is like tension with taiwan near the chinese working with a lot of like: u s, adversaries! It's just. This feels like a bandaid, a fifty two billion, bandaid that hopefully heels, and hopefully they don't pick the scab. We don't pick this guy, all too often in it. Just like really Justino set in stone, and we can get moving on this, but I mean it's hard to tell do think. It eventually got dungeon because this so visceral with the chip shortage in the supply chain, issues that it like it. It became really obvious to everyday americans- that this was a thing I feel like chip supply chains were not a thing that people were aware of three, ago, in a way that I think a lot of people like sort of deeply understand now, like I couldn't buy a car because they couldn't get a chip from taiwan, is like a thing. People understand now in a way that they didn't before. Is

what finally got this across the line. Was there some gating thing in the bill that finally got fixed like what? What did it at the end? So I am looking at past report, that even like we did at the virginal sean hollister was writing at the beginning of this year? At the companies were showing you figure it out rate. You were able to get this in. He had jp earlier and avail to get all this stuff at the beginning the year. This wasn't really affecting consumers in the same way. But what was affecting consumers and what voters were looking at where the mid terms and said this bill got signed this, I believe of september and in a bind and humor everyone wants to be able to say once you have that intel groundbreaking ceremony, they, I have the ceo of intel in their state breaking ground in promising you now thousands of jobs. For folks like this is what the bite administration this is. What Democrats did for. This is what we pushed out over the line you mean syracuse new york. Is they place that has suffered for awhile carrier? For instance, the air conditioner was conceived and developed and manufacture

church in syracuse they decided to move all the manufacturing to singapore and it was a sad day for syracuse a very sad day now. Microns huge investment, two hundred billion dollars bore major chip, fabs two point: four million feed of manufacturing space and up to fifty thousand new jobs. Syracuse has a bright future, or again, and people feel good about it, of course, like they're not going to feel it immediately, but I think the promise of jobs well paying manufacturing jobs that people in the states you know just generations- have relied on manufacturing jobs. I think that was really what pushed over the edge to get that you know to tell and bring to voters yeah. That makes sense, and do we have a sense yet, where, like geographically, that stuff is going to to happen, like obviously, intel has made a lot of noise in arizona. Chucks humor is deeply obsessed with, like syracusan buffalo put. Do we have a sense of where these other kind of new rising tech hubs are likely to be? Yes, So, if you look at where micron intel, these companies are investing money

now. Idaho is a big one with my crime, I think those like a fifteen billion dollar project yarn and there's the twenty billion pro from intel in ohio, there's like so smaller companies that are working in The carolina lies in places like our naming saves where this is traditionally not happen. I'm sure there's communities college is people who are looking for these jobs rate, and so it's areas like that, rather than the more condensed urban ino central hubs, attack that we ve seen in the past is there a political the connection between all of those places like can you can you sort of draw a line? between trying to win mid term elections and what happened there, I mean it's blue collar voters, sure you know these are people who a lot of them. I was listening to some interviews, everything some Paul's. About

well who voted for a bomb then voted for trump ray, and these are united, mostly like blue collar. You feel like they ve been left behind and if you know they think about the golden days. Of course, there's been this like weirdo movement of like return to tradition on the right day, but that people do use the you know. American manufacturing is like the glory days and if we could bring some of that back with like a eyes set to the future, I think that really benefit a lot of people. Ok- and I would assume the tech industry is psyched about how all of this turned out right. Oh yeah, I mean they'll, get chips are obviously the tech industry got behind the legislation. They were so entranced by all the investments in science and the high end manufacturing, and so we did have a cold What's your sense of how much the goal is- and this is this is a question I have with like. Basically, every law

As they gets done is the question of like how do we solve the sort of specific problem? We have right now as quickly as we possibly can, which is like give money to intel. It knows how to make chips, give them money to build more buildings to make sure right like that? That is the quickest, cleanest solution to an existing problem verses some of this longer term build new tech hubs, increase the size of the ecosystem. What's your sense of that both like where money is going and also that sort of goal of a bill like this, which of those two things. Does it try to do more of you think I'm sorry to come with like a left hook from those. But when I look at this and I see like people wanting to build jobs and tat, he now try, not start new industries and benefit people. I automatically go to the labour sector what's happening in labour. You know what is happening with these companies that are going to be contracted out to build these facts. Are these people going to be allowed to unionized? Are they going to have benefits? Is this a way for them to actually provide for their families for the next generation?

for the next ten years, and so I would be more glued to seeing how in tell how all these contracts in companies I build, these things are treating workers right and what. are not in a once. These facts are built. Where do the workers go next? Are they go build another fab. What are they going to do? That's my main concern: if we're talking about tech hubs, they think that's fairly predictable in being like there's money, they'll go, people will work on staff. If, if it's success success, although receive more money, blah blah blah. But I am I up an eye towards labour, and that also seems like a more immediate thinkers. Any part of what you're saying red is that, like the challenge with all this is during successes. Gonna take a really long time like it takes a long time to build buildings, especially large ones. That can make very tiny microchips like it takes a long time. The labour he's gonna be one way. We start to see how this is going to go down much sooner other There are a kind of early measures that you, the government are looking to figure out how this is gonna work

Are we going to get it twenty thirty? Five and a revision well, we spent a lot of money. Did it go what happened so you gotta look at like the last thing that the administration did. I think it was the commerce department a couple of weeks ago. They issued a new rule restricting the import of like chinese goods or like export of american goods and, of course, to china when it comes to like semiconductor manufacturing purposes, and that sounds like kind of silly. But China has become like really good at de no basic low level consumer products, semiconductor manufacturing, like they can lotta, that on their own, but when it comes to the more advanced like artificial and tell it Hence star found jp use those more powerful things. They need american devices and they need american tat.

in patterns and things. So I think I would pay more attention to how that's going to cripple you know. China's military. China's ability to you know, invest in advanced manufacturing tech manufacturing, of course, that'll play out god. How does america work right they are in the military, same rights and the global dominance you know can chinese germany's, that's probably before we see much for american people right, which is you just brought us to the final stage of this right, which is like massive global geopolitics activists is now there were. There are like world war, three questions baked into intel, building fabs in ohio, which is like insane but seems actually true and rate. Ever everybody talks about national security and it's like they were starting to think about chips politically as people they have thought about weapons for a long time, and it's like it's this. This is all gotten so much bigger and so much more high stakes, then, just like cars and fridges and

how much? That's really true now and how much that is like useful political posturing in order that something is done is hard It's hell, but it seems like we're, certainly headed in that direction and like this is political warfare as much as it is anything else right I mean the thing that I keep thinking of is In ten years, is ts, I'm sea going to be, viewed as the boeing right that manufactures all of these fighter jets that are really important to the american military nap today and like starting, you know, decades ago or is intel point to be boeing, you now? Oh, these other ino companies you think about in the dvd area that manufacture fighter jets, that manufacture of military equipment and ballistics is that going to be chinese companies that people rely on or is that going to be companies? And now you know when it comes to even visualizing aerodynamic stuff? For these you know boeing jets or whatever, like it's going to the point where you need official intelligence to model these things it. So, while the thing like me, I can, I think, of the company

name right now, but all day you know american military company using other crete, these ballistic some stuff. That's what I imagine like intel it micron being like twenty years, which is crazy yeah. I don't want to talk about the morality of it. I have no idea, but that seems to be. You know where the government is pushing. You know the next stage of you know: national security, stuff, yeah, one hundred percent, so now that this bill is done, What's the mood around it? Is everybody like? Well, we didn't it's not perfect, but we're glad we got it. is, everybody, are we'd still fighting about it as everybody thrilled and like waiting flags around and throwing microbes at each other like what's what's the mood, I think the mood right now is it over You have been seventy hours. I think people are like it's over thank ida and everyone's kind of focused on like the next two years, the Biden administration, what that looks, link and then they tweaks that could be made or going to happen through the federal agencies and link government bureaucrats in commerce department. The o d sets where I kind of deep looking at dayton

congress, but their foot and they did the money they did the gang. Now it's like the rest of the administrations problem to solve Whenever we invest in science, it pays off. We thus did in an and created the largest pharmaceutical and most advanced pharmaceutical industry in the world we invested in, we invested in and happened created the most advanced tech industry in the world, tens of millions of new jobs, direct and indirect, came out because of these ships as the next chapter in that book, and it's and it's help america, america, third generation, fairness well. Thank you appreciate yeah, no problem thanks folks. Alright, that's it for the verge yesterday. Thank you as always for listening. As always, there is tons more on everything we talked about on the verse dot com, especially in case you're, wondering the elon musk twitter saga keeps being nuts we're still covering it on the site and we're going to have lots more to say about it on friday, so stay tuned

of all of us on twitter, at least for now. Who knows where that's going out? He is Actually archy mckenna is Kelly Mckenna and I am pierce. This show is produced by andrew marino and Liam James Norrie Donovan is our executive producer and brooklyn's. Hers is our editorial director of audio the verge cast is a production and part of the vocs media podcast network. If you have thoughts, feedback Feelings- or to go orbs they can see into the future. You can always make us advert cast at the first come and, if you, of course, called outline its eight six six verge one one, and we want to hear all your big thoughts and questions about all thanks technology point on friday to discuss ilan and twitter t mobile broadband plans, zooms plan to take over movie theatres and a whole bunch of other stuff, we'll see, then rock n roll.