Limitless: An AI Podcast

Ejaaz:
On Friday, the USA banned Anthropic from being used in any military operation

Ejaaz:
after Dario refused to cave to their demands of being used for mass surveillance

Ejaaz:
and autonomous weapons.

Ejaaz:
Then literally hours later, in the early morning of Saturday,

Ejaaz:
Claude was used to perform and execute the most important and biggest military

Ejaaz:
operation since the invasion of Iraq.

Ejaaz:
This has by far been the most insane week in AI.

Ejaaz:
There was drama and deceit between the top two AI labs, OpenAI and Anthropic,

Ejaaz:
and the Pentagon wanted uncensored access for use of Claude and OpenAI's ChatGPT.

Ejaaz:
AI models are not just chatbots at this point, it's a geopolitical weapon being used for warfare.

Josh:
It's amazing how the biggest news on earth is now just AI news.

Josh:
Like not a single large thing happens that doesn't have AI integral to the decision-making process.

Josh:
And this was no difference. And I think the question that it left everyone at

Josh:
the end of this is like, who really controls AI.

Josh:
Because for the first time, what we're seeing is these private companies have

Josh:
so much leverage, so much power, that they're starting to conflict with the

Josh:
actual elected officials and government.

Josh:
And I think that's kind of at the core of this discussion. But if you missed

Josh:
anything over the last 72 hours. Don't worry, we're going to get you caught

Josh:
up, starting with what happened early last week that sparked this debate.

Josh:
Because at this time, we didn't know that there was any war plans happening.

Josh:
No one had any idea that there were any attacks planned. It was just an AI story.

Josh:
So maybe we'll start with that AI story.

Ejaaz:
That AI story specifically was the news that revealed that the Pentagon,

Ejaaz:
which is part of the US Department of War, had been using Claude to orchestrate

Ejaaz:
and execute their capture of the president or former president of Venezuela, Maduro.

Ejaaz:
And that shocked everyone because up until that point, people were just kind

Ejaaz:
of prompting it to vibe code stuff and to answer their silly questions about,

Ejaaz:
you know, what they wanted to cook tonight.

Ejaaz:
So to see this real life example of an AI being used, not just as a tool outside of a chatbot,

Ejaaz:
but for something so important as military warfare was a big shock and surprise,

Ejaaz:
which then sparked a debate around what the model wanted to be used for.

Ejaaz:
Now, the head of the Pentagon, Pete Hegseth issued an ultimatum shortly after,

Ejaaz:
which raised suspicions around what the conversations were like between the U.S.

Ejaaz:
Department of War and the owners of Claude Anthropic.

Ejaaz:
And it was all but good. The issue that they were facing was Anthropic had been

Ejaaz:
asked to give them an uncensored version of Claude, which could be used for

Ejaaz:
two things, mass surveillance,

Ejaaz:
which included domestic mass surveillance of people within the U.S.,

Ejaaz:
which was a breach of the Fourth Amendment, and also for use within autonomous

Ejaaz:
weapons, meaning that there was no humans involved and an heir would control

Ejaaz:
how weapons were executed and fired.

Ejaaz:
Dario's comments against that was simply, he did not feel comfortable giving

Ejaaz:
court access. He didn't think it was good enough.

Ejaaz:
And also that it was a direct breach of law.

Ejaaz:
So Pete Hegseth issued them an ultimatum at a deadline a few days later on the

Ejaaz:
Friday saying, you either agree to our demands or there are consequences.

Josh:
Yeah, and it's really interesting to hear...

Josh:
How close they were, but seemingly unable to reach a deal. It seemed like they

Josh:
had everything down to just, what, two of these red lines, right?

Josh:
And a lot of that conversation happened around whether they are allowed, whether the U.S.

Josh:
Government and the Department of War is able to use these models without the

Josh:
express written consent and approval of Anthropic when it comes to,

Josh:
I guess, making kinetic decisions, things that actually result in harm that's being caused.

Josh:
And there's this interesting interview that I saw, or just like kind of report

Josh:
that said that when asked about, what was it, the nuclear weapon?

Josh:
Like if someone shot a nuclear weapon at the United States, does the Department

Josh:
of War have... Oh, here it is. Yeah, this is perfect.

Josh:
Does the Department of War have the opportunity and have the right to use anthropic

Josh:
and clawed models to determine like what to do about that, to help shoot it down?

Josh:
And then the response from Dario was basically like...

Josh:
Call us first, and then we'll talk through it and we'll let you know.

Josh:
And I can understand why Dario wants that to be the outcome.

Josh:
And I can understand why the Department of War is absolutely furious because

Josh:
they're like, you are not the elected official.

Josh:
You are not the military. You don't have the right to sign off on our nuclear plans.

Josh:
But for Dario, he very much feels like he created this incredibly strong tool.

Josh:
And what is Anthropic known for at the core of its DNA?

Josh:
Well, it's safety, it's AI alignment. And I'm sure they want to feel like they

Josh:
have a heavy hand so it doesn't get out of hand.

Josh:
And I think that's ultimately where this conflict came from is Anthropic wanting

Josh:
to abide by their safety principles.

Josh:
But the Department of War and the government and the military really being like,

Josh:
OK, yeah, but we're the military.

Josh:
And like if someone's attacking us, we need to use all the tools at our disposal

Josh:
and we can't be waiting for you to answer the phone to tell us if it's OK or not.

Ejaaz:
Yeah, it's the crux of the issue comes down to the contractual language.

Ejaaz:
The Pentagon was willing to say, hey, yeah, you can keep us

Ejaaz:
within all means of legal law and

Ejaaz:
Dario's response was simply the legal law isn't

Ejaaz:
really prepped and covered for the future of AI like right now you could use

Ejaaz:
our model legally to get access to a bunch of people's data and you can just

Ejaaz:
get away with that and Dario his own fundamental ethics behind building Anthropic

Ejaaz:
wasn't comfortable with that but the US Department of War's response was simply

Ejaaz:
Hey, this is a matter of national security and we can't have a private company,

Ejaaz:
a private unelected official dictate how we perform national defense,

Ejaaz:
which you can see fair takes on either side at this point.

Ejaaz:
And it's extremely complicated and nuanced.

Ejaaz:
And in Dario's exact response, there's this very poignant line that he says,

Ejaaz:
we cannot in good conscience accede to their request.

Ejaaz:
This was in response to Pete's ultimatum on that Friday, which led to just only

Ejaaz:
like a crazy public, I guess, debate or fight between these guys.

Ejaaz:
You've got Pete publicly saying, Anthropic just delivered a masterclass in arrogance

Ejaaz:
and betrayal, as well as a textbook case of how not to do business with the

Ejaaz:
United States government or the Pentagon.

Ejaaz:
And a bunch of responses were released after that showing that Dario had not

Ejaaz:
been answering their phone calls or was just being inflexible.

Ejaaz:
And then Dario on his side was saying, we need these contractual language involved

Ejaaz:
because otherwise this AI could be used for nefarious purposes.

Ejaaz:
So it was just so, so much drama.

Josh:
In addition to the Secretary of War having some choice words for Anthropic,

Josh:
Donald Trump chimed in with a rather angry and loud all caps message saying,

Josh:
the United States of America will never allow a radical left woke company to

Josh:
dictate how our great military fights and wins wars, among other things.

Josh:
And the public backlash, the public sentiment around Anthropic and Trump kind

Josh:
of shifted at this moment to being supportive of Anthropic.

Josh:
They were glad that it was standing on its morals and its values. and as

Josh:
a result the app store showed that claude actually

Josh:
became number one in the world and a few

Josh:
weeks ago it was only 131 and this part

Josh:
of the show is brought to you by our sponsor and a supporter

Josh:
of the show polymarket and polymarket is a great way to determine things

Josh:
like who is going to be the number one app in the app store on march 6th and

Josh:
what's interesting here is there's a 62 chance that the current leader actually

Josh:
changes hands it's showing that chat gpt is going to be the new king on the

Josh:
block when in reality there's another market that shows Anthropic is actually

Josh:
most likely to have the best model by the end of March which is you know loosely

Josh:
the same exact time and I love how they've used this to kind of

Josh:
gauge what's the best because now we kind of have an idea that there isn't going

Josh:
to be gpt 6 isn't coming out this month but we know for a fact that anthropic

Josh:
has the winner with opus 4.6.

Ejaaz:
I was just looking and wondering why chat gpt might be taking the lead here

Ejaaz:
despite there being so much positive approval for claude and that might have

Ejaaz:
something to do with our friend sam ulman at open ai who swooped in at the last

Ejaaz:
minute after all the drama between dario and the u.s department of war with his own proposition,

Ejaaz:
basically saying, hey, you can use ChatGPT instead, and we'll agree to your terms.

Ejaaz:
As long as you want to keep things within lawful use, we're going to draft up

Ejaaz:
our own safety stack and red lines. What do you think about this?

Ejaaz:
And the agreement was pretty extensive. They put out an open statement.

Ejaaz:
Now, there's a lot of minutiae in details, but the way I see it,

Ejaaz:
or my favorite highlights from this is they pretty much agreed to the simple

Ejaaz:
terms, but there was some slight changes in the form of they agreed that open

Ejaaz:
AI won't be used for mass domestic surveillance,

Ejaaz:
no use of open AI technology to direct autonomous weapon systems.

Ejaaz:
So these are the two things that Dario wanted, but it's all under lawful use,

Ejaaz:
which is the issue that Dario had.

Ejaaz:
And then there's a third thing, which is no use of open AI technology for high

Ejaaz:
stakes automated decisions, aka they should always be a human in the loop and

Ejaaz:
conceivably held accountable for any court of law going forward this

Josh:
Is crazy i this is the part of the story in which i just kind of lost my mind because.

Josh:
It didn't make any sense. It was like, okay, the Pentagon is saying no to it.

Josh:
Anthropic is saying no to the Pentagon.

Josh:
Clearly, they can't figure it out. Sam Altman was on CNBC earlier in the day supporting Anthropic.

Josh:
And then that evening, they signed the deal with the Department of War that

Josh:
is supposedly the same exact terms because they didn't want to redline.

Josh:
And this was like, oh my God, what do you mean? Was Sam just manipulating the

Josh:
world that he just slide in and actually steal the deal from Anthropic? And in a way he did.

Josh:
It appeared as if the Department for was trying to call Dario at the 501 deadline.

Josh:
He didn't answer the phone. They gave him a couple minutes. They picked up the

Josh:
phone, called Sam, and now there's a deal.

Josh:
And to your point, it seems like there is this key difference.

Josh:
And while a lot of the morals that they were standing on are the same,

Josh:
the key difference is basically in the responsibility and the lawfulness.

Josh:
Like one is kind of proactive, one is retroactive, where Anthropic wanted the

Josh:
ability to sign off on things.

Josh:
Whereas OpenAI is saying, well, you are the government, you are the military,

Josh:
you can make these decisions so long as they are lawful and so long as someone

Josh:
is responsible for like kind of claiming responsibility for these decisions.

Josh:
And we kind of know how that works, where, I mean, perhaps that is not as foolproof as Anthropix plan.

Josh:
It resulted in them getting a, what was it, $200 million deal and a lot of publicity

Josh:
with the government. So it was a big win for OpenAI.

Josh:
And the point of the story where I was like, what is going on here? This is chaos.

Josh:
And mind you, this is just hours before the actual first strikes were about

Josh:
to start. So there was a lot of things happening in anticipation of this mission.

Ejaaz:
Yeah. All of this happened within, like, I can't emphasize this enough.

Ejaaz:
It happened within like four to six hours. All of this happened.

Josh:
I was sitting on X scrolling and I was like, I was sharing something and I was

Josh:
like, oh my God, wait, like a new thing happened. Then a new thing happened. Yeah.

Josh:
Friday night was not a night to go out because the internet was at its peak.

Ejaaz:
The truth was being revealed. I think X had their highest amount of engagement

Ejaaz:
over the weekend. Saturday and Sunday broke both new records. It's a great

Josh:
Time to monitor the situation.

Ejaaz:
Insane. But back to the Sam agreement, they agreed to all lawful use.

Ejaaz:
And the explicit difference there is that they'll settle all kind of grievances

Ejaaz:
in a court of law. So retroactive, as you just said, which is the thing that

Ejaaz:
Dario was just completely against.

Ejaaz:
But there's also some other important safety lines that they put in that I actually

Ejaaz:
think are useful towards addressing this.

Ejaaz:
So one, the models or chat GPT can only be deployed through the cloud.

Ejaaz:
And the reason why this is a better implementation versus letting the government

Ejaaz:
run it locally is that you can monitor and you can track what they're doing

Ejaaz:
to make sure that they're not doing anything nefarious.

Ejaaz:
Number two, OpenAI has a specific vetted team of American software engineers

Ejaaz:
that will always is work on these models and we'll update them.

Ejaaz:
And the best part is the government is hands off on this entire approach.

Ejaaz:
And then the third important point is Dario's agreement

Ejaaz:
His problem was around usage policies. So he basically wanted to dictate when

Ejaaz:
the Pentagon could or could not perform, let's say, a military strike.

Ejaaz:
Whereas in OpenAI's deal, they use usage policies and a software stack that

Ejaaz:
kind of helps them navigate through all of these different legal issues.

Ejaaz:
So it's just a much more detailed and nuanced plan.

Ejaaz:
A lot of people were kind of like against OpenAI for this, but this might be a hot take.

Ejaaz:
I actually think it's a very proactive way to kind of deal with this situation

Ejaaz:
for what we have right now. I think legislation will change eventually going

Ejaaz:
forward. I don't think it's perfect.

Ejaaz:
I don't think it's ready for AI-enabled warfare, but I think it's a good step

Ejaaz:
in the right direction ultimately.

Ejaaz:
And there was this really awesome comment from OpenAI's head of national security,

Ejaaz:
Katrina, who kind of explains these nuances and saying that the safety stack

Ejaaz:
and usage policies that we've set up here is going to be a more reliable one.

Ejaaz:
They called out Anthropic basically

Ejaaz:
saying that it wasn't well thought out and ours is way, way better.

Ejaaz:
The other final cool part about this agreement is that OpenAI explicitly states

Ejaaz:
to the Pentagon that they should offer these terms to every single AI model

Ejaaz:
lab. So they're not trying to secure an exclusive deal.

Ejaaz:
This could be for anyone and OpenAI is just the first vendor.

Josh:
Can we take a moment to just appreciate the fact that OpenAI,

Josh:
the AI company, does have a head of national security partnership?

Josh:
Like, I think this gets to the core of the message of this episode is,

Josh:
and the message of this entire narrative this weekend is who is really in control of this?

Josh:
And not like, when I say in control, in control of everything,

Josh:
Who has the leverage to make the decisions at the end of the day?

Josh:
And it seems like they're, I mean, prior to OpenAI signing this deal,

Josh:
it seemed like they were forming this kind of force against the government, right?

Josh:
This oppositional force where Anthropic was like, we need this to be safe.

Josh:
OpenAI and Sam Allman went on TV and agreed. Google and a lot of employees from

Josh:
that company and DeepMind were kind of on board.

Josh:
They were saying, we're going to draw these hard lines too. We're not working with you.

Josh:
And it created this interesting power dynamic where they actually did have enough

Josh:
leverage to inflict damage on, I guess, matters of national security on the

Josh:
military and limit their ability to use these prime tools.

Josh:
And it gets into this interesting debate of who should be responsible for these

Josh:
decisions. I mean, a lot of people will say the military, they've been elected.

Josh:
They are the officials. They understand they're held responsible for keeping

Josh:
us safe and protected, and they deserve the best tools.

Josh:
And the OpenAI and the Anthropics and the AI companies, they'll say,

Josh:
but you don't understand how these tools work. You don't know how capable they

Josh:
are. You don't understand the nuances within them.

Josh:
And we have spent our whole life trying to design these safely.

Josh:
Therefore, you should trust us to make this decision.

Josh:
And I think it's step one and it's like event number one in a probably longstanding

Josh:
kind of argument that could happen,

Josh:
which is who actually holds the leverage over who and is there a willingness

Josh:
to work together or is this going to be this divisive thing where there's a

Josh:
band of private companies and there's a band of public entities and they are

Josh:
clashing because they have the same goals, but they are at odds with how they get accomplished.

Josh:
And I think this was just an interesting moment of time to kind of reflect on

Josh:
that part in particular.

Ejaaz:
Well, we didn't even mention the craziest part about all of this,

Ejaaz:
which actually answers your question, which is no one knows.

Ejaaz:
For the actual military operation, Epic Fury that was performed over the weekend,

Ejaaz:
it was enabled by Claude after being blacklisted and after being banned completely.

Josh:
That's so ironic, huh?

Ejaaz:
Yeah, it's ironic. So, you know, you had the Pentagon creating this entire fast

Ejaaz:
diary saying, okay, cool, we'll give up means like you can transition to use another model.

Ejaaz:
They signed a new deal, $200 million deal with OpenAI.

Ejaaz:
And then they ended up using the model, which they explicitly banned by the president himself.

Ejaaz:
So it goes to show that there's a lot of nuance with this. I think Claude had

Ejaaz:
been used for well over six months within the Pentagon right now.

Ejaaz:
So it's trained on all of its data. It's being used by all the employees.

Ejaaz:
It's something that they have here. And technically, they do have another six

Ejaaz:
months to transition to another model. So it makes sense that they were still using Claude.

Ejaaz:
And it's obvious that Claude is the current and preferred choice right now,

Ejaaz:
and that'll probably change over the next couple of months. But yeah, it's a very...

Ejaaz:
Unsubstantiated or undefined vector moving forwards.

Ejaaz:
I think US has a lot of angles towards this, meaning they want to upgrade their

Ejaaz:
military offense, but also they're cautious and curious of the rising and looming

Ejaaz:
threat from China, potentially taking over Taiwan and a bunch of other things.

Ejaaz:
So they just want to get ahead of these things.

Ejaaz:
And if they could leverage top American AI model labs to work with them,

Ejaaz:
specifically work with them, that'll be the advantage that they want.

Josh:
Yeah. And it seemed like it was used in terms of like the actual implementation

Josh:
for three things it was for intelligence assessment for

Josh:
target identification and for simulating battle scenarios so

Josh:
the ai isn't directly guiding missiles it's

Josh:
not doing anything kinetic it is mostly just for informational purposes but

Josh:
yes and i think that's where a lot of this discourse comes from now sam had

Josh:
a really interesting ama where he was kind of answering questions too right

Josh:
yep about kind of the public sentiment addressing them doing it live in real

Josh:
time, answering people's questions the night of.

Ejaaz:
He goes, I'd like to answer questions about our work with the Department of

Ejaaz:
War and our thinking over the past few days. Please ask me anything.

Ejaaz:
And his three takeaways were super interesting. Number one, he was surprised at how much

Ejaaz:
50-50 debate there was between whether warfare in America or national security

Ejaaz:
should be the judgment of elected officials or unelected private companies.

Ejaaz:
It seemed like a lot of people were like, yeah, Anthropic maybe should have

Ejaaz:
some more involvement here in setting the guidelines up to what we use AI within warfare.

Ejaaz:
And then a bunch of other people saying, no, we elected officials specifically

Ejaaz:
for this. They should be the ones doing this.

Ejaaz:
The second biggest takeaway is there's a question around whether like companies

Ejaaz:
like OpenAI eventually become nationalized by the government because that technology

Ejaaz:
is so important and crucial towards things like defense and the economy.

Ejaaz:
And he goes on to say, this was really revealing. He says, I've thought about

Ejaaz:
nationalization, of course, and for a long time, it seems like it might be better

Ejaaz:
that building AGI was a government project,

Ejaaz:
which kind of shocked me there because I understand the existential crisis here,

Ejaaz:
but you know, that was super cool.

Ejaaz:
And then the third thing that he states is people take their safety for granted,

Ejaaz:
basically saying that people don't really realize the lengths and extents that

Ejaaz:
the Department of War and Defense need to go to to protect them.

Ejaaz:
And this is just a misunderstanding through public discussion and nuance.

Josh:
Yeah, the government backed project is super interesting because in the past,

Josh:
when we have done things like this, the Manhattan Project,

Josh:
companies like Lockheed Martin, who had a lot of government support,

Josh:
they've worked very well because it allows you to kind of move,

Josh:
converge resources and talent into a single motive and you get the legislative

Josh:
protection to build as fast as possible.

Josh:
The issue now is there's just this lack of efficiency and capability within

Josh:
those same entities that did this in the past.

Josh:
And the market forces will not allow it. With the amount of capital needed to

Josh:
build these gigantic AI data centers, you can't extract that from taxes. You can't,

Josh:
validate it by printing more dollars. You actually just have to make revenue

Josh:
and do this in private markets.

Josh:
And I think that's the slightly uncomfortable truth is that it's just too expensive

Josh:
and too challenging to do this in any other way.

Josh:
So there has to be this divide between private and public sectors because it's

Josh:
the only way that you can kind of garner resources this effectively to actually

Josh:
deploy them at the scale required to build AGI in the first place.

Ejaaz:
Yeah. And there was this other take, which I thought was super interesting.

Ejaaz:
Rune asked, are you worried at all about the potential for things to go really

Ejaaz:
south during a possible dispute over what's legal or not later,

Ejaaz:
or be deemed a supply chain risk?

Ejaaz:
Sam Olman responds, yes, I am. And if we have to take on that fight, we will.

Ejaaz:
But it clearly exposes us to some risk. I'm still very hopeful this is going to get resolved.

Ejaaz:
And part of why we wanted to act fast was to help increase the chances of that.

Ejaaz:
So again, reemphasizing the point we made earlier, he's taking the approach of take action now,

Ejaaz:
and we'll figure it out later, as long as there are certain stipulations from

Ejaaz:
the government saying they'll do it within lawful use and that there will be a human in the loop,

Ejaaz:
that you won't have AIs autonomously firing weapons at random people because

Ejaaz:
the models just aren't good there. But it's relatively uncertain.

Ejaaz:
This land is very uncharted. We don't know where this is going to end up.

Ejaaz:
And to be honest, it's going to be a very significant debate probably for the next couple of years.

Ejaaz:
I don't think this is going to be a one-off event. It is certainly the craziest

Ejaaz:
48 hours that we've had in 2026 so far, but it is by no means at its end yet.

Josh:
Yeah, it's been absolutely insane. And now you are mostly caught up on everything

Josh:
that happened this weekend.

Josh:
It was nuts. And I mean, it's to your point, Ijez, I think it's not a conversation

Josh:
that's going to end here.

Josh:
I mean, just in the last, what, in the two months we've went to Venezuela and

Josh:
now Iran, and there's clearly more intent to apply this to the real world.

Josh:
And as these models get more capable, as they're able to actually do more things,

Josh:
these debates are just going to keep heating up.

Josh:
But this one was crazy. I mean, I haven't been glued to my phone like this in a long time.

Josh:
And the plot twist, like this is better than any sort of drama TV show,

Josh:
right? We watched a deal fall apart.

Josh:
The same person who was backing that deal swooped in and stole it.

Josh:
And then within hours, the blacklisted AI was used to actually attack another

Josh:
country, even though a new deal had signed because they still have six months left of contract.

Josh:
And now Dario and the Anthropic team are upset and the public kind of supported

Josh:
them. So it went to number one on the app store. And it's just like.

Ejaaz:
I mean, can we... There's so much. Can we appreciate how quickly all of this

Ejaaz:
happened as well? Like, man, yeah.

Josh:
Shout out to X for this because geez, like the information was flowing.

Ejaaz:
The information was flowing and it came in in real time. Like I felt the hours.

Ejaaz:
Like I woke up, I think it was Saturday morning. I went to bed,

Ejaaz:
like maybe a normal or lame person.

Ejaaz:
And I woke up and I saw, I think a tweet from maybe you, Josh,

Ejaaz:
that was like giving me the breakdown of everything that was going on.

Ejaaz:
And I was like, how did I miss this? This is like an hour after I went to bed.

Josh:
The news is breaking every hour. It was crazy.

Ejaaz:
It was absolutely insane. And it just goes to show that the speed at which AI is accelerating,

Ejaaz:
not just chatbots, not just video creation, but major important things like

Ejaaz:
national defense, security, should not be understated and should be a focus

Ejaaz:
of topic for probably a lot of other sectors going forwards.

Ejaaz:
I don't know if we're at this point where we want to get into homework for the

Ejaaz:
listeners here, but I really want to hear from you.

Ejaaz:
What are your thoughts are on this entire debate? Do you think the Pentagon was in the right?

Ejaaz:
Do you think Dario was in the right? Do you think OpenAI and Sam actually struck the right resolution?

Ejaaz:
Or do you think it's all rubbish and that we need to completely dismantle everything

Ejaaz:
and rebuild from the grounds up?

Ejaaz:
Let us know your thoughts in the comments or even like DMs to us.

Ejaaz:
Like, I really want to hear your feedback.

Josh:
Yeah. And if you want to follow the conversation, we've been monitoring the

Josh:
situation. We've been publishing the situation.

Josh:
Follow both of us on Twitter or on X. They're both linked in the description below.

Josh:
We've been on it, I think between us, we've gotten like 20, 30,

Josh:
40 million impressions this weekend. It's been crazy.

Josh:
So that is always where you can see the news first before we get on camera,

Josh:
but we will try to keep you updated.

Josh:
If you've watched this, congratulations, you're now up to date for now.

Josh:
We'll see where things go throughout the rest of this week, but we have a lot more planned.

Josh:
There's a lot of exciting topics to cover and we'll be here with you to cover

Josh:
it all. So thank you as always for watching. I very much appreciate it.

Josh:
Thank you for sharing with your friends, which goes a long way for subscribing

Josh:
to our sub stack, which has been doing very, very well.

Josh:
There's like 60,000, 70,000 people that read every single one.

Josh:
So if you want to get in on the know, click the links down in the description,

Josh:
share it with your friends.

Josh:
And as always, thank you so much for watching. We will see you guys in the next one.