transcript

Speaker 1:
[00:00] Kayak gets my flight, hotel and rental car right, so I can tune out travel advice that's just plain wrong.

Speaker 2:
[00:07] Bro, Skycoin, way better than points.

Speaker 1:
[00:10] Never fly during a Scorpio full moon. Just tell the manager you'll sue. Instant room upgrade. Stop taking bad travel advice. Start comparing hundreds of sites with Kayak, and get your trip right. Bad advice?

Speaker 2:
[00:24] You talking to me?

Speaker 1:
[00:25] Kayak, got that right.

Speaker 2:
[00:31] Good Morning Brew Daily show. I'm Neal Freyman.

Speaker 3:
[00:34] And I'm Toby Howell.

Speaker 2:
[00:35] Today, why are gas prices so much lower in the US than everywhere else?

Speaker 3:
[00:39] Then Meta is surveilling its employees to train its AI models. It's Thursday, April 23rd. Let's ride.

Speaker 2:
[00:51] Good morning. Well, you all came through. Excited to announce that Morning Brew Daily won the Webby for Best Business Podcast, People's Voice Winner. Appreciate everyone who voted for us, who got their friends and family to vote. It all made a huge difference. Toby, what should we say in the acceptance speech?

Speaker 3:
[01:08] So the Webby's does acceptance speeches a little bit differently. They only give you five words, which maybe the Oscars should think about, but also got us thinking, what should we say? I need you guys to show out once more, reply in an email, reply in an Instagram, reply in the comment section of what our big five-word acceptance speech should be, because right now, all I have is, let's ride, let's ride, let's. So we're clearly in need of some help right now, but seriously, thank you everyone who voted for us. During that week, a couple people stopped, Neal and I, on the street, and that was the first thing that they brought up, was like, hey, I'm going home right now to vote for you. So we appreciate the enthusiasm, and it's really cool to see this podcast bring home some hardware.

Speaker 2:
[01:51] Yeah, what about these five words? This episode is brought to...

Speaker 3:
[01:55] Too many, too many.

Speaker 2:
[01:56] Okay, well, I'll go into it anyway. This episode is brought to you by On Investing, an original podcast from Charles Schwab. Each week, host Lizanne Saunders, Schwab's Chief Investment Strategist, and Colin Martin, Head of Fixed Income Research and Strategy for the Schwab Center for Financial Research, bring you fresh insights into what's happening in the markets and why, and what the implications might be for your portfolio.

Speaker 3:
[02:15] Join Colin and Lizanne as they explore questions like, how do you evaluate corporate bonds that look interesting, and what sectors are on the move right now? You can download the latest episode and subscribe at schwab.com/oninvesting or wherever you get your podcasts. If you ever feel like somebody's watching you, they are if you work at Meta. Meta is installing software on its employees' computers that will track keystrokes and mouse movements, not to see if you're being productive, but to gather data to train their AI models. In a memo seen by Reuters, Meta justified the intrusion by saying, will help AI models learn how humans actually use computers. Our models need real examples, things like mouse movements, clicking buttons and navigating drop-down menus, Meta spokesperson Andy Stone said. Of course, the humans involved are more than a little dubious. That makes me super uncomfortable. How do we opt out? Was the top-like response to the internal announcement, according to messages seen by Business Insider. To which CTO Andrew Bosworth responded, there is no option to opt out of this on your work-provided laptop. Neal, screen surveillance and click tracking aren't new in the corporate world, but using humans as fodder to train the very models that might eventually replace them in the workforce, that's leading to backlash.

Speaker 2:
[03:29] Yeah, I think you're maybe underplaying the reaction from Meta employees. This is like a full-on revolt, according to tech reporter Alex Heath. This broke such a strong reaction that a follow-up note was posted internally acknowledging, there has been a lot of concern about this. And then another said the tracking program is really antisocial and is going to be extremely bad press for the company. When Bosworth posted the fact that employees couldn't opt out, he was hit with a ton of emojis of angry faces, kind of like when you post in Slack. It was just completely bombarded with angry, you know, sad faces, angry faces. So employees are very upset about this. So why is Meta taking this step? They had to know it's going to take off employees. Well, Meta is going all in on AI agencies, AI systems that take over your computer and do stuff for you autonomously. But they're not very good at using computers like we do. Just drop down menus and icons and clicking on icons and things like that. So they think so Meta needs this data from employees about how employees use computers to train these AI systems. And I didn't mention that I didn't get to this when we were talking about the AI store run by Luna. But Luna we talked about made a few mistakes, typical of AI agents. She tried to hire a painter from Afghanistan because in the drop down menu in TaskRabbit, Afghanistan is the top alphabetical country. So these are the mistakes that AI is making that Meta wants to fix.

Speaker 3:
[04:55] Yeah. And the reason that they are using their own employees is because they've kind of exhausted most of the training data sets out there right now. This is a real problem that AI companies are running into is that they basically scraped the entire Internet at this point. So you have to find these alternative data sources, and Meta is like, wait, we have a lot of employees here. What if we just scraped our own employees' habits? Speaking of the amount of employees Meta has, it's getting smaller. Meta is planning to lay off 10% of its workforce globally, which is why, again, the fact that they are being used basically as crash test dummies for the very models that are going to take their jobs, hypothetically are being used as justification for firing people. That is why you are seeing all these angry face Slack emojis.

Speaker 2:
[05:40] I think that is the undercurrent is that it's very widely reported that these widespread layoffs, 10% of the workforce, is coming next month. Meta had a response to this. He said, there are safeguards in place to protect sensitive content, and the data is not being used for any other purpose rather than AI training. So they're not doing to measure performance or anything like that. But clearly, a higher level of surveillance than white collar workforces are used to.

Speaker 3:
[06:05] Anthropics new model, Mythos, has been hyped as a menacing, dangerous, all-powerful cyber security threat. But a couple of random guys just gain access to it by guessing its URL. Anthropic has warned that Mythos is capable of exploiting vulnerabilities around the web at an unprecedented rate. Because of that danger, it's only been released to a select few organizations. But according to Bloomberg, a small group of users who belong to a Discord server that tries to hack unreleased models found their way in under Anthropics' nose by quote, making an educated guess about the model's online location. In other words, they guess the URL. Luckily, the group in question isn't up to anything nefarious. They have been regularly using Mythos since gaining access, but are more interested in playing around than wrecking global havoc, according to the report. But the incident shows that other less curious hackers could have gotten their hands on Mythos without Anthropic knowing. After getting a lot of praise for being very careful with Mythos, basically treating it as a powerful weapon the public shouldn't get his hands on yet, this is a bad look for Anthropic.

Speaker 2:
[07:08] I mean, this is wild. They did this huge miniature releasing, where we developed this thing that is the cybersecurity equivalent of a nuclear weapon that can get access and exploit vulnerabilities in every major operating system and every major web browser when directed by a user to do so could bring down governments. And these guys on a Discord server got access to it on the same day it was released, April 7th. And an interesting part of this is they didn't even hack it. They barely put in any effort. One of the guys who got access just used their permissions as a contractor, as a third party contractor for Anthropic to gain access to Mythos. And the good news is that they don't want to do anything bad, they're just kind of playing around with it. But certainly it raises a lot of questions about Anthropic security procedures.

Speaker 3:
[07:57] Yeah, the big picture here is that whoever has the lead in building these powerful AI models also has outsized geopolitical advantages as well, because now these product launches are not being treated like product launches, they're literally being treated like weapons tests, where you only allow a select amount of people access to them. And because if you can find flaws in the software that's running banks, power grids, governments, that means that you have much more leverage over the world than someone else does. So that was a subtext of this, is the fact that most of the organizations that got access to this were in the US. Only one from Britain got access. So all of the U.S.'s allies and enemies are saying like, hey, is this going to be like the new normal when these bottles come out? It is essentially getting access to an all powerful weapon that tilts the balance in favor of the country that owns it. So definitely a wake up call for friends and enemies alike.

Speaker 2:
[08:52] Yeah, one Russian pro Kremlin outlet called Mythos, quote, worse than a nuclear bomb. But it's sure to raise even more questions about security processes of Anthropic. I mean, we're just coming off a month where two different leaks happened at Anthropic, including the source code for Claude Code, which set off a huge frenzy among the software community. So another bad look for Anthropic. This is something that they wanted to keep so tightly under wraps and it was very easily accessed on the same day it came out. Moving on, sometimes a movie trailer isn't just a movie trailer. In the case of an upcoming Looney Tunes movie, it's a gleeful roast of a Hollywood giant. Yesterday brought the long awaited trailer Coyote vs Acme, a live-action animation hybrid coming this summer starring Will Forte, John Cena, Wile E. Coyote, and a bunch of other popular Looney Tunes characters. It looks like a total blast. But hidden in the trailer, well, I shouldn't say hidden, it was pretty overt, were multiple barbs at Warner Brothers, which had previously shelved this movie. Yes, there is a juicy backstory. Back in 2023, Warner Brothers decided to cancel Coyote vs Acme, despite it being completed with a $70 million budget and delighting audiences in previews. It was a very controversial move that elicited strongly negative responses from the creative community. But in 2025, independent distributor Ketchup Entertainment acquired the rights to the movie and set it on a path to theatrical release. And from the looks of the trailer, they are fully leaning into the beef with Warner Brothers. The fictional company Acme is used as a metaphor for the Hollywood studio, with the trailer stating, The movie Acme doesn't want you to see, meaning the movie Warner Brothers doesn't want you to see. Toby, I think people are going to roadrunner their way to this film.

Speaker 3:
[10:30] Yeah, the trailer looks great, honestly. All the cameos from all the Looney Tunes characters got me fired up, but the jokes, the anti-Warner Brothers jokes were right there front and center. At the end, a voiceover says, the Acme Corporation is releasing this film for accounting purposes only. And that was truly the crux of this disagreement, is that what do you mean you're taking a tax write-off on a pretty good movie that screened well with audiences? Just release the dang thing. Warner Brothers was being very sticky with the price it wanted someone to pay for the rights to distribute this film. Eventually, they were shopping it around for $75 million. Eventually, Ketchup brought it for $50 million. And I think everyone is going to be better off for this movie coming out because, like I said, I don't even love the Looney Tunes, but seeing a Bugs Bunny cameo kind of got me fired up.

Speaker 2:
[11:17] Yeah, so why did Warner Brothers show this in the first place? They had finished this movie, cost $70 million. Now, this is something in the industry that is called tongue-in-cheek-ly Hollywood accounting. It doesn't happen often, but it does happen where a movie is completed, but they just don't decide to release it. Now, one of the reasons is that it's bad, and they don't want that to just be a bad look for the studio to release a really bad film to audiences that will leave a bad taste in their mouth. Another reason is that it costs, this movie costs $70 million to make, but maybe it will cost another $70 million to market when you get out into the theaters. I mean, it all sometimes costs just as much to market the movie as make it. So basically, you're incurring additional costs, and Warner Brothers, in this case, might have just wanted to eat it. And then a final reason, this is what the accounting barb relates to, is that they might have just used this as a tax write-off. Warner Brothers, a couple years ago, had so much debt, and then now they're selling themselves, but they wanted to pay down this debt, and one of the ways that they could do that is cancel these movies and use it as a tax write-off to lower their tax bill.

Speaker 3:
[12:23] But unfortunately, the fans kind of got whiff of all of this, and the release Coyote vs Acme hashtag started trending back in February of 2024, and then also one of the actors, one of the voice actors in the show, I should say, Eric Bauza, who does 10 characters in the film, went off script at an awards show and started improvising, saying, I hate to be political, but release Coyote vs Acme, but he did it in Daffy Duck's voice, which also went very viral. So when you have movies that get this groundswell of support, they never really die. They kind of just go on life support. It looks like the heartbeat is getting stronger and stronger, and we're finally going to see this movie.

Speaker 2:
[12:57] And we haven't even talked about the plot. The plot is so funny. It's a genius. So it's based on a satirical New Yorker piece from back in 1990. Basically, Wiley Coyote has been using all these Acme products to take down Roadrunner, but they've just malfunctioned over the course of many years. So he's actually suing Acme. He hires a lawyer, Will Forte, to sue Acme. So it's about this courtroom battle. Acme is being represented by John Cena, who's the big bad lawyer for the corporation. So just a very funny concept as well.

Speaker 3:
[13:28] All right. We're going to take a quick break and come back with Neal's numbers right after this.

Speaker 2:
[13:35] Toby, would you say you're authentic?

Speaker 3:
[13:37] You know I'm the real deal, Neal.

Speaker 2:
[13:39] Well, you and iHerb have that in common. iHerb is a trusted wellness specialty store that sources 100% authentic vitamins, supplements, sports nutrition and so much more directly from brands with zero third-party sellers on the site or app.

Speaker 3:
[13:53] And iHerb stands behind every purchase. If something doesn't meet your expectations, they make it right with easy returns and simple refunds.

Speaker 2:
[14:00] Head to iherb.com for the real deal, not just a marketplace knockoff. That's iherb.com. Toby, you ever found a big problem with a teeny tiny solution?

Speaker 3:
[14:12] Yeah, locked doors.

Speaker 2:
[14:14] Okay, fair, but what if I told you I found the key to losing and keeping weight off? It's going micro with Noom. Micro habits, micro wins and micro doses of GLP-1s.

Speaker 3:
[14:24] In fact, Noom found users lose on average eight pounds in 30 days on their micro dose protocol.

Speaker 2:
[14:30] The Noom GLP-1 micro dose program starts at $79 and is delivered to your door in seven days. Start your micro dose GLP-1 journey today at noom.com. That's noom.com. Noom micro changes, big results. See podcast description for full disclaimers. Toby, have you ever flown a friend?

Speaker 3:
[14:50] I think you mean phone a friend?

Speaker 2:
[14:52] Nope, I mean F-L-O-W-N, flown.

Speaker 3:
[14:55] Ah, like when the founders at unfiltered hospitality used the rewards to fly a new hire for onboarding?

Speaker 2:
[15:01] Exactly. The rewards from Capital One's Venturex business card redefine premium for small business owners like unlimited travel miles on every purchase with no preset spending limit.

Speaker 3:
[15:11] It's straightforward and lets you earn travel bonuses.

Speaker 2:
[15:14] Spend more, earn more. Your rewards grow with your business. Enjoy big purchasing power that adapts to your business' needs. Terms apply. Head to capitalone.com/morningbrew. Welcome to Neil's Numbers, the segment where I share three stats from the week's news that will have you feeling like you could beat Jamie Ding in Jeopardy. For my first number, let's answer the question of why are gas prices so much cheaper in the United States than in other countries? I know, prices of over $4 a gallon doesn't sound cheap. It is the highest average price in four years, but the grass is definitely not greener even in other wealthy countries. In March, the Germans, French and Norwegians paid over $8 a gallon for gas. The UK was over $7 a gallon and Mexico over $5. So what gives? As the Wall Street Journal explains, one factor is that the US has become the biggest oil producer in the world so that self-sufficiency shields Americans from supply shocks like, say, the closure of an important waterway. But a much bigger reason is taxes or the lack of them in the United States. The US government has one of the lowest fuel tax rates in the world, accounting for about 16% of the retail price of a gallon in March. In Europe, it's a completely different story. Gas taxes there account for 50 to 60% of the retail price of fuel, according to S&P Energy. Look at Germany, they paid $8.75 a gallon last month, but more than half of that comes from taxes. Gas in Mexico averaged $5.07 in March, but $2 of that was taxes.

Speaker 3:
[16:41] I'm never complaining about gas prices again, because what do you mean $8.75 a gallon? I genuinely did not know they were paying that much for gas over in Europe, but it comes down to what the taxes are used for. The tax on fuel in the United States is mostly used to maintain roads and highways. The tax on fuel in Europe is used for much more. They want to fund transportation systems. It funds government spending at large, so it's just a bigger surcharge on top of it. But also, there is variation within gas prices within the United States as well. Much of the Midwest and Gulf Coast states are still paying relatively low prices, and it comes down to a lot of it just comes down to access to supply. If you are closer to oil refineries, it is less expensive to transport that gas to your gas station. That's why you are seeing lower prices in Louisiana and Mississippi and Texas rather than a California which doesn't have as much access to refineries.

Speaker 2:
[17:35] And New Jersey, if you drive on the Jersey Turnpike, you're going to see a lot of refineries and maybe it stinks up your car a little bit. But at the same time, it has much lower gas prices than surrounding states because of that refining capacity. It also has to do with taxes. Taxes are variable across the United States. It's as low as nine cents per gallon in Alaska and then in California, where the gas is currently $5.80, taxes account for 71 cents of that. My next number is a surprising factor in whether you apply to a college or not, the weather on your campus tour. A new paper from Amherst College found that if there's poor weather when you're visiting campus, you're less likely to apply by a considerable amount. According to the researchers, applications fell 10.1 percent when a tour was hotter than moderate temperatures and 5.9 percent when it was cold. Applications fell 8.3 percent when there was precipitation and 4.9 percent when it was cloudy relative to clear skies. The temperature effect is even more pronounced for prospective students who grew up in warm places. After particularly cold tours, applications dropped 14.6 percent for these shivering kids. So what to make of all this? First of all, it's pretty wild that the weather on a specific day can impact one of the biggest decisions you will ever make. Also, it's assigned to campus tour guides to be aware of the weather. Find shade if it's hot, go inside as much as you possibly can if it's cold. Keep people comfortable and they're more likely to apply.

Speaker 3:
[18:57] I love these weather mitigation strategies that these tour guides are rolling out. Amherst's Dean of Emissions said that if it cracks 90, we bust out ice cream sandwiches, which again, that would work on me. High Point University uses golf carts if it gets too warm to shuttle families around. I love what Minnesota does as well. They show off its elaborate network of tunnels and skyways if it gets too cold there. It sounds like common sense stuff, but then when you actually dive in the data and realize this makes or breaks, if someone attends your college, I would do everything in my power to mitigate whatever the weather is doing.

Speaker 2:
[19:31] This literally happened to me. I mean, this is going to ask. Yeah. So I visited the University of Virginia one day when I was a high school junior, I guess it was 70 and sunny. It was gorgeous. Everyone there was gorgeous. I was like, this is the place for me. I love it here. Then the next day we drove up to University of Maryland College Park. It was rainy and 30 degrees. The tour was so bad, we left half way. I was like, I am never going here. So I ended up applying to the University of Maryland. I ended up going there and I had a great time. But to me, I will never forget the experience of going to Charlottesville, Virginia at 70 degrees. Beautiful. The next day, College Park, 30 and rainy and it really, I mean, the fact that it still sticks with me, shows how impactful the weather is when you're having this tour. Because the College Park campus is great.

Speaker 3:
[20:16] You undermine exactly what you said though. You went to the place that it was super rainy at. So what happened to-

Speaker 2:
[20:21] I didn't get in.

Speaker 3:
[20:22] Oh, God. I didn't mean to bring that up. But okay, I guess that's the biggest factor with determining whether you go to a school or not, whether you get in or not.

Speaker 2:
[20:33] All right, for my final number, if you give a mouse a cookie, they'll want a glass of milk. But if you give cocaine to salmon, they'll swim further. In a new study released Monday, researchers found that Atlantic salmon exposed to cocaine traveled five kilometers farther per week than sober salmon. Plus, they wouldn't stop talking your ear off. But that's nothing compared to when the salmon were given cocaine's main breakdown product created in the liver. Those salmon traveled 14 kilometers further than the control group. So where did these fish get cocaine and why wasn't I invited? The researchers implanted 105 two-year-old salmon with implants that slowly release cocaine and its primary metabolite into their bodies, then release them into Lake Vatern, the second largest lake in Sweden. This wasn't for fun and games. Cocaine pollution is a huge problem for marine life. 25 million people use the drug in 2023, which increasingly winds up in waterways, where it impacts on animals are only beginning to be understood. It's not just cocaine ending up in fish, but other substances like caffeine and pharmaceutical products. Report co-author Marcus Michelangeli said, the idea of cocaine affecting fish might seem surprising, but the reality is that wildlife is already being exposed to a wide range of human-derived drugs every day. The unusual part is not the experiment, it's what's already happening in our waterways.

Speaker 3:
[21:47] Jack Brand, a researcher at the Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences said, many aquatic organisms in human-impact environments are living in a dilute cocktail of biologically active chemicals. It's a funny headline, let's be honest. Salmon swimming further on cocaine, that is going to go viral. But they not only went further, they dispersed more. They reached 12 kilometers further from the release site than non-exposed fish did. That is a 60 percent increase and that means all sorts of things for salmon. Scientific American pointed out that if you travel longer distance, that actually means that you're spending more valuable energy on swimming than using it to forage or grow. That also might expose you to different types of predators and food that you are encountering. So again, you laugh because you see the headline, but then when you start to dig into the nitty gritty of what it means for these salmon populations, you start to get a little sad, honestly, that they have no say over what's coming into their environment, and yet it's affecting so much of how they live. Let's sprint to the finish with some final headlines. Looks like there will still be a Spirit in the sky. The Trump administration is ironing out a rescue deal for Spirit Airlines that could hand the US government up to 90% of the carrier once it limps out of bankruptcy. The package would offer up to $500 million in financing in exchange for the ownership stake. The momentum around this deal came after Trump went on CNBC and said, I'd love somebody to buy Spirit, and I think an idea took root in real time because he followed that up with, maybe the federal government should help that one out. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick is leading the talks, who is the same guy who quarterbacked the 10% stake the government took in Intel earlier this year. Spirit shares jumped 150% on the news after rising 122% the day before. In total, the stock is up 455% in the past week alone. Neal, if this goes through, I think it means Air Force 3 is getting a yellow paint job.

Speaker 2:
[23:38] This did not make a lot of people in Trump's, even in Trump's party, happy because you're telling me Spirit is too big to fail and that we should bail out Spirit Airlines, which owns 3% of the airline market. Ted Cruz, a Republican senator, said this is an absolutely terrible idea. And then the guy who may be tasked with implementing it, who's the transportation secretary, Sean Duffy, said on Tuesday, the question will be, can we do anything to save Spirit and make it viable? Or would we be putting good money into a company that is inevitably going to be liquidated? And that's the main concern here, that taxpayer money is going into a broken company. I mean, Spirit couldn't get its act together. United CEO is also against this. Scott Kirby said Spirit was going to fail because the business model doesn't work. This company has filed for bankruptcy twice in the past year. So is this really where you want to put taxpayer money to own 90% of Spirit? Looks a lot more like socialism than capitalism. Finally, here's a pitch for Marty Supreme, the sequel. Timothy Chalamet vs. the BOTS. Yesterday, scientists at Sony AI unveiled a robot table tennis player that can go toe to toe with the sports greats, calling it a milestone in AI and robotics research. They said it's, quote, the first time a robot has achieved human, expert level play in a commonly played competitive sport in the physical world. By robot, they actually mean a crane-like lever with an attached ping pong paddle. It uses vision sensors and reinforcement learning to understand where the ball is in space, measure its spin and properly hit it back so it goes to the opponent side. Often that opponent loses the point. Sony's robot won seven out of 13 games against five different top players with more than 10 years of intensive training. It fared a little worse against the pros, winning one out of seven games. Still Toby, they said that athletes were the one profession that AI wasn't going to take over. Looks like it's just a matter of time.

Speaker 3:
[25:27] I thought the most fascinating part of this was measuring the spin because spin is a huge part of table tennis. In order to do it, they made a camera that zooms in on the ball as it's traveling across the net. Specifically, they zoom in on the logo to see the magnitude and axis of the spin that it has on it. You could beat this bot if you just took the logo off the ball because then it couldn't measure the spin, but you can spoof the robot. These human players are extremely high level. Rui Takanaka, who played one and lost against the robot, said, I used to serve with a complex spin, but then Ace also, which is the robot's name, also returned the ball with a complex spin, which made it difficult for me. But then when I used a simple serve that we call a knuckle serve, Ace returned a simpler ball. It was essentially just mirroring whatever the human was giving them. If the human played down to a dumber level, the robot responded at a dumber level as well. There's still some edges that humans have that can outthink the robot. I just thought it was fascinating how humans can adapt to whatever they're getting from the other side of the table as well.

Speaker 2:
[26:30] Now, I don't want to blow up your spot, but last week we had a big Morning Brew ping pong tournament, and who won but this guy, Toby Howell. If you're taking on the Sony robot, what's going to be your strategy?

Speaker 3:
[26:41] I mean, my strategy would be far, I'm not even making it into the room because these are very, very high level players just to show that there are levels to ping pong. While I was playing and I started beating some of my co-workers, one of the employees there who runs the ping pong bar that we were at said, let's start rallying and midway through the rally that we're playing, he pulls out his phone and he starts playing me with his iPhone. Then I started playing him with my iPhone, so then it was iPhone versus iPhone. There's just a lot of levels to this. Go see Marty Supreme if you haven't already. That's the only thing we can think about when it comes to this story.

Speaker 2:
[27:12] But also more seriously, I mean, the fact that AI is making advancements and the robots are making advancement in the physical world, in the sports world was something that very few people had on their bingo card this year. I mean, the NFL draft is happening later tonight. Just how long till the number one pick goes to Fernanda Mendoza bot? All right, that is all the time we have. Thanks for starting your morning with us and have a wonderful Thursday. If you like to reach us, send an email to morningbrewdaily at morningbrew.com or DM us on Instagram at MB Daily Show. Let's roll the credits. Emily Milliron is our supervising producer. Raymond Liu is our senior producer. Our producer is Olivia Graham and our associate producer is Olivia Lake. Her makeup needs a date to the Webbies. Devon Emery is our president and our show is a production of Morning Brew.

Speaker 3:
[27:54] Great show today, Neal. Let's run it back tomorrow.

Speaker 4:
[28:05] Hey, business owners, the NFL season is a big revenue driver. Now there's a smarter way to get ready. Everpass is the only authorized commercial platform for NFL Sunday Ticket, delivering every live out of market regular season Sunday afternoon game. Lock in the best offer now, with up to 40% off saving up to $2,500. For the first time, you can pay over nine months. Get up to six free devices and a free bar kit. Sign up by April 27th. Visit everpass.com. Limited time offer, terms apply.