Latest / Connecting the Dots / AI Search Opt-Outs, Regulatory Pushback, and a Record-Setting IPO

Transcript

AI Search Opt-Outs, Regulatory Pushback, and a Record-Setting IPO · Connecting the Dots

• 0:00
  Today's tech news moves fast, but understanding
• 0:03
  it shouldn't be hard. That's why Snarfl Solutions
• 0:06
  Group brings you Connecting the Dogs, where we
• 0:09
  break down what's happening in tech and why it
• 0:11
  matters to you. Now, let's dive in with your
• 0:14
  hosts. Imagine, you know, just walking your dog
• 0:17
  down your own street, minding your own business,
• 0:19
  and without you even realizing it, three different
• 0:23
  houses have just mathematically mapped your face.
• 0:25
  Oh, yeah. Categorize your identity, and then...
• 0:28
  like, stored that biometric data on some remote
• 0:31
  server. Right. I mean, it sounds like total science
• 0:34
  fiction or, you know, maybe some highly secure
• 0:38
  military facility. Yeah. But it is actually just
• 0:41
  a Tuesday afternoon in a totally normal suburban
• 0:44
  neighborhood. And it's well, it's the exact center
• 0:46
  of this massive new legal battle over who actually
• 0:50
  gets to monitor public spaces. So welcome to
• 0:52
  Connecting the Dots. I am Alex. And I am Morgan.
• 0:55
  And we are coming to you from Snarfle Solutions
• 0:56
  Group right here. in Sacramento, California.
• 0:59
  It is Wednesday, June 3, 2026. And, you know,
• 1:03
  whether you are prepping for a morning meeting
• 1:05
  or maybe sitting in traffic or just insanely
• 1:08
  curious about the hidden forces shaping our tech
• 1:10
  today, we are thrilled to have you here. Absolutely.
• 1:12
  Just think of yourself as the third friend sitting
• 1:14
  right here in the studio with us. Yeah, pull
• 1:16
  up a chair. But before we dig into the digital
• 1:19
  world, let's take a quick look at the physical
• 1:21
  one. We always like to ground our analysis and
• 1:24
  what is happening outside your window and in
• 1:26
  your portfolio. For sure. And if you're here
• 1:28
  in Sacramento with us, you are looking at an
• 1:30
  absolutely gorgeous day. It is sunny, hitting
• 1:33
  a high of 94 degrees Fahrenheit. And we've got
• 1:36
  a light wind blowing at three to eight miles
• 1:39
  per hour. Yeah, definitely enjoy that sunshine
• 1:41
  while you have it. Because if you're tuning in
• 1:43
  from elsewhere in the country, you're really
• 1:45
  need to pay attention to the radar today. Right.
• 1:48
  There are currently 187 active U .S. weather
• 1:51
  alerts. And 45 of those were over land, so take
• 1:55
  a quick second to check weather .gov for the
• 1:57
  specific details in your local area. Got to stay
• 1:59
  safe. Now, onto the financial market. We have
• 2:02
  the closing numbers from yesterday, June 2nd,
• 2:05
  and it was a solidly green day across the major
• 2:07
  indices. Oh, definitely. The Dow Jones closed
• 2:09
  at 51 ,307 .79, which is up 394 .95 points, or
• 2:15
  0 .78%. Yeah, and the broader market basically
• 2:18
  followed that exact same upper trajectory. The
• 2:21
  S &P 500 closed at 7 ,609 .78, so that's marking
• 2:25
  a bump of 14 .38 points or 0 .19%. Nice. And
• 2:30
  looking over at the crypto boards this morning,
• 2:32
  June 3rd. Bitcoin open at sixty six thousand
• 2:35
  six hundred and sixty seven point six one and
• 2:37
  just recently closed out its rolling window at
• 2:39
  sixty six thousand eight hundred and sixty six
• 2:41
  point four three So a slight bump there as well,
• 2:44
  right and just rounding things out with sports
• 2:46
  real quick recap from yesterday's baseball action
• 2:49
  The Oakland A's edged out the Chicago Cubs with
• 2:51
  a 2 -1 victory, and Gage Jump took the win on
• 2:53
  the mound. Yeah, it was a much tougher day for
• 2:55
  the San Francisco Giants, though, who dropped
• 2:57
  their game to the Milwaukee Brewers 3 -8. Rough
• 2:59
  one. Yeah. And if you are trading the basketball
• 3:01
  schedule, the Sacramento Kings had the night
• 3:03
  off. So with the physical landscape set, our
• 3:06
  agenda today takes a, well, a pretty sharp pivot
• 3:08
  into the digital realm. Because every story we
• 3:11
  are covering shares a single, massive underlying
• 3:13
  theme, which is control. Control, yeah. We are
• 3:16
  dissecting who controls our biometric data on
• 3:18
  public streets, who controls the flow of our
• 3:21
  internet traffic, our livelihoods, and honestly,
• 3:24
  who controls the very financial mechanics of
• 3:27
  Wall Street. Today's episode is brought to you
• 3:29
  by Strong Coffee, the premium instant coffee
• 3:31
  that tastes like a traditional brew, but is packed
• 3:34
  with 15 grams of protein, MCTs, and adaptogens
• 3:37
  like ashwagandha. Get clean, sustained energy
• 3:41
  without the jitters. Use promo code SNARFL for
• 3:44
  20 % off at strongcoffeecompany .com. So let's
• 3:48
  look closer at our Morning Star Tech article
• 3:50
  report. Story number one takes us right back
• 3:52
  to that frankly unsettling scenario we mentioned
• 3:55
  at the top of the show. Yeah, it's wild. There
• 3:57
  is a new lawsuit making waves claiming that a
• 4:00
  feature on Amazon's ring doorbells is quietly
• 4:02
  capturing facial data from passersby without
• 4:05
  their knowledge. Right. And to really understand
• 4:07
  the gravity of this lawsuit, we have to look
• 4:09
  at how this technology actually functions because
• 4:11
  it's not what most people think. How so? Well,
• 4:14
  a standard security camera simply records a video
• 4:17
  file, right? Light hits a sensor and it saves
• 4:20
  a moving picture. But advanced facial recognition
• 4:23
  does something fundamentally different. When
• 4:25
  a person walks into the frame, the software is
• 4:28
  actively scanning the geometry of their face.
• 4:31
  So it's not just taking a picture? No, no. It
• 4:34
  measures the distance between their eyes, the
• 4:35
  curve of their jawline, the depth of their eye
• 4:38
  sockets. Wow. So it translates an actual physical
• 4:42
  human being into like a unique mathematical string
• 4:45
  of numbers. Precisely. That string of numbers
• 4:48
  is called biometric data. And because it is so
• 4:51
  uniquely tied to your physical identity, I mean
• 4:53
  just like a fingerprint or a DNA swab, the law
• 4:56
  treats it as highly, highly sensitive information.
• 4:59
  Right. And the core allegation of this lawsuit
• 5:01
  is that ring devices are casting their net way
• 5:03
  too wide. They're scanning everyone. Exactly.
• 5:06
  They aren't just processing the face of the person
• 5:08
  who actually walks up and rings the bell. They're
• 5:10
  capturing the biometric data of anyone just,
• 5:12
  you know, walking past the house on the public
• 5:15
  sidewalk. See, I look at it this way. Imagine
• 5:17
  you hire a bouncer to stand on your front porch
• 5:20
  to keep an eye on things. OK. That makes sense
• 5:22
  for homosexuality, right? But. This lawsuit basically
• 5:26
  alleges that your bouncer isn't just checking
• 5:28
  IDs at the door. Instead, this bouncer is walking
• 5:31
  down to the edge of the lawn and secretly fingerprinting
• 5:35
  every single person who happens to stroll past
• 5:38
  on the public sidewalk. That analogy captures
• 5:41
  the legal tension perfectly. The bouncer has
• 5:45
  expanded their jurisdiction from private property
• 5:47
  to public space. Exactly. And because this technology
• 5:51
  operates invisibly, you know, the people walking
• 5:53
  their dogs or pushing strollers. They have absolutely
• 5:56
  no opportunity to consent to being fingerprinted.
• 5:58
  But wait, how does this actually impact the average
• 6:01
  family? Because I mean, most people just buy
• 6:03
  a Ring camera because they want to make sure
• 6:04
  their Amazon packages aren't stolen off the porch.
• 6:07
  Sure. Their intention is entirely about home
• 6:09
  security. It's not about like neighborhood surveillance.
• 6:12
  And that's the tragedy of it. The real world
• 6:15
  impact is that everyday families are inadvertently
• 6:21
  being drafted into this massive data collection
• 6:24
  apparatus. Right. Because the software is designed
• 6:27
  to be frictionless. You plug it in, you turn
• 6:29
  on the smart alerts feature, so your phone doesn't
• 6:31
  just buzz every single time a car drives by.
• 6:33
  Well, everyone does, yeah. Right. And suddenly
• 6:35
  your front porch is running sophisticated biometric
• 6:39
  sorting algorithms on your neighbors. Which raises
• 6:41
  the ultimate question, really. Is the pursuit
• 6:44
  of personal home security crossing the line into
• 6:47
  neighborhood surveillance? Well, the courts are
• 6:49
  going to have to decide where the threshold of
• 6:51
  the home actually ends. Because historically,
• 6:54
  you know, the law treats the front door as this
• 6:56
  sacred boundary. The castle doctrine kind of
• 6:58
  thing. Exactly. But software doesn't respect
• 7:00
  physical boundaries. The lens of that camera
• 7:03
  easily reaches the street. And you know, that
• 7:06
  loss of physical agency on your front lawn mirrors
• 7:09
  exactly what is happening to digital agency on
• 7:12
  the Internet right now. Oh, absolutely. Because
• 7:14
  just as pedestrians want control over their biometric
• 7:16
  data, web publishers are currently fighting this.
• 7:19
  honestly, existential battle for control over
• 7:22
  their digital content. So let's look closer at
• 7:25
  our second story. Google's AI search opt out.
• 7:29
  Yeah. Over the past few years, Google has integrated
• 7:31
  generative AI directly into their search engine
• 7:35
  through features called AI overviews and AI mode.
• 7:38
  Right. So instead of giving you a list of traditional
• 7:41
  blue links that you have to click through, the
• 7:44
  AI essentially reads all those underlying websites
• 7:46
  for you. Yep. It synthesizes the information
• 7:49
  and then presents this neat conversational answer
• 7:51
  right at the top of the page. And for the end
• 7:53
  user, the scale of adoption is just staggering.
• 7:57
  AI Overviews now has over 2 .5 billion monthly
• 8:01
  active users. Wow. Well, AI mode has surpassed
• 8:03
  1 billion, but... we really have to examine the
• 8:06
  mechanics of how that conversational answer is
• 8:08
  generated. Because it doesn't just know things.
• 8:10
  Right. A large language model, or LLM, does not
• 8:14
  create knowledge out of thin air. It relies on
• 8:17
  a massive training corpus of human written data.
• 8:20
  So in this case, it is scraping the articles,
• 8:22
  reviews, and research produced by independent
• 8:25
  web publishers and news organizations. And here
• 8:28
  is the brutal economic reality for those publishers,
• 8:31
  right? Traffic is money. Exactly. If a user gets
• 8:35
  the answer directly from the AI at the top of
• 8:37
  the page, they have absolutely zero incentive
• 8:40
  to click through to the actual website that spend
• 8:43
  the time and money reporting that information
• 8:45
  in the first place. And the financial damage
• 8:47
  to the publishing industry is already materializing.
• 8:49
  I mean, Conde Nast CEO Roger Lynch recently addressed
• 8:53
  this in a remarkably candid interview. What did
• 8:55
  he say? Well, he advised his internal teams to
• 8:58
  operate under a new baseline assumption. He literally
• 9:01
  told them to, quote, assume there's no search.
• 9:04
  Assume there's no search. Yes. He is officially
• 9:06
  forecasting that referrals from Google will plummet
• 9:08
  to a single digit percentage of their total traffic.
• 9:11
  I mean, for an industry that has spent two decades
• 9:13
  optimizing every single headline for Google's
• 9:15
  algorithms, that is an apocalyptic statement.
• 9:18
  It really is. But the news today kind of changes
• 9:21
  the dynamic, right? Because the UK's Competition
• 9:24
  and Markets Authority, the CMA, has officially
• 9:27
  designated Google with strategic market status.
• 9:30
  And that designation is incredibly powerful.
• 9:33
  Because the CMA recognizes Google's monopolistic
• 9:37
  dominance in search, they have mandated a new
• 9:40
  rule. OK. Google now has exactly nine months
• 9:43
  to implement a specific opt -out toggle. So this
• 9:46
  toggle will allow UK website owners via the Google
• 9:49
  Search Console to explicitly exclude their sites
• 9:52
  from being ingested by AI overviews and AI mode.
• 9:56
  I am trying to visualize this. It is like, say
• 9:59
  you spend a year writing a heavily researched
• 10:01
  book, right? Sure. And you place it in a public
• 10:02
  library so people can find it and read it. That
• 10:04
  is standard internet search. OK. But Google's
• 10:06
  AI operates like a machine sitting at the front
• 10:09
  doors of the library. It takes your book off
• 10:11
  the shelf, speed reads it, writes a condensed
• 10:13
  CliffsNotes version, and then hands that summary
• 10:16
  to everyone walking in the door. So no one ever
• 10:18
  actually goes to your section of the library
• 10:20
  to check out your original work. That's spot
• 10:23
  on. And the UK CMA rule effectively allows publishers
• 10:26
  to say, hey, you can keep my book in the library,
• 10:29
  but I absolutely forbid you from feeding it into
• 10:32
  your CliffsNotes machine. But hold on, I need
• 10:34
  to push back here for a second. Sure. If I'm
• 10:37
  an independent working professional like, say
• 10:39
  I run a recipe blog or a local news site and
• 10:43
  I use this new search console toggle to opt out
• 10:46
  of the AI, don't I risk angering the algorithm?
• 10:50
  Like, do I disappear from standard Google search
• 10:52
  entirely? That is the most critical technical
• 10:55
  nuance of this entire ruling. No, you do not
• 10:57
  disappear. Oh, really? Yeah. The CMA mandate
• 11:00
  forces Google to separate their indexing mechanisms.
• 11:03
  So Google has explicitly confirmed that opting
• 11:06
  out of the generative AI features will not be
• 11:09
  used as a negative ranking signal for standard
• 11:11
  search results. Your classic blue links will
• 11:14
  remain the traditional search index, totally
• 11:16
  unaffected by your refusal to participate in
• 11:18
  the AI ecosystem. See, that changes everything.
• 11:21
  Because if publishers can opt out of the AI without
• 11:23
  destroying their traditional search traffic,
• 11:26
  this toggle isn't just a privacy setting, it's
• 11:28
  leverage. Exactly. It creates immense bargaining
• 11:31
  power. The underlying logic here is simple supply
• 11:34
  and demand. If major news organizations, specialized
• 11:38
  publishers and high quality independent creators
• 11:40
  all flip that toggle, the AI's training data
• 11:44
  degrades. Right. It's starved. It loses access
• 11:46
  to real -time, accurate, human -verified information.
• 11:51
  And if the AI becomes less useful, Google's entire
• 11:54
  strategic pivot is threatened. So it basically
• 11:56
  forces Google to the negotiating table. Yes.
• 11:59
  This rule finally gives the people who rely on
• 12:01
  web traffic to put food on the table the ability
• 12:04
  to demand actual content licensing deals. They
• 12:07
  can say, hey, if you want my journalism to fuel
• 12:09
  your billion -dollar AI answers, cut me a check.
• 12:12
  And while this is currently just a UK mandate,
• 12:14
  it establishes a regulatory blueprint. You can
• 12:17
  fully expect publishers globally to use this
• 12:19
  exact framework to demand similar controls in
• 12:21
  the US and the European Union. Well, let's unpack
• 12:24
  this. We have seen how publishers are trying
• 12:25
  to leverage their data against massive tech platforms.
• 12:29
  But what happens when a single company doesn't
• 12:32
  just scrape data, but actually owns the physical
• 12:35
  space infrastructure and the AI models under
• 12:38
  one roof? Yeah, that's when you get an unprecedented
• 12:40
  financial flex. Exactly. Which takes us to our
• 12:43
  third story today, the SpaceX IPO. So SpaceX
• 12:47
  is preparing to go public. and they are targeting
• 12:50
  a record -shattering $75 billion raise. They
• 12:54
  are scheduled to debut on the NASDAQ on June
• 12:57
  12 under the ticker symbol SPCX, and they are
• 13:00
  looking to offload 555 .6 million shares. I mean,
• 13:04
  just the sheer size of this initial public offering
• 13:07
  is staggering, but the part that is really breaking
• 13:09
  the brains of Wall Street analysts right now
• 13:11
  is how SpaceX is choosing to price it. In a move
• 13:14
  that defies all traditional financial mechanics,
• 13:16
  SpaceX is fixing the price at $135 a share before
• 13:19
  the road show even begins. And to appreciate
• 13:21
  how disruptive this is, you kind of have to consider
• 13:23
  how an IPO usually works. Right, the standard
• 13:25
  playbook. Yeah. A company wants to go public,
• 13:28
  so they announce a target price range. let's
• 13:31
  say $80 to $100 a share. The executives then
• 13:34
  embark on a road show, traveling around the country
• 13:36
  to pitch their business to institutional investors,
• 13:40
  massive pension funds, investment banks. They
• 13:42
  gauge the appetite of those big players, they
• 13:45
  build an order book, and that institutional demand
• 13:47
  discovers the final price. It is, at its core,
• 13:51
  a negotiation based on perceived risk. But SpaceX
• 13:55
  is just refusing to negotiate. They are skipping
• 13:58
  price discovery entirely. They are walking into
• 14:01
  the room with the biggest banks in the world
• 14:03
  and basically saying the price is $135, take
• 14:06
  it or leave it. It is the equivalent of putting
• 14:08
  your house on the market, listing it for double
• 14:11
  what the comps say it is worth, and refusing
• 14:13
  to entertain a single counter offer. You're just
• 14:15
  banking entirely on a frenzied bidding war. And
• 14:17
  at a fixed price of $135 a share, SpaceX is implying
• 14:21
  a total company valuation of $1 .75 trillion.
• 14:25
  Wait, wait, stop. Let me just pause you right
• 14:26
  there. $1 .75 trillion. With a T. With a T. For
• 14:30
  a company whose primary business is building
• 14:32
  rockets, I mean, look at their actual financials.
• 14:35
  SpaceX reported a $4 .94 billion net loss in
• 14:40
  2025. Yep, they did. So how is Wall Street seriously
• 14:44
  expected to ignore a nearly $5 billion hole in
• 14:47
  the balance sheet and just hand over a trillion
• 14:49
  dollar valuation? And that is the exact debate
• 14:52
  fracturing the financial community right now.
• 14:54
  I bet. The justification for that multiple comes
• 14:57
  down to a major structural change that happened
• 14:59
  internally. So back in February of 2026, SpaceX
• 15:03
  quietly folded Elon Musk's artificial intelligence
• 15:06
  startup? AI into their broader corporate structure.
• 15:10
  Oh, interesting. Yeah. So they are no longer
• 15:12
  pitching themselves as just an aerospace manufacturer.
• 15:15
  They're pitching this IPO as a combined space
• 15:18
  and AI infrastructure monopoly. So they're arguing
• 15:22
  that the capital raised won't just build more
• 15:24
  rockets. It will fund the expansion of like massive
• 15:26
  AI computing clusters that are directly integrated
• 15:29
  with the Starlink satellite network. Exactly.
• 15:31
  The pitch is that they own both the orbital data
• 15:33
  transmission layer and the algorithmic processing
• 15:36
  layer. That's a huge claim. It is. However, traditional
• 15:40
  analysts are highly, highly skeptical. Morningstar
• 15:43
  equity analyst Nicholas Omens released this blistering
• 15:46
  note, pushing back on the valuation. He argues
• 15:48
  that SpaceX is drastically overvalued. What's
• 15:51
  his number? Well, his team suggests the true
• 15:54
  intrinsic value should be less than half of that
• 15:57
  $1 .75 trillion figure, closer to $780 billion.
• 16:01
  Wow. A trillion -dollar discrepancy in valuation
• 16:04
  is almost comical. What is Owens basing that
• 16:08
  massive haircut on? Owens points out that while
• 16:10
  the space infrastructure part is dominant, the
• 16:12
  AI component is completely speculative. His team
• 16:15
  does not view Grok, which is the specific AI
• 16:18
  model developed by XAI, as one of the leading
• 16:20
  artificial intelligence labs currently operating.
• 16:23
  So it's not open AI or entropic. Right. Critics
• 16:26
  argue that folding XAI into SpaceX is essentially
• 16:29
  an accounting maneuver designed to artificially
• 16:31
  inflate the IPO valuation by attaching it to
• 16:33
  the current AI hype cycle. So are institutional
• 16:35
  investors actually buying a dominant space logistics
• 16:38
  company or are they just buying a ridiculously
• 16:40
  overpriced ticket on the Elon Musk AI hype train?
• 16:43
  Well, if you look at traditional financial metrics,
• 16:46
  institutional investors should balk at this.
• 16:48
  But SpaceX has engineered a really brilliant
• 16:52
  structural hedge to force their hand. How so?
• 16:55
  They are actively bypassing the traditional Wall
• 16:58
  Street gatekeepers by reserving up to 30 percent
• 17:01
  of this offering specifically for individual
• 17:04
  retail investors. That is unheard of. I mean,
• 17:06
  historically, retail investors, you know, everyday
• 17:09
  people with a standard brokerage account, they're
• 17:12
  lucky to get a tiny single -digit sliver of a
• 17:15
  hot IPO. The big banks just hoard all the shares
• 17:18
  for their best clients. But by carving out 30
• 17:20
  % for the public, SpaceX changes the leverage
• 17:23
  dynamics entirely. If the massive pension funds
• 17:26
  and banks complain about the $135 fixed price
• 17:29
  and threaten to walk away, SpaceX doesn't care.
• 17:32
  Right. SpaceX knows there's an absolute army
• 17:35
  of devoted tech enthusiasts and retail traders
• 17:37
  ready to just scoop up those shares. They are
• 17:40
  literally monetizing their own cultural gravity.
• 17:42
  And the betting markets basically prove that
• 17:44
  gravity is real. I mean, the polymarket odds
• 17:46
  currently sit at an 89 % probability that SpaceX's
• 17:50
  closing market cap will actually break above
• 17:52
  $1 .8 trillion on its debut day. It's incredible.
• 17:56
  The retail crowd doesn't care about a $4 .94
• 17:58
  billion loss last year. They believe they are
• 18:01
  buying equity in the combined future of space
• 18:03
  exploration and artificial intelligence. It's
• 18:06
  a high wire act, for sure. If the order book
• 18:09
  fills at $135 a share, SpaceX will have fundamentally
• 18:13
  broken and rewritten the rules for how mega IPOs
• 18:16
  are priced. But because they refuse to set a
• 18:19
  lower price range, there is absolutely no safety
• 18:22
  net. If institutional demand falters and retail
• 18:25
  cannot absorb the sheer volume of shares, the
• 18:28
  offering could stumble spectacularly. Control.
• 18:30
  It all just cycles back to who dictates the terms
• 18:32
  of engagement. SpaceX is exerting total control
• 18:34
  over the financial narrative, UK publishers are
• 18:37
  fighting for legal control over their intellectual
• 18:39
  property, and homeowners are unwittingly relinquishing
• 18:42
  control of their neighbors' biometric privacy.
• 18:45
  Before we wrap up, a quick thanks to Old Glory,
• 18:48
  an iconic music and sports fan merch store. perfect
• 18:51
  for the techie in your life. Use promo code SNARFL
• 18:53
  for 15 % off at OldGlory .com. As we step back
• 18:57
  and view these three stories together. A pretty
• 19:00
  clear picture emerges of a society really struggling
• 19:03
  to draw boundaries around rapidly scaling technology.
• 19:07
  Oh, absolutely. We started at the physical threshold
• 19:09
  of our homes, exploring how a simple desire for
• 19:12
  package security via ring doorbells has inadvertently
• 19:16
  transformed public sidewalks into biometric data
• 19:19
  harvesting zones. And then we shifted to the
• 19:21
  digital threshold, looking at how the UK CMA
• 19:24
  is legally forcing Google to decouple standard
• 19:27
  search indexing from AI ingestion. Right. Which
• 19:30
  is finally granting web publishers a toggle to
• 19:32
  protect their livelihoods from being algorithmically
• 19:34
  summarized without any compensation. And we finished
• 19:36
  by examining the ultimate display of leverage
• 19:38
  on Wall Street, with SpaceX fixing an unprecedented
• 19:41
  $1 .75 trillion valuation by merging satellite
• 19:45
  infrastructure with AI ambition, basically daring
• 19:47
  traditional banks to bet against a retail army.
• 19:49
  It leaves us in a landscape where data, content,
• 19:53
  and capital are all being funneled into artificial
• 19:55
  intelligence models at a truly staggering pace.
• 19:59
  Which brings us to a final thought for you to
• 20:01
  carry through the rest of your day. You know,
• 20:03
  we spent a lot of time today talking about mechanisms
• 20:06
  for opting out, whether it's trying to opt out
• 20:08
  of a camera's facial matrix on a public street
• 20:10
  or a publisher opting out of an AI training corpus.
• 20:14
  Right. But as these intelligent systems integrate
• 20:17
  into the very foundation of our infrastructure,
• 20:20
  from our front porches to our orbital rockets,
• 20:23
  will the concept of opting out even exist in
• 20:25
  five years? That's a good question. Or will our
• 20:28
  privacy, our original ideas, and our attention
• 20:30
  simply become mandatory raw materials quietly
• 20:34
  priced into the next trillion -dollar algorithm?
• 20:36
  It is definitely a complex question to consider
• 20:39
  the next time you walk past the glowing doorbell
• 20:41
  ring, or type a query into a search bar. We're
• 20:44
  here to help at Snarful, so reach out on our
• 20:46
  website if you have any more questions. That's
• 20:52
  a wrap on today's top stories. Remember, tech
• 20:55
  doesn't have to be complicated, and we're here
• 20:57
  to help connect the dots. If you've got questions
• 21:00
  or want to learn more, visit us at snarful .com.
• 21:03
  Thanks for listening, and we'll catch you next
• 21:06
  time.