Jun 6, 2026 ยท 2026 #20. Read the transcript grouped by speaker, inspect word-level timecodes, and optionally turn subtitles on for direct video playback
Edit labels for this show, save them in this browser, or download a JSON override for the production folder.
Transcript Playback
What is the End Game?
Human Transcript
Timed transcript
Blocks are grouped by speaker for readability. Expand a block to inspect word-level timing.
Andrew Keen
Hello, everybody. It is Saturday, June the 6th, 2026. Been another remarkable week in technology out here in Silicon Valley. Anthropic filed for a huge IPO. That was a slip, according to the New York Times. Meanwhile, Terms have been revealed for SpaceX's unconventional 75 billion dollar IPO that seems rather small compared now to the anthropic plans but for Keith Teare the issue this week is more political he leads his That Was The Week newsletter with a series of pieces about the political implications of AI. There's a piece in the New York Times about PACs, super PACs, funded by AI companies, rivals, OpenAI, of course, and Anthropic. Meanwhile, this week, Anthropic urged a global pause in AI development. Some people think that that's being used by Anthropik in order to concretize its own domination. And the Trump people are all over the map. Not surprisingly, according to Wired, the Trump administration is at war with itself over AI regulation. So for Keith Teare, that was The Week newsletter publisher, he asks in his editorial this week, what is the end game, of course, associated with Technology, AI, and Politics. Keith, should we be thinking of end games? History never ends. So why use this term end game?
Well, it's another word for a mission. You know, what is the mission? And it's kind of interesting when you look at the politics of AI that there's opinions left and right. This week, Anthropic doubled down. One Of The Co-Founders Went On The Record Saying The Government's Gotta Slow It All Down That Was Jack Clark Right Yeah Because In His View AI Is Getting To The Point Where It Can Iteratively Self-Learn And Therefore Learn Much Faster Than Humans Can Organize It To Learn And He's Scared About That So It's pretty hard to have an opinion about these opinions unless you have in mind at least a long-term end state. It might not be the end in a historical sense, but a set of goals that shape your opinion about the present. And that seems to be missing. So there are so many different opinions this week. None of them state what they'd like to see conclude. And That Seems Strikingly Bad It Is Like Going Into A World Cup Game Without A Game Plan But You Just Each Player You Know Plays Their Game Spontaneously With No Game Plan
Well, the World Cup is starting next week. I'm sure that will be the case with some teams. We've been talking, you and I and many other people associated with tech, about tech being the main event, so to speak, in the world. But now it's becoming self-evident. You note in your editorial that AI is no longer only a tech story. It's becoming a story about work, wealth, power, access, infrastructure, and institutional competence. That's a good summary. How self-evident, Keith, is this to most people? Because we live in end times in some ways. You talk about an end game. The Economist, you linked to a very good piece in The Economist, talking about American capitalism has taken an apocalyptic turn. Many viewers, commentators, even politicians, are articulating things in End Terms In The End Of The World So It's A Very Confusing Time Yeah I Actually
Dropped It From The Newsletter Because There Was Too Many Articles But Noah Smith Had An Article Again This Week Called We Need Liberal Nationalism To Come Back Which Was A Reaction To That Economist Peace And I Think There's A Broad Narrative Now If You Look At It
The Problem Is We Are So Atomized Between What Used To Be Called Left And Right I Don't Think It Is Anymore That We Don't Really Have A Proper Conversation And If We Have A Proper Conversation It Is Very Clear That AI Represents Successful
Capitalism Hold On Keith I Mean You Are Just Saying Everyone Is Divided And Then You Just Make The Case For AI You Are No Different From Anyone Else No I Am Saying
Let's Break It Down In A Way That Defies Labels And My First Point Is AI Represents Capitalism Being Successful It's When Resources Are Directed To Money Making Opportunities Due To The Profit Motive Which Coincides With Innovation And Spins Up Lots Of Jobs In AI In Fact Most Of The Recent Numbers Are Suggesting Lots Of Jobs Due To AI Everywhere At Least In The Short Term And That Is Successful Capitalism What We Have Is Unsuccessful Government Alongside That So Government Is Doing Two Things The Trump Administration Is Kind Of It Was Hands Off this last week, it decided that all models have to be submitted for 30 days assessment prior to being launched. So that's going to be effective in them.
Exactly. Are they going to do drive up in trucks to, to the White House, they won't get any I was in DC this week, you can't get into the White House because they're building all sorts of weird new things.
And then you've got, Individual Politicians Reacting To That Government Failure Of Government To Really Have A Plan So This Week Bernie Sanders Argued For 50% Ownership Of All The AI
Companies You Talk About That A One Time 50% Tax And Then Another Of Your Old Friends Elizabeth Warren Argued For High Taxation I Was Actually Surprised in your editorial, I thought you would trash Sanders and Warren, but you kind of acknowledge that at least they're having the conversation.
At least they're having the conversation. Unfortunately, it's framed inside of a, you know, a kind of a centralized government view of the world. They're not very creative when it comes to how do you distribute wealth to people in modern society. So theirs is always tax, centralize, and then spend. Which Of Course Is Very Unattractive To Most People But What Gives You Keith Teare
The The Right That's The Wrong Word What Gives You The Authority To Talk About This In Any Different Terms From Anyone Else You Have A Position You Argue That It Reflects AI Reflects Capitalism Working Well Many People Would Strongly Disagree With That In Terms Of Monopolization And Inequality We've Talked About This Endlessly Keith Why are you any different from anyone else?
Well, I do have a PhD on this subject Where did you get your PhD from and what's it about? My PhD was why capitalism is never static and that new entrants always eclipses older Where did you get your PhD from, Keith?
University of Kent Where's that? In Canterbury, in England. I'm teasing you, I'm teasing you. And when did you get it? 1970s? I mean, my point is that he doesn't give you any more authority than anyone else because you got a PhD in 1972.
I'm not whining about views. I'm saying there's no end game. And The End Game Needs Defining Society Has To Have A Conversation Sanders And Warren Have End Games And You May Not Agree With Them I Don't Think Those Are End Games But They Are At Least Contributions To Thinking And You Are Right I Do Give Them Credit For That Even Though I Actually Disagree With Both Of Their Specific Proposals At Least Their You Know So For Example 50% Ownership Of The AI Companies Let's Ignore The Fact That He Wants The Government To Do That And Imagine Through A Sovereign Wealth Fund Let's Imagine He'S Actually Going To Give Every Citizen A Stake In That Sovereign Wealth Fund Which Would Probably Fix The Idea Well Then Honestly 50% Isn'T Enough It Probably Should Be 90% If You Really Want To Get The Wealth Distributed 50% Isn'T Enough I Take Your Point And I Don'T Disagree With You
On in principle, but you know better than I do that everything's moving so fast. I mean, there are going to be three IPOs this year. They're going to transform everything financially, economically, technologically. How is it possible to slow everything down so that The Kind Of Conversations You Want To Have Maybe Bernie Sanders And Elizabeth Warren If You Don't Agree On Everything You Agree At Least On Having The Conversation How Is It Possible To Have This Conversation My Guess Is That As The 2028 Election Comes After The Midterms These Conversations Aren't Going To Be Had In Either Party
Well, weirdly, I disagree with that. I think, firstly, I don't think you should slow things down. Anyway, it's impossible to. So it's not a worthwhile conversation to slow things down. I do think as things speed up, the amount of wealth being thrown off is going to grow even more and fast. And the ability of that wealth to uplift everything is going to grow. and I think the idea of if you listen to Altman and Musk in particular, Amadai is silent on this point, but he's probably got a point of view. They're pretty open to the wealth being figured out societally to uplift everything. They're both open to that. And so the smart thing to do would be to be having a conversation with them about How And What And When And That Conversation Isn't Happening There Is No Conversation There Are Various People Drawing Up Manifestos Which I Didn't Want To Do Because Who Am I To Draw Up A Manifesto But There Needs Don't Ridicule Me Andrew It's Not Fair But It At Least You Know Creates The That Discussion That Is Absent is very available. So it is somewhat tragic. Now, if you tie together a couple of things, Trump recently, along with one of the all in podcast, no, what's his name? Brad Gerstner created this thing, the Trump wallet, where every child in America gets $1,000 of equity at birth that sits for 18 years before they go to college. You've already got conceptually there, the idea of money directly going to citizens from capitalism. And it seems very easy to extend that in a much, much bigger way to the wealth that's going to be thrown off by AI. And that seems a reasonable conversation to be having, but isn't happening. Instead, what you've got is politicians coming up with one-off ideas Obviously As Politicians They Are Focused On The Next Election Midterms They Have Very Short Term Agendas And I Think This Week You Gotta Say Hats Off To Bernie Sanders And Elizabeth Warren For At Least Having Half Of An Idea Yeah And You Also
Know Greg Caesar Democrat From Texas Proposing An AI Token Tax So People Are Thinking Creatively The Economist Piece Was Good talks about Wall Street being in a fatalistic mood and it talks about the great crashes in the past, mentions 1873, they talk about the most read book on Wall Street last year was called 1929, a good bet for this year is 1873 and as it happens, the author of that book, Leakat Ahmed Was On My Show And I Was Actually At His Book Party In Washington DC Last Weekend His New Book 1873 The Rothschilds The First Great Depression And The Making Of The Modern World Talks About 1873 As An Example Of The First Example Of A Global Crash I Wonder Whether There's Any Chance Of These IPOs Triggering The Kind Of Crash That Happened In 1873 Or 1929 Billions Of Dollars Hundreds Of Billions Of Dollars Are Going To Flow Into These IPOs How Fragile Do You Think The World Economy Is Or At Least The US Economy When It Comes To These IPOs Well I
The Level Of Jobs It Actually Seems Quite Healthy As Well The Job Numbers Are Very Good That Came Out Yesterday But At The Level Of Global Displacement Which Is What My PhD Was About Is Very Clear Did You Talk About 1873 In Your PhD I Did I Talked About Britain Being Eclipsed By The United States As Being An Inevitable Outcome Of A Set Of Trends That Started Actually Earlier Than That In The 1850s And So He Is Right I Think His Book Is On The Money And I Do Think America He Is
Also The Author Of A Very Brilliant Book About The Great Crash Of The 1930s Which Actually Won The Pulitzer Prize Back In 2010 Or 12 So He Is A Very Good Writer Both
Of Those Crashes Were Symptomatic Of The Changes In The World Which Was The Relative Decline Of Britain And The Rise Of At Least Two Competitors Germany And The United States And That Was A Hundred Years Long Process That Culminated At The End Of World War II With The US Being Supreme And The Move Off The Pound To The Gold Standard Initially And Then To The Dollar We Are At A Similar Moment When It Comes To The US And China Early We're Very Early In It So We're At The You Know But It Won'T Take A Hundred Years This Time And AI Is A Key Driver Of Yeah I Mean It Never Happens Quite When
You Expect It The Economist Makes An Interesting Point The Best Of Times The Worst Of Times They Say The Danger The Real Danger In 2026 Isn't 2008 1999 1973 Or
1873 But Actually 1789 Which Is Of Course The Year Of The French Revolution So Like You The Economist Leads With Politics I Mean There Are Economic Indicators And Data And All The Rest Of It But Ultimately We Live In This Weird Times Where Everyone Seems So Pessimistic About Technology And Progress As The Economist Says American Capitalism Has Taken An Apocalyptic Turn And In Apocalyptic Times You Get A Politics Of The
Apocalypse Too Well I Think You Get Both Things Think Of It This Way Every Crash Is A Rebirth And So What Came After 1873 And What Came After The 30s Well The Answer In Both Cases Is World War I And World
War II What Came After 18 And As Ahmed Tells Me In Our Conversation I Mean You Had This Long Depression That Some Economists Argue Existed Between 1873 And 1899 So You Had A Quarter Of A Century World Depression Which Happens When There's No
Catalyst For Innovation And Therefore No Growth And We're Not In That Moment I Mean We Have Probably The Biggest Ever Catalyst For Growth In History I Do Think The 1789 Reference Is Interesting 1789 Represents The End Of Feudalism Even Though Literally It Took Till The Spanish And Portuguese Revolutions For It To Fully End But Which Was The 1970s But The End Of Feudalism Started In 1789 And Arguably With The American Revolution As Well And You Know We Are A Moment Where Capitalism Has The Potential To Deliver The End Of Wage Slavery And This Rich Poor Divide It Actually Has That Potential It Is On The Agenda Of History Today There Is A Legitimate Conversation About A Post Abundance Society
No, they're more mechanical. They're looking for instruments. I think Ezra Klein is closer to the conversation. I don't think anyone's really having it in a thoroughgoing way. There are no revolutionaries, really. Probably Sam Altman and Musk are the closest because they're actually discussing what should happen to the world. And You Know They Are Obviously The Wrong People To Be Doing It But They Need To Be In The Conversation And So We Are At A Kind Of An Interesting Moment In History Where The Challenge To Intellects Is What Do You Want To Build Societally That's Hence My Title What Is The End Game It Is The Right Question For The Moment We're Living Through Yeah I
I mean, maybe it's right in a very abstract sense, but I don't think anyone's... Has there ever been a time, Keith, you're Mr. PhD, has there ever been a time in world history where people have had that kind of conversation, even in slower times?
But They Mostly Do Weirdly Maybe The Equivalent I Mean Given Especially This Year With The 250th Anniversary Of The American Revolution Maybe The Conversation Around The American Revolution The Federalist Papers The Writing Of The Constitution The Debate About What A Republic Should Or Shouldn't Look Like But I Don't Think America Is In 2026 In The Same Kind Of End Game Mood or Long Term Mood as it was in 1776. Well,
you're right, because a period that's challenging in the way that this one is, and in the way that 1873 and the 30s were, produces doom and gloom and a search for alternatives. Both exist. And the doom and gloom certainly dominates until it doesn't. And so we are Very, very clearly in a doom and gloom moment in America, at least, when it comes to AI, the opposite in China. And that is not just going to go all by itself. You know, basically, if normal people saw AI as the path to their own better life, that would change, but they don't. And the reason they don't is no one's talking about how to get that path to a better life in any actual Operational Way That Could Be Implemented And Sanders And Warren This Week Throw Something In The Ring Which Forces You To Contemplate One Of The Other Pieces You
Link With Which Actually Is Another Interesting Piece Is By Harry Law Politics Cannot Be Simulated There's More To Democracy Than Decision Making Some People See AI As The New Operating System For Democracy But Law argues that it's all about citizenship. Your AI summary is that, and I'm quoting that, Harry Law argues that AI for democracy projects risk making politics better at aggregating preferences while leaving the deeper work of civic formation untouched.
I Mean You're Writing In Your Editorial The End Game Is Political And Yet We Can't Think Politically That's The Problem At Least Politically In The Way In Which Harry Law Defines Politics I Mean He's Certainly Not The First Or The Last To Define
Politics In Those Terms Well It's Because We're Obsessed With Fighting The Last Battle We're Not Really Looking Forward All Of The Narrative Around The US Political Ecosystem You Know Is Dated Back To The Earliest It Goes Is Reagan But It's Mostly About The 2020 Election Onwards And Biden And The Trump Administration And His Proclivity To Break The Law Corruption It's All This Very Narrow Stuff That It's like when a family meets at Thanksgiving and argues over the dinner table about something that happened five years ago. We're in that mood and clear thinking. And I do think your interview of the week is a representative of clear thinking. Clear thinking is in short supply and certainly at the leadership level doesn't dominate. And that's the fix. I think the fix is now clear. So who's going to step up and how?
Well you could have had this conversation not that we would have because we weren't around in 1788 or 1787 in France I mean The Economist which is a conservative newspaper some people on the left would say it represents the ruling class or the wealthy class is fearful of 1789 but there is an argument Keith to make that Given The Dysfunctionality Of American Politics And Capitalism The Inequality The Inability Of The State To Reign In Tech The Incredible Wealth That's Already Been Created And Will Be Even More Compounded This Year There Is An Argument To Make That America Needs Its Own 1789 Or 1776 Or Even 1917 I Mean
Politics Democracy It's Just Not Working In Terms Of Addressing These Issues So I Take Your Point But You Only Have To Switch On You Only Have To Go Online And Everyone's Saying The Same Thing But No One's Coming Up With Any Answers There Isn't An End Game There's No Real Structural Conversation Everyone In Their Camps It's Like Your Dinner Table Conversation In A Country Exactly Right And So If We
Can Put Our Finger On That As The Problem that then you can start thinking about solutions. You know, I think it makes it makes intellect and dialogue more important than ever.
But you and I can afford that you and I are both Silicon Valley people financially, we're very secure. We Have Fun With All This Stuff Has No Meaning To Us We Don't Have Careers Or We're Self-Employed So We're Not Threatened By Any Of This So It's Easy For Us To Have The Conversation Much Harder For People With Less Wealth Less Privilege Less Power Certainly In A Generational Sense Too Young People Are Increasingly Angry And Upset In Some Ways Perhaps Justifiably And Others Perhaps Less Justifiably
I Think That's A Correct Description You Know I Think To Make To Start Being Useful We Have To Do More Than Describe The Malaise We Because Within The Malaise You Can Point To Little Beacons Of Light And To Give Them Credit I Do Think Sanders And Warren This Week Were Little Beacons Of Light They're Gonna They'll Mess It Up Because Unfortunately The Framing That They Think Of It Within Isn't Going To Pan Out But At Least They Put Their Finger On Something That We Should Think About Well
Them All In A Room You Know Which Won't Happen Will It Because Of The Way The Politics Is But It Should That Should Happen In Fact I Think The Democrats Would Run Away With The Next Election If That Conversation Became Central To Their Entire Plan But Unfortunately They Think In Terms Of Monopolies And Big Tech And So They're Completely Immune To Having That Conversation What Do You Think And You Know I'm
Not A Big Fan Of Elon Musk Certainly This Idea Of The End Of Money But What Would Bernie Sanders And Elizabeth Warren's Reaction Be To Musk's Kind Of Utopian Idea Of The End Of Money Would They Just Dismiss Him Would They Say He's Self-Interested Would They Say He's Mad
It's hard to answer at the level of those two individuals, but I will characterize them as being part of a movement or mindset that is dominated by the old economy. Their primary relationships are to trade unions and to institutions that represent the bureaucracy of the working class, if you will, plus various coalitions. The Black Coalition, the GBLTQ Coalitions. And so their primary framing is the preservation of the coalition's self-interest, which pertains to an old economy. And so I fear that they are not well placed to really, in a relaxed way, think about the future. The future probably means there will be no teachers, for example, in the way that we think of teachers today. Well, it's hard for them as Teachers Union, you know, sponsored to contemplate that. So I do think that the structure of the past will get in the way of them thinking about the future. It really means that the old Democrat-Republican structures are dated now. It's funny, Andrew Wang this week Went Even Further Is It No Yang Is It The Guy That Was The UBI Guy In The Previous Election Yeah New York Based And He's Now Part Of This Forward Party Or Future Party I Forget What It's Called He Was Interviewed On CNBC This Week And He He Talked About Universal Capital Distribution I Didn't Put It In The Newsletter Probably Should Have Done He He's A Little Bit Freer From The Past So His Thinking Can Go Further But I think it really comes down to a new generation of thinkers that will not be held down by the past.
So what's going to happen this year, Keith, in economic terms with these IPOs? What's your prediction? I mean, is it going to create a new class? I live in San Francisco. Real estate prices doubling, tripling overnight through these Remarkable Wealth Creation Machines These New AI Companies Isn't It Just Going To Compound All The Old Problems Central Massive Wealth Inequality More And More A Tinier Group Of Tech Companies Anthropic Open AI XAI That Dominate Every Aspect Of Our Economy As Well As Google You Have Some Interesting Pieces On Actually On Google This Week In Which Ben Thompson Talks About Google Becoming A Capital Company A Company That Really Is Focusing More On Data Than Anything Else John Battelle Has A Good Piece In Your Newsletter This Week About Google Reinventing Itself From Search To This Big Data Center Company It Just Seems As If All The Problems Are Going To Be Compounded By The End Of The Year This Time Next Year We're Just Going To See More And More Of The Things That Upset People That Make Them Conspiratorial And Apocalyptic I Think The Answer Is
Yes But Yes And Certainly As These Three IPOs Pan Out And By The Way Cerebrus Went Public A Couple Of Weeks Ago And 800 Employees Are Now Millionaires Every One Of Them And So The Bay Area Housing Market Certainly Has A Glut Of People Who Can Afford To Pay Cash For Homes Which Is Going To Lead To Prices Rising For Sure At Least Stabilizing And These Three IPOs Are On A Much Bigger Scale Than Cerebrus And Will Compound That They Will Be Successful I Can Tell You This Week In My Brokerage Accounts SpaceX Shares Were Offered To Everyone I Said I Want To Buy Them If I Can I Suspect I Won't Get Any Because I Think The Demand Will Be Way Bigger Than The Supply And The Price Will Probably Go Up Initially At Least From The Offering Price So Yes You're Right To Describe The Growth Of Rich People Is Going To Be Accelerated Into You Know Some Tens Of Thousands Of People It's Not Millions And You Know Everyone Else Will Stay Where They Are Yeah And Meanwhile You Just Made The
Announcement That The Teaching Profession Will Go Away Which Certainly Teachers Aren't Going To Be Happy With The Bernie Sanders And Elizabeth Warren You Have A Piece On Benefits Of AI To The Independent Writer We Were Often Seen These Pieces At Times
This I Mean We Still Have The Fundamental Question Keith We Don't Have A Lot Of Time Less On The Show So I Don't Necessarily Want To Address It But No One Knows What Anyone's Going To Do I Mean If You're Right If the teaching profession is finished, I don't actually agree with you, but it's certainly going to change dramatically. It's not clear what everyone's going to do. Are they all going to be part of some sovereign wealth system getting their thousand dollars a month?
Well, to be clear, I don't think the profession is going to go away. I think the job is going to go away. I think teachers will become more like mentors of other human beings. I think the human to human relationship will be enhanced. And The Mechanical Delivery Of Content And Scoring Will Go Away That Can Be Automated So I Don't Think The Profession Goes Away But I Think It Changes Massively And You Know I Think While Whilst We're Describing And I Just Reinforced Everything You Said But The One Thing I'd Say That's Different To You Is During This Process Enormous Amounts Of Wealth That Is Not Sitting In The Equity Of The Employees Will Be Created For Society And That Therein Lies The What Does That Mean Created For Society Well Profits Get Taxed Tax Goes To Government Government Buys Things That Is Gonna Massively Grow The GDP Of The World Is Going To Grow Probably By 2x The GDP Of The US I'm Not Sure About The World Even The World Is Going To Go Up 2x Because These Tools Will Get Used In Every Country And It May Even Go Up More Than 2x Depending On The Time Frame So Wealth Is Going To Be Created Unlike Ever Before That Is The Opportunity You Know The Shortcut Word Is Abundance Abundance opens up political possibility. And that is where the conversation needs to be.
Well, let's end. I know you've got to run, Keith. Let's end with something very concrete. You've talked about needing an endgame. I disagree with you. Although, as I said, I don't think you have any more or less authority than anyone else. We all come with a baggage of opinions, of ideology. Give me one concrete thing. That You Would Like Politicians On The Left Or The Right Or The Center To Actually Take Up This Year To Address Responsibility And The Problems Of This New AI Economy
One Concrete Thing I Think They Should Create The Institute For The Future It Should Have Musk Altman Amadai And Everyone Else And Politicians To Talk About The Concrete Future They Want And Define Actual Outcomes That Then Become Consensus Within That Institute For The Future And Then They Seek Governmental Authority To Implement It But They Won't All
And That's Politics Not Everyone's Going To Agree Some People Want Inequality Some People Want A Future With Work Some People Want A Future Without Work Doesn't This Go Back To Harry Law's Argument That You Can't You Want To Simulate Politics You
Want To Turn I Will Give You An Example Of A Multi Stakeholder Body Like That That Disagrees All The Time Nonetheless Makes Decisions And Implements Them Which Is I Can It's A Global Authority Over The Internet And It Is Entirely Possible For Human Beings To Disagree But Have A Process To Decide Things Well There You Have It Keith
Wants To Create An ICANN For Society For AI Interesting Idea Interesting Conversation Keith No Doubt This Subject Will Reappear Next Week It's Certainly Not One Going Away Thank You So Much Have A Great Week And We'll See Everyone Next Week