Keen On

“It’s happening. The question is whether it’s a dream or a nightmare. This week, OpenAI introduced Pulse, an AI assistant that knows what we want to do and think before we do. That Was The Week publisher Keith Teare welcomes Pulse as a “habit” that will “shape your day.” Unlike the techno-teleological Keith, however, I’m less enamored by Pulse. Do we really want a proactive AI assistant that not only controls what Keith calls the “front door” but every other door (and window) in our lives? Keith describes this as the “consumer install moment” - Sam Altman’s $10 trillion bet on ‘Abundant Intelligence.’ But what, exactly, is so abundant about this personalized machine intelligence that installs itself into our lives? Having a smart assistant determine our daily calendar might actually make us dumber. Such an “agentic” future is certainly no friend of human agency. Yeah, it’s happening. The end of the beginning or the beginning of the end?* The “Front Door” Battle is On: OpenAI’s Pulse represents a strategic shi

“What Trump is doing is not popular”. For the This Old Democracy podcaster and veteran Democratic activist Micah Sifry, that’s the good news of Trump’s sub-40% approval rate. The bad news, Sifry warns, is that the Dems remained a weak, divided party struggling to counter the MAGA-controlled Republicans. Learning from the campus success of Charlie Kirk, he says, the Democrats need to rediscover what once made them a party of the vibrant counterculture. And that certainly isn’t going to happen if grey functionaries like Schumer and Jeffries retain control of an increasingly gerontocratic party. He favors economic populism over identity politics, arguing that progressives made a “gigantic mistake” by favoring the woke politics of the university over working-class concerns. And so the New York based Sifry is cautiously optimistic about Zohran Mamdani whose primary victory, he is convinced, demonstrated that young voters will turn out for dynamic candidates who offer both generational change and credible ways to

Jacob Ward warned us. Back in January 2022, the Oakland-based tech journalist published The Loop, a warning about how AI is creating a world without choices. He even came on this show to warn about AI’s threat to humanity. Three years later, we’ve all caught up with Ward. So where is he now on AI? Moderately vindicated but more pessimistic. His original thesis has proven disturbingly accurate - we’re outsourcing decisions to AI at an accelerating pace. But he admits his book’s weakest section was “how to fight back,” and he still lacks concrete solutions. His fear has evolved: less worried about robot overlords, he is now more concerned about an “Idiocracy” of AI human serfs. It’s a dystopian scenario where humans become so stupid that they won’t even be able to appreciate Gore Vidal’s quip that “I told you so” are the four most beautiful words in the English language. I couldn’t resist asking Anthropic’s Claude about Ward’s conclusions (not, of course, that I rely on it for anything). “Anecdotal” is how it c

So where exactly is Trump’s America? According to the Brookings fellow Jonathan Rauch, the world’s largest economic, military and cultural power is “half way to Hungary” - the small, landlocked Central European country run by an equally small and landlocked man called Viktor Orban. For Rauch, this suggests that America is on its way to becoming the sort of pathetically petty patrimonial state that the wannabe dictator Orban is trying to establish in Hungary. But the idea of the world’s dominant superpower being “halfway to Budapest” sounds more like the title of a characteristically absurd central European novel. It suggests that Trump’s America is, in fact, currently lost in the mid-Atlantic. It’s nowhere. And if making America great again really does require borrowing anything from a country as small and landlocked as Hungary, then I fear for the historical significance of both Trump and his MAGA movement. Surely they could come up with a more original playbook than that?1. America is Following the “Hungari

Donald Trump made his own controversial case against the United Nations at the UN today, lecturing world leaders that “the UN is supposed to stop invasions, not create them and not finance them.” But he was beaten to this anti-UN manifesto by the New York City based journalist Seth Barron, who wrote “The End of the UN ” cover story for Tablet magazine this month. While Barron’s historically grounded critique is more academically rigorous than Trump’s, it essentially makes the same realpolitik argument: that there’s an irreconcilable contradiction between American interests and multilateral governance. Barron blithely suggests it’s time for the United States to withdraw from the UN entirely. But as I pressed him, without success, in our conversation, what then would replace international institutions when it comes to resolving seemingly intractable conflicts in Ukraine, Gaza, and beyond? 1. The UN Is Already Dead in PracticeBarron argues the UN has lost all meaningful influence and relevance. He compares it to

As the prize-winning author of Dreamland and The Least of Us, Sam Quinones is one of the most acclaimed authorities on America’s deadly drug epidemics. So it might seem a little surprising that his follow-up to these two best-sellers is a book in praise of the bass horn, a relatively unglamorous musical instrument that he neither plays nor learned in marching band. But it all makes perfect sense. In The Perfect Tuba, Quinones resurrects the American Dream in the form of the bass horn (tuba) which he describes as the “tuba civil rights movement”. It’s the story of how to forge fulfillment from the bass horn, high school band and hard work. This isn’t just Quinones’ journey. It’s a map of how America can get from fentanyl to fulfillment. 1. You Don't Find Your Passion—You Forge It Through Hard Work Quinones discovered that fulfillment doesn't come from finding something you're naturally drawn to, but from working so hard at something that you become good enough to love doing it. This creates a cycle where comp

I suspect both left and right have the Kimmel-Kirk story wrong. Rather than being about free speech versus hate speech, it’s actually the story of the end of the television era and the rise of open internet platforms like YouTube and Substack. So when Keith Teare asks who is for free speech in his latest That Was The Week newsletter, what he’s really saying is that free speech has never been freer. Anyone can say anything they want, he says. The only real question is whether anyone is actually listening. So the Kimmel-Kirk story is really about the shift in broadcast business models and the future of paid content. Getting fired from ABC might be the best thing that ever happened to a generic tv comic like Jimmy Kimmel. What he now needs to figure out is how to monetize his instant global fame. 1. The Cancellation Paradox Getting "canceled" from traditional media might now be a career accelerator rather than a death sentence. Kimmel has instant global recognition - the hardest thing to achieve in the creator e

Is there anyone who will defend Kamala Harris’ latest debacle, her 107 Days memoir that has irritated prominent Democrats like Josh Shapiro, Tim Walz and Pete Buttigieg? Certainly not the progressive writer David Masciotra, who has appeared on this show several times in the past to defend the former Vice President. According to Masciotra, the person most damaged by the ridiculous narcissism in 107 Days is Harris herself, who appears utterly out of touch with reality. "I was wrong, you were right," Masciotra admitted to me (never a fan of Harris), describing the memoir as a "literary political travesty" that reveals Harris as a "callous, petty, self-involved careerist." Even more damning, Masciotra argues, the book's timing couldn't be worse: while Trump dismantles democracy, Harris chooses to settle scores with the very Democrats who helped her in the last election, effectively torching her political future.1. Progressive Defender Completely Reverses Position on Harris David Masciotra, who previously defended

Gutted by AI larceny and glutted by an avalanche of shows, the podcast economy is in deep crisis. So says Marshall Poe, founder of The New Books Network, a publisher of almost 30,000 independent podcasts. Things really are that bleak, Poe insists. Drawing parallels between today's AI content appropriation and Napster's music piracy in the late Nineties, he argues we've entered an era where "the theft of IP is an accepted business model." AI companies appear to scrape podcast content without permission or payment, then repackage it as their own product. Meanwhile, the market drowns in a vast ocean of shows, with AI-generated podcasts now flooding platforms at unprecedented scale—one company claims profitability with just 20 listeners per episode while producing 3,000 episodes weekly. For independent creators lacking deep pockets or legal teams, podcast economics have become impossible. "The cost of that theft has gone to zero," Poe explains, describing an environment where authentic human voices struggle to su

It’s the most curious paradox of today’s digital revolution. While the computers, the internet, smartphones and AI all appear magical, they haven’t actually translated into equally magical economic progress. That, at least, is the counter-intuitive argument of the Oxford economist Carl Benedikt Frey whose new book, How Progress Ends, suggests that the digital revolution isn’t resulting in an equivalent revolution of productivity. History is repeating itself in an equally paradoxical way, Frey warns. We may, indeed, be repeating the productivity stagnation of the 1970s, in spite of our technological marvels. Unlike the 19th-century industrial revolution that radically transformed how we work, today's digital tools—however impressive—are primarily automating existing processes rather than creating fundamentally new types of economic activity that drive broad-based growth. And AI, by making existing work easier rather than creating new industries, will only compound this paradox. It might be the fate of not just

Should being a billionaire be illegal? Or, at least, actively discouraged? That’s the argument at the heart of Ingrid Robeyns’ intriguing case against extreme wealth, Limitarianism. It’s an argument particularly pertinent in a week when Tesla is offering to make Elon Musk a trillionaire if he can reach certain sales targets. For Robeyns, an ethicist at the University of Utrecht in the Netherlands, her arguments against extreme wealth are both moral and utilitarian. On the one hand, she argues that nobody truly "deserves" billions because economic success depends heavily on factors beyond individual control - genetic lottery, family circumstances, educational opportunities, and market timing. On the other hand, she contends that extreme wealth concentration actively harms society by undermining democracy, encouraging unsustainable consumption patterns, and creating inefficient resource allocation. While acknowledging that such reforms may take decades to implement, Robeyns floats the idea of wealth caps around

If Donald Trump is a broken clock only right twice daily, then one of those truths might be US policy toward Greenland. According to the Australian based geo-strategist Elizabeth Buchanan, Trump is correct to be preoccupied with American influence over, and perhaps even ownership of Greenland. In her new book, So You Want To Own Greenland, Buchanan argues that the 57,000-person continental super-sized island is becoming central to 21st Century geopolitics. From the Vikings to the (yes) colonizing Danes, she argues, Greenland has always been an important piece of the North Atlantic strategic jigsaw. Today, however, with the melting polar ice cap and its vast mineral resources, Greenland is becoming essential - not just to native Greenlanders, the United States, Denmark and Canada, but also to Russia, China and even India. 1. America's Greenland Interest Predates Trump by 160 Years US interest in Greenland dates back to 1867 and the Seward Purchase ("Seward's Folly"). Trump's fixation isn't erratic - it reflect

So are millennials really the unluckiest generation? Yes and no. At least according to their unofficial biographer, Charlie Wells, the energetic London based Bloomberg reporter and author of What Happened to Millennials. In a way, Wells is a defender of his much-maligned and misunderstood generation. But his new book is also a kind of confessional of five millennials who, in his view, represent the spirit of those who came of age at the turn of the century. Wells’ own soulful mix of forthrightness and insecurity offers a glimpse into the millennial heart. Could it really be the ubiquitous electronic screen that is both the cause and effect of his generation's over-publicized struggles with anxiety? Or are millennials simply the first cohort to have their universal coming-of-age confessions broadcast live for all to see?1. Generational narratives are often outdated Wells argues that millennials are actually 31% wealthier than boomers were at the same age, but the "unlucky generation" story persists. This sugg

So why do we humans have such big brains? According to the NYU neuroscientist Nikolay Kukushkin, it’s because of language. In wanting to talk to one another, Kukushkin argues in his new book, One Hand Clapping, we need to be able to think more coherently than other species. Thus our uniquely big brains. Language itself emerged from our increasingly social lifestyle, Kukushkin explains, which developed after our mammalian ancestors spent 150 million years hiding from dinosaurs in what he calls the "nocturnal bottleneck." And what good have our big brains done us? That, according to Kukushkin, is a trickier question. It’s certainly made us more social, even collective, in our politics and culture. But it also seems to have divided us from one another, fostering as much misery and violence as harmony. Indeed, Kukushkin suggests that we've always been "grumpy"—even back when we lived in caves. The difference now is that we have the internet to advertise our grumpiness. More seriously, though, we're the first spec

How should we punish criminals? In Impermissible Punishments, the Arthur Liman Professor of Law at Yale Law School, Judith Resnik, provides a historical narrative of punishment in European and American prisons. Tracing the evolution from Jeremy Bentham's utilitarian Panopticon through post-World War II human rights frameworks, Resnik argues that punishment systems developed as a transatlantic rather than uniquely American project. Her analysis reveals how prisoners themselves, not reformers, first articulated the concept of retained rights during detention. Resnik’s new book chronicles a crucial divergence after the 1980s, when European systems maintained stronger human rights commitments while American prisons retreated from recognizing prisoners as rights-bearing individuals, thereby making prison a problem for its democracy. 1. Prison systems developed as a transatlantic project, not American innovation Punishment theories and practices emerged from shared Enlightenment thinking across Europe and America i

In a week dominated by the tragic assassination of Charlie Kirk, Cynthia Miller-Idriss’ insights as the founding director of American University’s Polarization and Extremism Research and Innovation Lab (PERIL) are particularly valuable. Her new book about what she identifies as “the new misogyny and the rise of violent extremism” is entitled Man Up. But its message might be summarized as Man Down in its attempt to temper the violent fringes of what she calls the manosphere. Miller-Idriss, one of America’s leading researchers on violent extremism, argues that misogyny is the cause of today’s troubling rise of political assassinations and mass shootings. Her research across seven countries reveals that hostile sexism ranks among the top three predictors of support for political violence. She traces a disturbing pipeline from seemingly innocuous self-help searches by lonely young men to radicalization by influencers who blend fitness advice with violent scapegoating of women and minorities. Miller-Idriss docume

Today’s $3 trillion investment in AI is not only rational and beyond inevitable - it’s “predestined”. At least according to That Was The Week newletter publisher and techno-determinist Keith Teare. Exuberance is not only required, Keith argues, but absolutely essential in today’s AI mad gold rush. And he’s particularly critical of all skeptics - from traditional tech naysayers (like myself) to mainstream publications like The Economist - which are all a touch questioning of today’s unprecedented boom. What if the $3 trillion AI investment tsunami goes wrong? The Economist asks. But for Keith, it can’t possibly go wrong. The investment has already been made, he argues, and the resultant technology will inevitably benefit humanity. He envisions a world where AI adds $20 trillion to global GDP by 2035, where a kid in rural Africa with an Android phone can access the world's best AI, and where economic growth hits an unprecedented 20% annually. I think this type of teleological argument adds up to about $3 trilli

David Lesch is a poster child for something. I’m just not sure what. On the one hand, given his personal reinvention from Los Angeles Dodgers first-round draft pick to official biographer of Bashar al Assad, some might consider him proof that the American Dream still exists. But others, including even himself , would argue that his incredible pivot from baseball protege to Harvard-educated Middle Eastern expert, reflects the privilege of his social class and perhaps even gender. In any event, the Lesch story is pretty amazing - which is why the San Antonio-based biographer Catherine Nixon Cooke has just published Dodgers to Damascus, the story of his journey from star pitcher to star diplomat. So it was intriguing to not only host Cooke but also David Lesch to discuss his highly unusual journey from the youthful potential of baseball to the grim reality of Bashar al Assad’s Syria. 1. Privilege complicates the reinvention narrative Lesch's transformation from baseball to diplomacy required significant advantag

Things aren’t quite as sunny on the environmental front as some recent guests suggest. According to the award winning science writer Peter Brannen, our planet is in an unprecedented crisis. We’re burning 500 million years of the earth's history in a few decades, Brannen warns, so we should all quit pretending that our recycling will miraculously save the planet. That said, though, his latest book, The Story of CO2 is the Story of Everything, is the complex narrative of how carbon dioxide (CO2) both made and might unmake our world. So CO2 is simultaneously the good guy and the villain in our environmental story. Without carbon dioxide, Brannen warns, Earth would freeze into an uninhabitable ice ball. But too much creates a Venus-like greenhouse hell in which all life would be quickly extinguished. We hang in a delicate sweet spot that took nature millions of years to manufacture —and we humans are now disrupting this ecological balance at breakneck speed. The result is what Brannen calls a terrifying planetary

If Geoffrey Hinton is the Godfather of AI, then Bruce Schneier might be described as the Godfather of Security. A celebrated cryptographer and computer security expert, Schneier’s latest co-authored (with Nathan Sanders) book is entitled Rewiring Democracy and speculates on how AI might transform our politics, government and citizenship. American democracy, Schneier notes, runs on archaic 1776 technology in today’s digital 2025 world. Rather than fighting against AI then, he suggests, Americans should adapt this new technology to update how they do politics in the 21st century. But Schneier offers the crucial caveats that AI can neither solve fundamental human problems nor transcend ideology. "A value is just a bias we like," he warns about the impossibility of a “valueless” AI system. While cautiously optimistic about AI's potential to democratize power—from helping local politicians without resources to enabling mass citizen assemblies—he warns that without fixing underlying political and economic structure