If my data are to be obtained, they'll lock me in the room, put a gun in my head and get all the data. Hello, everyone! We're on ToTheMoon. Technology news and sites from the Silicon Valley all over the world. That GPT-5 could be in the summer, right?
The participants were divided into three groups and forced to write a essay.
It's more of a value to human normal communication, even from the wrong...
They make the brain reindeer, but they seem to have a positive impact on how people ask questions.
This Wednesday will be, uh, on the channel, we've got a professional video. What professions will disappear with which professions must be carefully considered, which occupations , uh, as much as possible, and, if any, will be alive, given the emergence of artificial intelligence. Here. I've done this great deal of work. Our specialty. I'll remind you, we're on Wednesdays, and we're getting special episodes, right? There were many of them on the canal. And how to use agents there and, uh, legal questions about using artificial intelligence and a lot of different requests, you can find on the channels.
Look, I get everything and look at this news that was in, uh, New York, where the OpenAI now ordered the court to keep all the lies of all the requests, even remote, ChatGPT. I mean, he's keeping all these logic now. Only the OpenAI lawyers have access to these logs. There's a closed security team. Doesn't mean the plaintiffs have access. Yeah, I remember, it's in the New York Times, that the OpenAI was training on their data. And, uh, OpenAI states that they will continue to remove all chat rooms, as they have removed, after the trial is completed. But this precedent is quite so, I think it's very weighty and debated, because, uh, it's always an interesting aspect. On the one hand, all the data are stored on the Internet, all the photos, mail, correspondence, notes, all the different cloud services. What's the difference? Search, search, search, search, browser, all. So everything's going on. And on the other hand, um, it's kind of like this information that's super-collected, built on you, it's much bigger. And I don't think we should do that. On the third hand, I think the columns are all written, televisions, video cameras, computers, video cameras, WhatsApp all over, Telegram. So it's all over, all the messages, all the correspondence is completely stored somewhere. They're stored in some cloudy storage stores when they're rebuilt. Well, except for super-closed secret chat, huh? They're individually placed on a specific device. So much remains. And this, and this is a moment of internal condition that can be used, and that's not what data can be turned out to be. Our audience, what do you think about this? What kind of data are you willing to share? Do you have a paranoid or not on this? I've met a lot of people who have paranoia on this subject, paranoia is just the worst. I think they've turned down the technology. I've always chosen, uh, technology. Let the technology be. If my data are to be obtained, they'll lock me in the room, put a gun in my head and get all the data. And that's why I've always come from this kind of thing. So it's gonna be cool if you write your comments. What do you think about this? Tanya, Elnar.
Oh, there was news, uh, I don't remember where, if anything, we'll add that it's just a part of, uh, requests for, uh, chat boots, it's become known.
I don't remember the kids. Let's go. I'll tell you a hypothetical situation that you write chat-bot every day, it's made public available. And there was information that, for example, people were asking how to optimize taxes, right? And imagine that these requests are your kind, they're all available. Or some other questions. And here, about paranoia, you just have to keep your mind in mind that all you write, uh, is probably recording, at some point, it can be there, uh, getting online, and, well, you just need to keep that in mind, right? So, uh, such a healthy paranoia note, she should always be present.
So let's do this.
Request.
One friend of mine wrote a friend. We'll be so kidding.
I'm asking for a fight...
In the USA, on this subject, in the US, on this subject, by the way, it's not, it's a rash-- it's absolutely-
What's the matter with the tax optimization? You don't ask how to get away from the taxes.
Look, look. No, that's absolutely, you can even ask me how to leave.
Only correct wording.
Yeah, it's a way to go. That-- that's all about country, by the way, right? That's what matters even to our audience. It depends very much on the country. In some countries, you have no right to ask such a question, and in some countries this is not a problem at all.
You have the right to ask him. But the point is, Elnar, just add that all the queries in Google are still there. There's, uh, a very interesting case in the U.S. about the data. He's not very interesting, of course, he's very fucking. Young guy, 16 years old, I think in Denver, he was walking down the street to buy himself an iPhone and he was robbed. And his men robbed. He returned home and identified the device at the Apple position, identified where, uh, this phone is now or there. Told his friends. They came over at night, set the house on fire and burned people. They burned people, and it turns out they were wrong. They realized they were wrong about-- they were actually kind of coming to the wrong people. They burned down, I think, a family, there, with kids. But they-- they found out they were wrong. This case was a police hang. The police couldn't figure out how it was.
Yeah, if it were those people.
How did the police find these people? In a while, in a few years. They, uh, compared all Google queries, who, in the day and in advance, searched for two weeks in different systems for this location. And they found it on the search for this location, that there was a group of people who had asked about this location on several occasions. And then, in the performance, with these people, there were minors in this group, I think they were all minors, and they were just different ages. I think it was 14 years ago. They, uh, found these, uh, all the people. Someone's been in there for life, someone's been in there for ten years. So they found them all. There was such a reservation that the judge, that one of the counsels said that you had no right to use such data and to take such data. The court said, "No shit!" So they had no right to take that data. But the police data from the point of view of investigation are-- other data are reliable in order to indicate who and what he did. So I mean, I'm saying that there's a lot of requests, we're using a lot of applications, and these applications are often medium sequential or we don't understand, yes, when you're buckling in a restaurant, you're, uh, Come on, taxi, there you call when you listen to music, the same data, they are. And there's a huge number of systems that contain logic, that's the logic. It's not that, it's not that big a deal. Once again, it's interesting if you write your opinion as far as it doesn't give you, a-a-a-a-a-ha, that's the use system. For example, Elinar said "We're gonna figure it out." Remember, for example, my wife uses ChatGPT every day. I think she doesn't even have a question in her head, that the data can be leaked or not released or something. I mean, I think she's using them from the point of view that this is aid, not that she's got someone there who might hurt her, I don't know, to find out her blood type because he knows her, I don't know, or there's something that he can find. data and somehow damage.
Take a picture of the card for payment or something.
Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. And take a picture of some systems and do, yeah.
By the way, depending on countries, many people are surprised. I'm just getting a friend from Moscow, and a card is always taken to the US restaurant and taken, stolen. And he says, "How do you take her away? It's crazy to take her away." And I remember how I reacted to it, too. But if you look at the facts, it's an interesting moment, why are people in America not worried? Because with the credit card, if you've got the money...
There's insurance for this.
...you didn't waste it, the bank will return it all back. He'll give you back them, and then he'll figure it out. Not much of a guy who wrote that money back. That's great! And that-- and that's hard to understand, for example, the man who's in there--
There's one in Russia, too. I had an accident in America when I didn't live here, just came as a tourist. I bought jeans at Bergdorf Goodman, and then I checked in a while and saw that I had another one right now, literally ten minutes after that, bought a roadbag from the same map I didn't even get, And I found it there a few days later. I called the bank, the Russian bank, and I got all the money back, even without questions.
It works.
Yeah.
Tanya, it works, but it doesn't work in the system as it works in the States. In the States, people pay for education in a foreign company, for example, the American card for European education. Then they come in three months and they say or they say, "We didn't do it." They're having a trespass. That company would even write to the American bank that a man bought an education, they
The bank that a man bought an education, they won't pay back.
Mm-hmm.
I see these cabins, I see these cabins, and people just do very well--- I say, another little defense system and another approach. And therefore, to safety, I think it's very much a-a-a-a-a-a- country-dependent, on location, on education, on everything else. Once again, it's very interesting that you'll write how you feel about this and, uh, if you need to consider this subject in more detail what systems are, why, what systems are safer or less safer. Safe.
I always say that Google servers are safer than your corporate servers, which your technical staff member has access, right? Well, I mean, I do. Ah, Illnar, the very cool news about MIT, but before we go to MIT, we'll be talking about the research that, uh, institute, uh, technology, about the use of what you did to your MIT. The brain becomes when you use ChatGPT, there, or DeepSeek, or Gemini. I want to see the topic that the US Congress brought a project, and he's got a two-day-- it's working a couple days ago, yeah, the twenty-fifth of June, who said that, uh, government agencies are banned. Use models from China, especially from China. And there's a-- and there's a straight-up tract that's popular, like DeepSeek, and from Russia, Iran and the DPRK, yes. So they're also obliged to put this list on those foreign nationals, block them in the state and so on. It's an interesting moment, that, uh, there's a word from chapter Anthropic, he said it, I think, ten days ago, I don't remember, we talked about it or not. He said that in ten years the world would rule or artificial intelligence. He has an interesting reservation. I mean, not a country, look, artificial intelligence, and this artificial intelligence will be either US or China. Here. And it's worth a reason-- I think it's worth paying attention to people, so you can take it. Why is a man, why, why does a man have such a reason, huh? Why is it even so much of a reason, and who's like him? But these blocks, they're very interesting. They, on the one hand, er, some countries can block and say, don't use, there, I don't know, American soft, there, or Chinese systems. I'm-- I'm getting these data. It is unclear how these data are used, removed, not removed. In the meantime, Microsoft, for example, is around the world, uh, in all systems, yes, you know, in all the systems of state agencies, airports, it's just, like, everywhere, it's just, like, the Americans are standing around the world. system. And, um, some people get used to it. Or Google, it means it's practically used everywhere, right? On the other hand, there are countries like the US that say that lead models and thus bring such exclusiveness to their own. In doing so, the same Government is moving towards lobbying to prevent the use of its models in all countries. Here. What, uh, everyone think about country-level bans? Is that allowed to use it in your countries? How do you see that now? How far is the country lagging behind or not behind the processes that will be happening?
The topic is very alive on the agenda.
We talked about it a year ago, uh, we talked about it. Remember that there are limits to geographical location? Well, there's a card, yes, there's a border between countries. And now the same border is formed in the information space.
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
One country has one, another one. It's just that this trend is continuing, these boundaries in the information space are already clearly depicted.
Look, the U.S. government says that they don't have to be blocked in other countries, does that mean that, uh, Openai will make it accessible in Russia? And will he work? I think Belarus is working, yes, perhaps ChatGPT or not? I don't know. Oh, yeah. Do you know if it means that it'll open the system and it'll work?
In Russia, it is possible through VPN or only through Telegram.
Through the VPN, well, Telegram is a limited resource, there's a simple version of absolute.
That's weird.
I'm talking about a serious story. A serious version only through VPN. And it's hard, isn't it? There's a lot of z- restrictions. Plus, OpenAI itself is increasingly limiting access, because America has the most recent versions. So the versions that are in America, the servers that are for the American market, they are different from the European market or from the Asian market. It's obvious that they even officially declare that we are there, for example, that function is being demolished here.
So, there's news that GPT 5 could be in the summer, right? And, well, again, it's either coming or not coming, it's not clear.
But at least they said she had to, they should show up. There's a nice Polymarket website where the bets are made. And I'm here. Illar, have you seen it? No. There is a rate, which model will be better by the end of June, which model will be more good by the end of July, which model will be better by the end of the year.
I wanted to put the bet yesterday, and there was a cryp-- there was something to cryptate. And I'm like, "Okay." So in America, by the way, I got a partner yesterday, and in business, one-on-one, says, "All right, in America, officially crypt at banks everywhere," although she was in PayPal, yeah, official currency. So, uh, uh, I was wondering if all the stakes were made on Gemini. Very much. So it was so low in the OpenAI rating. It was a surprise to me.
Yeah, that's weird.
He's a bit of a stunning.
Oh, yeah, he's nick-- yeah, Gemini's up a lot. You saw that, right? Did you see that? Yeah, Gemini's up a lot. Well, I'm not doing this, not acting as a counselor, and I don't recommend doing anything. I'll buy something there and tell you, as usual, uh, in the next edition.
We know you're gonna buy it.
Well, look, there's $20,000 or $1,000 worth of Openai shopping. So. Here. Uh, well, that's a fun website, by the way. These bets, the show-- the bets that are, there are bets that would put the president away, which law will probate, and so on. I think it's a very interesting subject, especially for the bright. So, Ilnar!
Yeah, but let's start with a very small sample of fifty-four people, and it's almost 18 before the end. So we'll just keep it behind the brackets. But the study itself is quite fun. People, participants were divided into three groups and made a essay write. Uh, what were the three groups? The first group wrote it on its own. I mean, without Google, without LLM. You just sit there and that's how you write your essay, essay. The second group had access to Google. So you could've searched for something, found some kind of data sources, based on that. And the third group used LLM. Well, that's where the ChatGPT was used to write the essay. That's how they, uh, went through three stages, respectively. Uh, bands just wrote different essays three times and each time they measured brain performance. Well, obviously, those who wrote themselves worked their brains more active., those who used it, there, the ChatGPT, they're much worse off brain, their interest was less on. They've been checking it through, uh, encephalogram, what brain waves, and so on. The groups were changed, respectively. Well, the middle group that used Google didn't do anything to her. And the first two groups, the first and last groups have changed places. So, the writers themselves, in the fourth stage, were written with the ChatGPT, and those who wrote LLM at the end wrote their own writing and watching, and what happens to people involved with brains, Activity, and quality of the essays written. The essay was also tested in various ways and by the experts, and the AI expert was reading there, making some assessments. And the obvious conclusion was that, yes, that people who write themselves have a much better brain, they're much better involved in writing, and, uh, they can, then. I'm gonna ask you what they wrote. I mean, if there's a essay on the page, you can answer some questions on your essay. And those who, with LLM, all this stuff were generated, they were, therefore, much less involved. The encephalogram was much less active. And, accordingly, questions about some of their written materials, they couldn't answer either. Here. What do you think about that?
Are we intimidating with ChatGPT or not?
Well, I, you know, I want to make a little remark like that. I think it's all in America now, I don't know how in other countries, I've started sending emails real. Whether they're Google right in there is all that to do, or they're gonna run through ChatGPT. And every time you get this kind of job, I often have a lot of emails there in the day, getting a little bit of a polished, you know, like it's not like a British queen writing this email, something, You know, it feels so unpleasant. I'd be much more comfortable getting a mistake email, maybe some kind of casual, something so free, something human. And I, uh, when I'm even gonna be lying, to be honest, these emails, because there's something--
Because something comes up, yeah, it feels like, well, I don't know how to explain. And I think that's, uh, by the way of this study, that some kind of human contact is missing from this. It's kind of nice, though, it's all right. Oh, I mean, I don't know. You don't have any experience like that? I've already stopped using it.
Sometimes it makes a wish, yes, so emailed to stick in GPT chat and ask, like, maybe in two words, explain what he wants me to say.
Yeah, right, right.
Now, there's a button of summary everywhere. There's a button of summary everywhere, Elnar, right?
Yes, summary. It even without a button gives you a side summary, and you realize that, well, plus or minus is the same and even the same in volume. Why this summary? I mean, I don't know, I think it's, uh, it's something more of a human normal relationship, even with mistakes.
But maybe it's just my kind of approach.
What, what do our audience think? What do you think of this subject in terms of the creation of content, the generation of content and the use of machines, as you see in this subject, which is being discussed? Please write in the comments. It's very interesting to have your opinion, especially if you give examples of the wider case. Or you-- you got caught somewhere for this, or you caught someone for it or where you were unpleasant, or where you see it as a support, auxiliary. Put a liquor on our channel, you're very supportive of the channel, you're very supportive of our video and sign if you don't want to miss our video. Let's go.
That news is not far away. I didn't say anything about it when I first heard it. When I first heard her, I had, you know, a different feeling. They're convinced that there, uh, users, are slacking, yeah, or stupid when GPT's chatting is used. And it's more like some kind of populist little story. But you can give me an example. He may not be correct. I'm just curious about your attitude to this and the audience, and here you are. I can imagine, there was a man there to get from one village to another village, and he had to walk, well, there's, like, 20, 30 kilometres, and then, uh, he's on the horses, and now, he's on the horse. He's driving. And if we're gonna take a look at the, uh, muscle activity of the man walking, rolling on the horse or driving in the car, and that's the same thing, three groups will do, we'll get, uh, the same results. Whoever walks or runs, he's got a very strong muscle activity. And the one who drives the car, well, he's driving off. There's four muscles he's got on the line, and all the rest of it is calm.
And suffers from obesity, heart disease and all that is related.
But it means-- does it mean that to drive there from one village to another village, you're better off walking now, and you're gonna give up the car and so on?
Well, that's Elnar, by the way, good,
that's a very interesting idea, yeah. That's a fun metaphor.
And, yes, you must understand for what.
Yeah, I'm totally here, by the way, supporting you on this. Here, this story. I have a wife, uh, I'm on Wednesday, I think that's Wednesday that the video will be going on, right? Uh, her wife's-- she's got a group with her relatives, and they've been discussing their last name, because they have a name, they have a sherb, a family name, and so on. And they were talking there. She went into GPT chatting in the last model, three things. I'm just asking you. He said, "Get up the archives, in which countries to raise the diaspora archives.
Wow!
I gave you an answer. She slipped in there-- she then, she dropped a response that people didn't see or spend years, so that, uh, or-- look, it's got to be, or really smart, to study it, put in time. My wife wouldn't do that. Doesn't mean she's stupid, she just wouldn't do it, she wouldn't do it. She knew there were people sitting there who didn't do that, they had no access to such a system, to such a model. She's got the most expensive GPT chat there, right? She threw it out. They've been super grateful. Does that mean my wife was knocked? First, she knew, first of all, that it was possible to ask. Most people don't even know that it's gonna be a lot of time.
Why would she do that? Here's a story. Or I was on the CSI of the neck vessels yesterday, and got a doctor. That was a very narrow result. I put it in the GPT chat, he analyzed it, said the next study was done in three five years. There's a ta-ta-ta-ta-ta. I could have asked, and how is Korea, Japan, somewhere else? My doctor didn't send me that kind of conclusions, he just dropped me off, like, okay.
American doctors are actually.
I sent it. No, no, no. Well, uh, yeah, that's your opinion. I have a good opinion for American doctors, by the way, so we can just split up here. I have people to share that I don't think I was at a bad-- bad doctor or bad procedure now. I was on a quality procedure with a fairly qualitative conclusion. The point is, I'm personally, yes, I'm talking about my own thing right now. The point is, I threw my sister there then, and I said, "I'm not gonna need help, in the transcript, 'cause you have your partner--" And she said it was perfectly natural because she understands that she, she, look, I used to give her a doctor's results, and now I threw her the GPT tip, and she knows she has nothing to add. Well, I mean, it's a question here. Tanya, you said letters. If I'm sent by people to the technical answer of the system, that's how Tanya said that you want to close it or not answer it or anything, and that's the technical answer that's expected, it makes me a bank technically sending me. or some person sends technically, I'm more or less expecting it and I know it's a normal use of such mechanisms. What's the problem?
Well, I'm if it's expected. I think we have a huge number of places we don't expect. For example, if I'm waiting for human relationships, I, for example, asked a man a personal question, and he's got a bot. I'll give you an example. You know, there's a lot of comments in Telegram under the beans' posts, the boots comment. My editor says, "Alexandre, you're asking me a question, please answer it." I say, "It's a beans." I can see that. Why do I see it? Because, after we put out the post, people took the summit off. I mean, it's worth a bot to ask a question. They're stupid questions, you see, and you get, you start wasting time on people. What's going on? You're starting to waste time to answer a man, and you're answering a cat, you know, not a bot, you're answering to a man who has a voice machine to draw attention to himself and to get his own attention.
Signatories.
Yeah, it's a turn, right? So you're out of the system at this point of time, like LinkedIn, yeah, I'm LinkedIn, we've been talking about it somehow. Sasha Masrabov says, "I'm using correctly." I can't be there at all because it's just a trash mess, yeah, a total lunatic's garbage. Unreal amount of trash. How can you be in this? Or if I understand that the comments are written by the bots, why be there? YouTube, what do you see? YouTube has no bot. Well, there's no algorithm that automatically writes. It's very expensive. Can I make this up? I can. But it's expensive. And Telegram is cheap. In Telegram, I think someone who's gonna protect his systems, make better products, human development will still depend, right? How Elnar gave an example to a car, you know, walking or not. I mean, this is a resistance, not a resistance.
But brain-smart research, Elnar, is still about what it is that for certain types of people, remember, we've been telling you in the past about using chat, you know, systems like GPT chat, they're stiffening, right? And the people with psychological moments are getting a problem just before there was a case, I didn't tell you about it, but then we put it on top that one girl asked, she wanted to commit suicide and I asked what's best for me, what bridges I'd rather commit suicide. And the system said, "This bridge is the best suit and this bridge is the best fit."
⁇ ⁇.
Of course it's-- yeah, of course, it's a problem. Well, let's be honest. Of course it's a problem. At the same time, well, people are also advising. What's the system doing here?
What's the problem with the system?
I think it's a problem, you know what? That changes happen unnoticed to us. I-I'm pretty sure people used to have better memories and a ability to concentrate until the Internet came up. Or now, people are not even able to watch long-term rolls. Why is TikTok so popular? I mean, it's also the changes that have happened, and as if it were, the world will not be the same. And I'm sure with artificial intelligence, there's gonna be the same result we're not gonna make, like, a change of things, and then as a fact, we're not really capable of anything anymore, like we used to remember, There are tasks to be done, and so on. That's the danger.
Yeah, I'd have done my thinking here. Look, does that mean that there's no need to walk, just drive on cars or, you know, don't write the text on your own, but you just have to generate it? Well, no way. Let's try the calculator. The calculator exists, but at school, children are prohibited from using it until some age. You should be able to count into a pole, you should be able to count in your mind and so on. But it's work.
In my mind and so on. But at work, if you need to count something, well, no one will deny you the use of the calculators. It'll be a pleasure if you think it's a calculator, not in your mind, just because there's more precise, the task will be better accomplished. So, just for what, huh? If the essay is writing to develop some of your skills, it's, like, a training exercise, then how do you write it yourself and if you need to, there, some muscle that's connected to it, with a essay writing or something? Something like that. And if this is a domestic routine you need to do, there, in the plan, there, there, a report, it's gonna help you or something, I don't think it's embarrassing to use the tools that will accelerate, too, It's like it's not embarrassing, it's like counting on the calculator, if you need anything, over there, overreacting.
I think it's a very good example, Ilnar, with a calculator, which is really awesome about him... And that's the attitude. You know, my daughter's in high school here is forbidden to use GPT chat, but they're allowed to use Google. Well, it's kind of weird. I know-- what does it matter? Not enough, you're in Google, you can get some incorrect absolute information, and you can check it out, you're having a hard time checking it out. Someone's gonna say, "Well, you'll check it out yourself." But the question here is not that you're gonna check it yourself. The question is, how do you even get to GPT chat room? How can you analyse how qualitative you can ask a question? I see how people wonder when they're around and hear what questions you ask how you're asking. They say, "Look, I wouldn't have made that question, and I wouldn't ask for such details, and I wouldn't add that kind of stuff." So people ask very simple things, very narrow, abstract, without even knowing, and maybe even, well, maybe it's possible to get out of it. It's not a... it's, you know, like a c-calculator. There's a plus or minus, and there's an expanded function. A huge number of people do not use expanded functions, there, memory, use, and, I don't know, root, there, and so on, logarithms. And then, if you know what it is, it gives you a huge impact. Question: Is a man aware of this or not? If he doesn't know, well, he's staying in his pros and cons. We've got a clear, uh, other toolkit right now.
Mm-hmm. And that's where you're wondering about asking questions. Uh, LLM-ki may be making a brain slack, but they seem to have a clear impact on how people ask questions. Yeah, I saw people writing, there, from the series, well, I'm a parole, and I put in a "Pretty" or "Related" or something. But there are people who make their questions, think how to ask that you don't have to, uh, then question again or something.
Yeah.
And this skills, I think, are LLM-ki doing this, and it's very useful.
And it's like this skills are all good for people. Actually, it's cooler to ask the person who's been able to ask them, yes, who understands the range. And you have to figure out the details. You've said a good thing in the past that if you're not a programmer and you don't know the code, it's an illusion to think you're a programmer. Well, you're gonna do simple things. So, yeah, well, let's be honest, 15 years ago, building a site was a big--- well, it was pretty hard. You should've turned a lot around. You're like a light text message now. Well, I did, so the websites just turned up a billion more. But serious things, they also got-- they're not easy to do. And we need to figure it out.
And you or you know it, in these aspects, and you go on, or you're gonna be a very simple user, who is the majority of the world in terms of websites. Very simple users, not in many ways, don't put a lot of chips in advance, and so on. Look, I want to tell the case by the end of today. I think he's very interesting. What we did, uh, team-- it was from Stanford, Ilnar, or was it the Wi-Fi that started to see through the walls? Oh, in Carnegie-Mellone. Carnegie. So in Carnegie, researchers noticed an interesting thing. They're taking Wi-Fi routers. Well, this thing you're connecting to the Wi-Fi that gives you Wi-Fi, and, well, the simple language. And, uh, they did nothing that when, uh, Wi-Fi Road-- they connected to the camera and said, when the camera sees, uh, um, man, they kept the data at the same time in the model, and they taught her what she saw. The man who has the radio signal on Wi-Fi Roader. And so they were totally going, going, going. And we're gonna get you a picture right now, look at the picture that's been made. I think it's very interesting that, in fact, new models have taught, you know, to make a system that, by the Wi-Fi signal, has begun to act, in fact, a camera-came. Yeah, you don't see exactly what kind of person it is, but you know exactly what kind of person it is, like, or what it is, and what it does. Well, because there's some interesting-- on the pictures, you'll see that he sees a man there, like, sitting at the table. Um... Very, very cool things. That's real, real, serious use. And by the way, the study is very interesting that, uh, now, a great number of companies complain that they've introduced artificial intelligence and that money hasn't increased. And that's where the study said that-- and I'm totally in agreement with it. Uh, it's, you know, once when--sometimes, people have automated the processes, and when they automate the processes, they said, "This is our process, automartize." I say, "These will not win. To win, you have to understand that you have... some technology instrument that you have, and you need to create a new process and start it in your company. If you automate an extremely old process, you get, I don't know, there plus 50%, and a new process can give you a plus 5,000." So, artificial intelligence now makes it very clear that you must not use the skill-- not the av-- not the arts of the current process, not the company's current activities, but build company, processes. inside the company, there's an artificial intelligence. Then you have the opportunity to get an incredible, cool result. Well, I mean, in advance, knowing your system can actually be. And, uh, well, and these companies are actually now visible. Yeah, well, when this is AI first, when you first know what you're gonna do here, use artificial intelligence, not just, there, you got to hire, hire staff, and, uh, you know, you know, you're gonna be doing it here, using artificial intelligence, not just, you know, there, you got to hire, you know, hiring staff, and You're telling me how to improve the hiring of staff with, uh, artificial intelligence, right?
And when you say, "I'm gonna do all the processes in the first place and start the system, and I'm gonna keep putting people to help this process, not the other way."
The radar is based, uh, Wi-Fi Roader. Uh, there were jokes about the foil caps, yeah, which screen you from any influence outside. There's gonna be some folg-bag jokes and a folgo walls to-- oh, don't! No one could watch you right away. Clients offer a new service. Yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes.
No, that's not real. It's just that if you see it, it's awesome, right? I mean, to date, big cities, absolute houses are completely sunk to everyone. I mean, you, uh, you know, uh, right away, uh, if it works, if it's mass-working, it's a serious move.
Yeah, I didn't see the details, so I don't know if I need to calibrate the equipment to get those pictures. Either that's one specific example they've got--
I guess we need some stitches, some stitches in these systems, right?
Yeah. But it looks like it, you know, uh, old Christopher Nolan movie, uh, Black Knight, about Batman. They were there, connecting to the people's phones in the building, and they found who's on what floor, who's in what room. Well, just like the sound was fired, then it was analyzed and found out where it was. In fact, such a design can work with Wi-Fi Roads. They're everywhere, in every apartment, not one. So the signal is sufficient, the should only be interpreted.
Likait, hold our canal. Sign if you don't sign up yet to miss our graduation. Uh, Wednesday, we may have an early release, and we're gonna have a new edition. Bye, everyone! ToTheMoon Canal: Technological news and sites from the Silicon Valley.