Speaker 1: You're listening to Later with Moe Kelly on demand from
Speaker 1: KFI AM six forty.
Speaker 2: And I got some bad news for Tula Sharp. I
Speaker 2: thought I had converted him. I thought I had won
Speaker 2: him over. I thought I had turned him into a
Speaker 2: cruiser for life. And then there are a couple of
Speaker 2: stories which came out which may give him some hesitation.
Speaker 2: One hundred and eighty people, maybe more, became sick from
Speaker 2: salmonella on a Royal Caribbean cruise ship. That's important because
Speaker 2: when Taula and I most recently went on a cruise
Speaker 2: with a lot of friends and family, it was Royal
Speaker 2: Caribbean Cruise Line, and Royal Caribbean is usually pretty good
Speaker 2: about avoiding these things. What makes it worse is it
Speaker 2: was on Radiance of the Seas, one of their premier
Speaker 2: cruise ships. I've been on Radiance of the Sea, so
Speaker 2: I'd know that ship particularly. And if you're wondering, like, well,
Speaker 2: how many people are there, Well, they have more than
Speaker 2: two thousand passengers. When you say two thousand passengers, they
Speaker 2: probably have another two thousand crew members, so up to
Speaker 2: four thousand people on the Radiance of the Sea ship.
Speaker 2: One hundred and eighty people reported being ill along with
Speaker 2: three crew members. And I say this as someone who's
Speaker 2: been on a lot of cruises. They're not going to
Speaker 2: tell you how many crew members got sick. They're not
Speaker 2: that the one hundred and eighty that you know about
Speaker 2: is because those are the one hundred and eighty people
Speaker 2: who reported it, and they're willing to let that get out.
Speaker 2: But the crew, they're not going to let them say
Speaker 2: anything about their health status, not publicly, because well, let
Speaker 2: me put it this way. If you've ever been on
Speaker 2: a cruise ship, you know that the crew and the
Speaker 2: passengers are all using the same stuff. You're encountering the
Speaker 2: crew every single day. There is no feasible way that
Speaker 2: one hundred and eighty passengers would get sick and only
Speaker 2: three crew members. Think about that, the crew they're serving,
Speaker 2: they're changing lit it in your rooms, they're cleaning the bathrooms.
Speaker 3: All that only three crew members got sick.
Speaker 2: But one hundred and eighty passengers who are coming in
Speaker 2: direct contact with crew members and passengers all day long,
Speaker 2: all night long. That's just a little bit behind the scenes.
Speaker 2: And there's something else that I don't know if if
Speaker 2: Twalla remembers this, but before he even got on the ship,
Speaker 2: I said, Twalla, don't get on the elevators.
Speaker 3: If you can.
Speaker 2: And also when you use the stairs, do not use
Speaker 2: the rails. The stairs are wide enough that they're each
Speaker 2: you know, they're at the bow and stern of the ship,
Speaker 2: and they're really wide, they're carpeted. You really don't need
Speaker 2: to use the rails. It's not like you're going to fall.
Speaker 2: They're not steep or anything. But don't put your.
Speaker 3: Hands on the rails.
Speaker 2: Why because everybody and their mama is putting their hands
Speaker 2: on the rails.
Speaker 3: There are other subtleties. When you go to.
Speaker 2: What they call the wind jammer wind jammers the buffet
Speaker 2: restaurant aboard Royal Caribbean. When you get like a cup
Speaker 2: of water, you're not supposed to reuse that cup. You're
Speaker 2: supposed to get a different cup each and every time.
Speaker 2: And you will find that some people don't do that
Speaker 2: and they'll share the cup with the family member or something.
Speaker 2: And that's another way in which you'll have these outbreaks
Speaker 2: on ships.
Speaker 3: But I got to ask you to Wali, were you
Speaker 3: worried at any time?
Speaker 4: No, I was not worried at any time when we
Speaker 4: went on the ship. Why Because I had a ship steward.
Speaker 4: I had someone who was able to tell me, don't
Speaker 4: you touch those rails when you're going to any of
Speaker 4: those restaurants. You make sure you seventimee your hands, You
Speaker 4: make sure you use utensils after you wipe them all.
Speaker 4: I had hot water at the table. All of that.
Speaker 4: I was not messing around. You would see people and
Speaker 4: I would just look at them, like, look at your
Speaker 4: sick ass. I'm staying away from you, staying away from
Speaker 4: the pools all that, and in crowds, staying away from
Speaker 4: being right tucked in with people. No, I'm going to
Speaker 4: stay on the outside. I saw this story and I said, hmm,
Speaker 4: they need to know, mo Kelly, that's what they needed.
Speaker 2: I wonder to alla, of these one hundred and eighty
Speaker 2: people who reported being ill, how many of them got
Speaker 2: into the pools of the jacuzzis. I really wonder, Oh yeah, oh,
Speaker 2: how many of them were in the pools in the jacuzzie,
Speaker 2: sharing drinks, not bathing before they got in, not even
Speaker 2: bathing when they got out right, because you're okay, if
Speaker 2: you don't know you're supposed to bathe, there's a sign.
Speaker 2: Espelically you're supposed to bathe before you get in the
Speaker 2: jacuzzi of the pool. There's even a shower there that
Speaker 2: you can do it, you know, but nobody ever does.
Speaker 2: And I've been on six cruises. I have never been
Speaker 2: in a jacuzzi. I've never been in the pool once.
Speaker 2: That is by choic, not by chance. That is a
Speaker 2: conscious decision on my part to limit the likelihood of
Speaker 2: contract contracting something in that environment. Now, as far as
Speaker 2: the rails, I don't touch the rails, I don't go
Speaker 2: on many of the elevators because it's in a small,
Speaker 2: enclosed space. Mark Ronner will never get him on a ship.
Speaker 2: But oh well no, Look, Mark can get on a
Speaker 2: ship if he pays attention to your rules. And there's
Speaker 2: another thing what we've got to make sure we let
Speaker 2: him know. Do not use the public restrooms. Go back
Speaker 2: to your room. Go back to your room to use
Speaker 2: the restroom. Yeah, that's another thing. Yeah, it's almost like
Speaker 2: a hotel where you will find restrooms on the various floors.
Speaker 2: But no, no, because you have hundreds of people conceivably
Speaker 2: going through those restrooms before they're cleaned on a given day,
Speaker 2: as opposed to in your cabin.
Speaker 3: Where it's just you and whoever guess you have.
Speaker 2: So there's some conscious decisions that you have to make
Speaker 2: and you have to be aware of your behavior, and
Speaker 2: you're far less likely to deal with something like this,
Speaker 2: far less likely. But just know when they say that
Speaker 2: only three crew members got sick, they're lying. You can't
Speaker 2: have one hundred eighty passengers get sick and only three
Speaker 2: crew members because one hundred eighty passengers are interacting.
Speaker 3: With the crew.
Speaker 2: You know, the crew is not using different facilities. They're
Speaker 2: not going in other words, they're not using different dining halls.
Speaker 2: You remember Twala, You would see people who are they're
Speaker 2: off time, they're downtime with working the crew. They're in
Speaker 2: the wind jammer just like we are, using the same
Speaker 2: utensils and everything. So they're using the same facilities that
Speaker 2: we are. Only three people. No, you know what disgusted
Speaker 2: me when you walk into the wind jammer. On both
Speaker 2: sides and in the middle they have sinks and they
Speaker 2: have someone there saying washy, washy. They're they're singing it
Speaker 2: encouraging you to wash your hands. You're not supposed to
Speaker 2: go into the cafeteria with your hands unclean. Coming from
Speaker 2: outside this.
Speaker 4: I would watch people go in there and I would
Speaker 4: follow them to make sure I don't go to their side.
Speaker 4: I immediately to the other side, like, don't go where
Speaker 4: this filthy hand having individual is going.
Speaker 3: Do not do that.
Speaker 2: They try to shame you into washing your hands, and
Speaker 2: I didn't feel bad about it because I think it's
Speaker 2: better for everyone. Yep, because they're looking at you and say, oh,
Speaker 2: wash your hands. No, they're telling you to wash your hands.
Speaker 2: And prior to COVID, those washed stations did not even exist,
Speaker 2: so I know that that is a direct result of COVID.
Speaker 2: Oh really, Oh yeah, yeah, it was just no, those
Speaker 2: wash stations did not exist. And now Royal Cribbean they're
Speaker 2: trying to force you to wash your hands. And still
Speaker 2: people would like get their ass on their shoulders and
Speaker 2: get indignant st and just walk straight through. Or they'll
Speaker 2: say I already washed them, Look wash them again so
Speaker 2: everyone can feel better. Yeah, because it's buffet style and
Speaker 2: the windjammer. Now they have formal dining where people can
Speaker 2: go in and have a sit down former like formal
Speaker 2: restaurant style serving of a meal, but when you just
Speaker 2: want to be able to get something to eat and
Speaker 2: tallow and me. We're like, I'm hungry. I'm hungry now.
Speaker 2: I want a couple of hamburgers. I want to be
Speaker 2: able to go back two and three times whatever. The
Speaker 2: windjammer is great for that. But there are a lot
Speaker 2: of people in there, a lot of people.
Speaker 4: Oh yeah, And I can see how people would absolutely
Speaker 4: get salmonella, especially from uncleaned services, because I actually watch
Speaker 4: some people go to just sit down at a table,
Speaker 4: no tray, just having their food out on the table
Speaker 4: on a napkin or something like that. I'm like, you
Speaker 4: don't know who was at that table before you. Your
Speaker 4: food is just on a napkin.
Speaker 3: I hear. Yeah gross. Yeah, yeah.
Speaker 2: Not everyone is clean, and unfortunately sometimes we suffer because
Speaker 2: of it. But I'm still going on cruises. I still am.
Speaker 2: Oh yeah, absolutely. That's the one danger that I'm going
Speaker 2: to You know, it's not like jumping out of an
Speaker 2: airplane with a parachute, but this is something I'll do.
Speaker 2: It's kind of dangerous, but not real dangerous. Mark, are
Speaker 2: you coming with us? I jump out of a plane first,
Speaker 2: no contest. Well, there you have it.
Speaker 1: You're listening to Later with Moe Kelly on Demand from
Speaker 1: KFI AM six forty.
Speaker 3: And you know, I am a died in the wool
Speaker 3: Rams fan.
Speaker 2: The team's not doing great this season, it's not over,
Speaker 2: but I live and die with my Rams.
Speaker 3: So when I saw this story, it's like, oh, this
Speaker 3: is interesting.
Speaker 2: And if you're into stats like I am, like fantasy football,
Speaker 2: or being able to enjoy a game in a different
Speaker 2: way or an enhanced way, you might be interested in this.
Speaker 2: Mark Bronner wouldn't, but a Rams fan, a true Rams fan, might.
Speaker 2: The Rams announced, No, it's true, you're not a sports guy,
Speaker 2: so you may not enjoy this.
Speaker 3: No. No, but I have other charming qualities. Yeah, but
Speaker 3: none which would apply here. That's all, now, please proceed.
Speaker 2: The Rams announced the partnership with Genius Sports, which is
Speaker 2: a data technology and broadcast company and it works in
Speaker 2: conjunction with sports, betting and media industries. Now going forward,
Speaker 2: at every Rams home game, fans can use the Genius
Speaker 2: Sports data processing and AI tool, which they call Genius Iq,
Speaker 2: to track everything from how fast a player is running
Speaker 2: to how much time the quarterback has to throw. And
Speaker 2: that's really really in the weeds, and you would have
Speaker 2: to truly be a football fan to talk about time
Speaker 2: before release or how fast running back may be running,
Speaker 2: or a wide receiver yards after catch, all that kind
Speaker 2: of stuff. But if you like the kind of stuff
Speaker 2: and I do, this might be kind of cool. After
Speaker 2: they are analyzed by AI in real time, the highlights
Speaker 2: and stats will be displayed on Sofi's Infinity screen.
Speaker 3: And if you've ever been to SOFI Stadium, it's that.
Speaker 2: Big halo ring, which is very similar to what they
Speaker 2: just put in the end to it Dome in Inglewood.
Speaker 2: It's this big halo's three sixty degree and it's both sides,
Speaker 2: so there is media on both sides of this ring,
Speaker 2: and it's viewable from anywhere in the stadium. And this
Speaker 2: goes to what I've long said about live entertainment, especially
Speaker 2: sports entertainment. Why am I going to go and see
Speaker 2: something in person if I can have a more enjoyable
Speaker 2: experience with more creature comforts at home. We're just talking
Speaker 2: about fights at stadiums last night. Why am I going
Speaker 2: to go to a stadium worry about a fight breaking
Speaker 2: out around me or getting hit in the head with
Speaker 2: a or something like that, or missing a play when
Speaker 2: I can just stay home and watch NFL Red Zone
Speaker 2: or watch the game from the comfort of my couch.
Speaker 2: I have a refrigerator right next to me. I can
Speaker 2: even pause the game. You can pause live sports, go
Speaker 2: to the bathroom, come back, and pick up right where
Speaker 2: you left off, and you don't have to miss anything.
Speaker 2: That's part of the reason why you're seeing these types
Speaker 2: of innovations in live entertainment, because there are so many
Speaker 2: ways now to enjoy a game without physically being there.
Speaker 2: I don't know if you've seen this, but there's this
Speaker 2: new type of event center called cosm Cosm. If you
Speaker 2: haven't seen it, you have to google it and look
Speaker 2: it up because it's very hard to explain. But it's
Speaker 2: an immersive, almost three D experience where you're on field level.
Speaker 2: You feel like you're in the game or right next
Speaker 2: to the game. It's it's really cool. They have one
Speaker 2: in Inglewood as a matter of fact, a plan to
Speaker 2: go in the near future where you can experience the
Speaker 2: game and it's stadium style seating, but it's almost like
Speaker 2: you're at the game. It's a huge half moon screen.
Speaker 2: It's another way in which people can enjoy live sports.
Speaker 2: They do college games, they do concerts, professional football, professional basketball,
Speaker 2: what have you. But it's another way for people to
Speaker 2: enjoy these live events without having to actually pay for
Speaker 2: a ticket at the event venue. That's why you're seeing
Speaker 2: all these types of innovations, inclusive of AI with the RAMS,
Speaker 2: because they need to make it more attractive to RAMS
Speaker 2: fans like me. I live ten minutes at most from
Speaker 2: Sofi Stadium, but if I find a better offer like
Speaker 2: staying home, I'm going to stay home because who wants
Speaker 2: to deal with parking?
Speaker 3: Not me?
Speaker 2: Who wants to deal with the insanity of crazy fans
Speaker 2: and the profanity and the fights.
Speaker 3: Not me?
Speaker 2: Who wants to wait in line to get their food.
Speaker 2: And it's a lot better now the lines are not
Speaker 2: as long because of technology. You can just kind of
Speaker 2: scan your food and go. The lines are not as
Speaker 2: long in the bathroom anymore. But still it's never going
Speaker 2: to be as convenient or as easy as just staying home.
Speaker 2: I don't know about you, and I love RAMS football,
Speaker 2: but it's not better than me sitting on my couch
Speaker 2: even with this. But I understand the reasons why you
Speaker 2: have to enhance this experience, And I don't know what
Speaker 2: it would take to get someone else in Sofi Stadium.
Speaker 2: But once you've gone, you know, that it's a commitment.
Speaker 2: I'm not saying it's a chore, but it asks a
Speaker 2: lot of you from getting in the stadium. I think
Speaker 2: it's one hundred percent digital ticketing now, where you have
Speaker 2: your ticket on your phone and you scan it like
Speaker 2: a QR code and you get in the stadium. But
Speaker 2: still it's a stadium, and it's not as comfortable as
Speaker 2: what you have at home. And also, and I don't
Speaker 2: think anyone on this show actually plays fantasy football with
Speaker 2: the exception. To me, that is another pull away from
Speaker 2: the end stadium experience. People are less now fans of
Speaker 2: one team and more fans of players on their fantasy team.
Speaker 2: They're either betting on the players they have them on
Speaker 2: their fantasy team. They're more looking at the sport as
Speaker 2: a whole, like the NFL Red Zone, where you'll watch
Speaker 2: the scoring plays of all games across the league on
Speaker 2: a given Sunday instead of watching one game between two
Speaker 2: teams for three hours. These are the things that stadiums
Speaker 2: have to somehow compete with and also overcome Genius sports.
Speaker 2: Going back to the story, they've partnered with many other
Speaker 2: sports leagues around the world to implement the same technology.
Speaker 2: They've done this with English Premier League, NASCAR, the NC
Speaker 2: two A and others, so you can tell that there
Speaker 2: is a general consensus that more needs to be done
Speaker 2: to bring people to the stadium. For example, Mark, you're
Speaker 2: not a football fan, are you?
Speaker 3: Generally?
Speaker 1: No?
Speaker 3: But I take your point about being in the comfort
Speaker 3: of your own home where you can sit and watch
Speaker 3: a game in a neglige or a mumu or whatever
Speaker 3: you wear and not have to worry. I just saw
Speaker 3: some footage yesterday of a sports fan walking around punching
Speaker 3: out people who are fans of the opposite team.
Speaker 2: Who wants to deal with that, right, who wants to?
Speaker 2: I saw it was a Baltimore Ravens fan. He punched
Speaker 2: out two Washington Commanders fans just onsite. He just he
Speaker 2: was looking for some and he wanted to beat them up.
Speaker 2: But there's a happy ending to that story. They found
Speaker 2: the guy, They fired the guy. He got fired from
Speaker 2: his job, and the social media out at him. And
Speaker 2: also he's their charge is pending against him. Just to
Speaker 2: let you know, oh yeah, throw away the key. That's insane. Yeah,
Speaker 2: over sports. But see that's another deterrent as far as
Speaker 2: or disincentive to actually go now here's the correlation. We
Speaker 2: talk about this all the time here on Later with
Speaker 2: mo Kelly. It's not very different from the movie going experience.
Speaker 2: Maybe fewer fights, but there's more reasons to stay home
Speaker 2: than it is to brave the elements, waste the gas
Speaker 2: and the time, and also not everyone wants to put
Speaker 2: up with other people. You know, the communal experience oftentimes
Speaker 2: is overrated. I can watch a football game at home
Speaker 2: and be just fine. I don't need another seventy thousand
Speaker 2: people around me to enjoy it. I can watch a
Speaker 2: movie at home. I don't need another three hundred people
Speaker 2: around me to enjoy it. And so movie theaters, you actually,
Speaker 2: even coffee shops, you know, any type of place where
Speaker 2: people are going to congregate. They have to reinvent themselves
Speaker 2: in a way to get people like you and me
Speaker 2: off our asses and actually come to that location for
Speaker 2: hours at a time and spend money. That is no
Speaker 2: small undertaking, because being home is pretty damn good. It's
Speaker 2: fun more times than not. I don't have to shower,
Speaker 2: I don't have to brush my teeth. Well, you buried
Speaker 2: the lead there about the showering. I love the communal
Speaker 2: experience of going to a movie. But I do believe,
Speaker 2: and don't you as well, that people are starting to
Speaker 2: act much worse than they ever have for some reason. Yes,
Speaker 2: I believe it's it's still a function of COVID, where
Speaker 2: we somehow not socializing for two years or so. It
Speaker 2: seems like we lost all ability or inclination to act
Speaker 2: like civilized individuals. If I could trace it back to anything,
Speaker 2: I would say COVID and that period of isolation.
Speaker 3: Well maybe this is where your citizenship classes had come
Speaker 3: in handy.
Speaker 2: Well, you know, look from your lips to God's ears.
Speaker 2: You know they haven't put they haven't put civics back
Speaker 2: in school. You know we don't. We don't reward good
Speaker 2: citizens ship. And you know this.
Speaker 3: Is what we get.
Speaker 2: We've for all the complaints we have about society.
Speaker 3: We didn't get here overnight.
Speaker 2: We've done a lot of things to earn what we
Speaker 2: don't like about society.
Speaker 3: Well, you are successfully turning me into a Moe Kelly
Speaker 3: TM misanthropist. You hate people. No, never I ever, As always,
Speaker 3: I'm just following your lead. Mo, It's later with Mo
Speaker 3: Kelly CAF. I am six forty. We're live everywhere on
Speaker 3: the iHeartRadio app.
Speaker 2: And when we come back, I'm going to keep the
Speaker 2: AI theme going. New York Times earlier this week has
Speaker 2: warned an AI company called Perplexity to stop using its content.
Speaker 2: Damn it, Mark Ramer was right again and I hate no.
Speaker 3: That's next.
Speaker 1: You're listening to Later with Moe Kelly on demand from
Speaker 1: KFI AM six forty.
Speaker 3: Caff I.
Speaker 2: Mo' kelly here, We're live everywhere on the iHeartRadio app.
Speaker 2: And when I saw this next story, I immediately thought
Speaker 2: of Mark Ronner, and I wanted to take my time
Speaker 2: with this because this is also part of an ongoing
Speaker 2: conversation the implementation of AI where it makes sense, where
Speaker 2: it is I would say stealing to use Mark Ronner's word,
Speaker 2: where it actually adds something to us as people or society,
Speaker 2: or also in the creation of content. The New York
Speaker 2: Times has demanded that the AI search engine startup company
Speaker 2: Perplexity stop using content from the New York Times website
Speaker 2: in a cease and desist letter sent to the company.
Speaker 2: The New York Times presently is also suing open Ai
Speaker 2: and Microsoft over allegedly illegally training its AI models using
Speaker 2: the New York Times content, which goes back to what
Speaker 2: Mark Roner says. It can't do anything, It can't create anything.
Speaker 2: It needs established and already created content for it to
Speaker 2: have any value.
Speaker 3: Paraphrasing, but something to that effect.
Speaker 2: Now, Perplexity and its business partners are fighting back against
Speaker 2: The New York Times, and they're saying that nobody has
Speaker 2: a copyright on facts. Nobody owns the copyright to facts.
Speaker 2: They're trying to argue, the information which is taken from
Speaker 2: The New York Times is just the facts, not the phrasing,
Speaker 2: not the wording, not actual paragraphs which were used by writers,
Speaker 2: but just the baseline information.
Speaker 3: Mark, What do you have to say to that? Can
Speaker 3: you feel how angry I'm getting? Just?
Speaker 2: Oh?
Speaker 3: I know, Oh I know. That's why I did the story.
Speaker 3: I mean. And I say this as a person who
Speaker 3: has written stories and then watched as a TV news
Speaker 3: anchor ripped them off word for a word, having my
Speaker 3: stuff read to me on the air with no acknowledgment
Speaker 3: of the source whatsoever. I think this is absolutely evil.
Speaker 3: You can't copyright facts, Okay, then go do your own reporting.
Speaker 3: That stuff doesn't just appear out of the ether on
Speaker 3: its own to be plucked out like fruit from a tree. Yeah,
Speaker 3: but can you prove it? Yes?
Speaker 1: Can you?
Speaker 3: Yeah? No? No, no, no, no, not you.
Speaker 2: I'm saying, I'm sorry, going back to New York Times,
Speaker 2: Oh can they prove it? How do you mean exactly?
Speaker 2: I want to make sure we're clear. Well, let's make
Speaker 2: I'm making a delineation, a distinction between the facts. In
Speaker 2: other words, the Dodgers lost to the Mets last night
Speaker 2: six to three, excuse me, seven to three, as reported
Speaker 2: in the New York Times. If perplexity uses that information
Speaker 2: to inform their model that the Mets beat the Dodgers
Speaker 2: seven to three, is that plagiarism. I'm playing both sides
Speaker 2: of the argument because factually that's true. Stylistically, it's not
Speaker 2: The New York Times.
Speaker 3: Well, the event occurred regardless of who reported it, but
Speaker 3: this AI swine wouldn't know about it apart from the
Speaker 3: reporting that they read someplace.
Speaker 2: Ah, okay, okay. So you're saying, look, without us, there
Speaker 2: is no U period.
Speaker 3: I think that's what I'm saying.
Speaker 2: Yes, yeah, and they're saying, but the you we're taking
Speaker 2: from is public information, no different from me or you
Speaker 2: reading the New York Times and saying, hey, Mark, did
Speaker 2: you see the Dodgers lost to the New York Mets
Speaker 2: last night seven to three.
Speaker 3: Oh really, how'd you see that? I saw in New
Speaker 3: York Times. Yeah. It's pretty funny, isn't it. How free
Speaker 3: public information always seems to be the result of someone
Speaker 3: else's leg work and effort.
Speaker 2: But it's not illegal for me to then reference that
Speaker 2: in a write up or a radio show and not
Speaker 2: even give attribution. Hey, the Dodgers loss last night seven
Speaker 2: to three. I could have gotten it from ESPN, could
Speaker 2: have gotten it from New York Times, could have gotten
Speaker 2: it from Mark Ronner when he talked about it in
Speaker 2: the KFI twenty four newsroom.
Speaker 3: I do, and I mean there's there are differences, and
Speaker 3: they get finer and finer. The more you know, the
Speaker 3: more granular you get into this discussion. But as a journalist,
Speaker 3: we cite our sources. If something's common knowledge, you know,
Speaker 3: like the Earth rotates around the sun and by the
Speaker 3: way it does, if you were wondering about that, you
Speaker 3: know other things don't know? Do your research? Yeah, do
Speaker 3: your own research. Yeah, some things are common knowledge. Other
Speaker 3: things you always cite your source. And if you're in
Speaker 3: the AI business, you don't get the benefit of the doubt,
Speaker 3: you better cite your source.
Speaker 2: Yeah, but they're not journalists, and I'm still playing the
Speaker 2: other side of the argument.
Speaker 3: They're not journalists, but they're using the product of journalism.
Speaker 3: I don't like this term, but the work product of journalism.
Speaker 3: I hate the word content too. But you know exactly
Speaker 3: what I'm getting at with this. It's a catch all.
Speaker 3: These are things that require the effort of humans with
Speaker 3: experience judgment, who have actually put hours of their time
Speaker 3: into it. For this information to be gleaned from another entity,
Speaker 3: whether it's a human or an AI. Well, you're lucky
Speaker 3: that I carved out time.
Speaker 2: We can go a second segment with this, because I
Speaker 2: still want to push back on your belief that this
Speaker 2: is plagiarism or stealing when they're taking the baseline information,
Speaker 2: or at least that's the argument that Perplexity is making.
Speaker 3: It's noble of you to take their sight on this.
Speaker 3: I appreciate that we can't agree all the time. Mark, No,
Speaker 3: that's boring. It's just unhealthy too. Nobody wants to hear
Speaker 3: us agree.
Speaker 1: You're listening to Later with Moe Kelly on Demand from
Speaker 1: KFI AM six forty.
Speaker 2: Mo Kelly, We're Live Everywhere on the iHeartRadio app, and
Speaker 2: we're going deep into the discussion of AI and when
Speaker 2: it may cross the boundaries when we're talking about journalism specifically.
Speaker 2: We all know that AI has potential to enrich our
Speaker 2: lives in some way, or at least I believe that
Speaker 2: we're not in agreement on where it should have a role,
Speaker 2: if it should have a role in content creation when
Speaker 2: it's connected to journalism. And last segment, I started talking
Speaker 2: about how The New York Times has sent a cease
Speaker 2: and desist to the company Perplexity, saying it has to
Speaker 2: stop using the New York Times content from training its
Speaker 2: AI model. This is what New York Times also had
Speaker 2: to say, Perplexity and its business partners have been unjustly
Speaker 2: enriched by using without authorization The Times expressive carefully written
Speaker 2: and researched and edited journalism with out a license. The
Speaker 2: New York Times also prohibits using its content for AI
Speaker 2: model training. It disallows several AI crawlers, including Perplexities, in
Speaker 2: its robots dot txt file that tell search engine crawlers
Speaker 2: which URLs they can index.
Speaker 3: Mark Ronner, there is no nuance for you.
Speaker 2: Is that fair to say you're all the way on
Speaker 2: the side of perplexity has no right to anything that
Speaker 2: it may find via the New York Times.
Speaker 3: Is that fair? Well, there's some nuance. I mean, I
Speaker 3: read about something the other day about an AI that
Speaker 3: could perform calculations in some medical issue that would have
Speaker 3: taken a person weeks, months, years to do. That's a
Speaker 3: perfectly valid good use for AI. But when you talk
Speaker 3: about talking about assimilating information that other people have created
Speaker 3: to pump out, crank out some ersatz garbage, Yeah, there's
Speaker 3: not a lot of subtlety for me with that.
Speaker 2: Okay, what about then you have someone like not someone
Speaker 2: something like the Los Angeles Times, And I use this
Speaker 2: example before it I think it bears mentioning again. They
Speaker 2: have an earthquake bot which will put up a completed story.
Speaker 3: Moments after an earthquake happens.
Speaker 2: It is a full story, you know, a four point
Speaker 2: two earthquake which was centered at such and happened at
Speaker 2: seven to fifty five PM.
Speaker 3: No, it's a full story. It's about maybe five or
Speaker 3: six lines.
Speaker 2: I would argue that it's probably resourcing similar stories from
Speaker 2: around the web, inclusive of the New York Times and
Speaker 2: other places. Do you think that to be plagiarism when
Speaker 2: the specifics and the facts would change from earthquake to earthquake.
Speaker 3: Well, it seems to me like you could also extend
Speaker 3: that to doing the weather. You can you can gather
Speaker 3: data that isn't necessarily the work of a human being
Speaker 3: sitting there pounding things out at a keyboard. And I
Speaker 3: think one aspect of this that isn't really discussed as
Speaker 3: much as it should be is that there's this kind
Speaker 3: of pervasive sense to me that people think information is
Speaker 3: and should be free. And this isn't stuff that just
Speaker 3: drops out of heaven. It is the product of people
Speaker 3: sitting there and doing work and bringing their experience to
Speaker 3: the table. It's not something anybody could do. It's not
Speaker 3: and I say this as somebody who's had so many
Speaker 3: things stolen from me over the years. I had a
Speaker 3: TV series stolen from me. It wasn't free. I put
Speaker 3: many many hours and months of my time into that.
Speaker 3: And like I said in the last segment, I've had
Speaker 3: news stories that I've written red word for word on
Speaker 3: the air on TV. Nobody mentioned where it came from.
Speaker 3: We have to acknowledge that these things are the product
Speaker 3: of people who do work, and that's not free. It's
Speaker 3: no different than somebody who picks a vegetable or does welding.
Speaker 3: For you, work is work if somebody does it.
Speaker 2: I'm really not disagreeing with you, and I know Twala
Speaker 2: would agree with me when I say that there are
Speaker 2: times where we've seen our work on this show being
Speaker 2: used as the basis and evidence for stories which have
Speaker 2: run in the La Times and other places, almost word
Speaker 2: for word. Yet and I've called out the writer on
Speaker 2: Twitter and other occasions saying like this, you did not
Speaker 2: come up with this on your own. It's way too
Speaker 2: damn specific, using the same terminology and phraseology that I did.
Speaker 2: Maybe just didn't think that I was going to see it,
Speaker 2: to which there was no response. So emotionally, I'm right
Speaker 2: there with you. I've been a victim of it as well.
Speaker 2: I'm just saying, in the larger discussion, is what you
Speaker 2: felt and what I felt the same thing which is
Speaker 2: going on here with perplexity. I'm not seeing the evidence
Speaker 2: that they're using the same phraseology. They're taking the basic
Speaker 2: tenets of the story, the information or the facts of
Speaker 2: the story, and then rejumbling it into a story of
Speaker 2: their own.
Speaker 3: Yeah, I just want to put a finer point on
Speaker 3: what I was saying, which is that we have to
Speaker 3: get it into our heads that stealing somebody's words they're
Speaker 3: writing or anything like that is no different than stopping
Speaker 3: somebody and stealing the money out of their wallet or
Speaker 3: breaking into their house and stealing their possessions. It is theft,
Speaker 3: and it's serious. Just because it happens to be kind
Speaker 3: of hard to pin down in terms of value, because
Speaker 3: it's not a tangible thing, that doesn't make it any
Speaker 3: less theft. Now, as far as this particular case goes,
Speaker 3: there might be some technicalities, some nuance, I still think
Speaker 3: this stuff should be regulated into oblivion to prevent abuses
Speaker 3: and to prevent theft from people, because, as you know,
Speaker 3: people who get into the occupations that we're in, whether
Speaker 3: it's news or talk radio, journalism of any sort, TV,
Speaker 3: writing novel, writing music, that's not easy and okay, and
Speaker 3: to have any success in that at all, it's like
Speaker 3: getting the brass ring on a merry go round.
Speaker 2: Let me push back on that, and I'm going to
Speaker 2: again play the other side because I know a little
Speaker 2: bit more about the inner workings of KFI than someone
Speaker 2: who's listening may not, and I think they would gain
Speaker 2: some insight. You have an editor who is responsible for
Speaker 2: writing stories. You have to write stories, and you have
Speaker 2: to go to other places news sources in which to
Speaker 2: collect those facts and then turn it into a Mervyn
Speaker 2: Block style stories.
Speaker 3: Isn't that correct? Extra points for the mervyn block reference.
Speaker 3: Generally that's correct. Yes, Okay.
Speaker 2: How would that be different than this AI robot dot
Speaker 2: txt crawling engine doing what seems to be the same thing,
Speaker 2: going to other sources, verifying if you will, with multiple
Speaker 2: sources the facts, and then generating the story.
Speaker 3: I think I can explain, for one thing, we pay
Speaker 3: for the wire services that we use, so we are paying.
Speaker 3: We are paying for the bulk of the information that
Speaker 3: we pass on to and if it's something that say
Speaker 3: the New York Times, has we cite them or the
Speaker 3: Washington Post, we cite the source. M Okay, I can't
Speaker 3: argue with that. I cannot believe with that. Foosh, are
Speaker 3: you recording this really?
Speaker 2: No?
Speaker 3: No?
Speaker 2: I think for a for a complete debate, I think
Speaker 2: you need to consider all of the the nuances and
Speaker 2: the vagaries of how this information is used in our business.
Speaker 3: Yeah. Another thing to keep in mind with this whole
Speaker 3: AI thing is think of the reasons for the things
Speaker 3: that are being done, and again, qui bono, who benefits
Speaker 3: from them? If the reason is you don't want to
Speaker 3: pay a person to spend all day doing it and
Speaker 3: give them health coverage and that kind of thing, pay
Speaker 3: them a living wage, that's one thing. If it's a
Speaker 3: thing that a human being can't do, that's an entirely
Speaker 3: different thing.
Speaker 2: Are you saying that you're as good as a computer,
Speaker 2: as a as an artificial intelligence?
Speaker 3: Where would I even begin with that until I get
Speaker 3: one of Elon Musk's little brain chip and plans and
Speaker 3: hope it doesn't catch on fire in my skull.
Speaker 2: No, honestly, I think we're all eminently replaceable. And going
Speaker 2: back to the whole I robot comparison, Yeah, they have.
Speaker 2: They have artificial intelligence which can create a symphony. Now
Speaker 2: is it derivative, Yes, But you know all art, all
Speaker 2: creation is derivative. It is based on it is like
Speaker 2: it is similar to and I don't know how much
Speaker 2: true creativity is anymore. Look, you have someone who's going
Speaker 2: to write a song. It's going to sound eerily reminiscent
Speaker 2: of this artist or that artist. In a particular genre,
Speaker 2: you have someone who's going to create a movie. Oh,
Speaker 2: it's going to be very similar to someone's script or
Speaker 2: someone's idea, someone's log line, don't I think we're past
Speaker 2: the point of we're at the point of no return
Speaker 2: as far as what we consider creation to be in
Speaker 2: a content sense, I.
Speaker 3: Don't know about that. I don't think anybody wants to read,
Speaker 3: or watch or listen to any piece of art that's
Speaker 3: generated by an AI. I think they want something from
Speaker 3: a human. That's where the connection is, and we have.
Speaker 2: Have you listened to what's on the radio. We are
Speaker 2: not a high standard species. I'm not going to argue
Speaker 2: against that.
Speaker 3: But we've had kind of a midpoint toward this hellscape
Speaker 3: with things like the Save the Cat formula for writing screenplays,
Speaker 3: which just completely leeches all the art out of something
Speaker 3: and has you copy a format from works that have
Speaker 3: already been successful. It's garbage. And once you read that
Speaker 3: book to Save the Cat book, you'll be able to
Speaker 3: tell every movie you ever see that copies from it,
Speaker 3: and it's crap. Nobody wants it.
Speaker 2: But they do that in music that I use music
Speaker 2: as an example because music sells, you know, talking about
Speaker 2: the one four five core progression or the the chords
Speaker 2: which are are the found in the most number one
Speaker 2: hit songs. I mean there is an intentional repetition science
Speaker 2: to creating art which sells, and it is it is
Speaker 2: a derivative and it's diminutive in nature. Well, it is
Speaker 2: taking from what has already succeeded.
Speaker 3: Yeah, every single artist, writer, movie director, anything like that.
Speaker 3: You know, what they give you in their art is
Speaker 3: the product of a lifetime of them absorbing things like
Speaker 3: little downloads like Neo and the Matrix. Every time you
Speaker 3: read a book or watch a movie, that becomes a
Speaker 3: part of you. But what but what you write or
Speaker 3: you know, the music you put out, that's your own
Speaker 3: original composition. And you can't say that of any ai
Speaker 3: yet yet, I like an optimist. It's later with mo Kelly.
Speaker 3: We're live everywhere on the iHeartRadio app. Well, at least
Speaker 3: you've decided to listen to KFI. See you're making progress.
Speaker 2: K F I N K O S T H D two,
Speaker 2: Los Angeles, Orange County, Live
Speaker 3: Everywhere on the radio