Transcription
A lot of the commentary that we're hearing from tech executives has added fuel to the fire of like, you know, oh, AI is going to replace X amount of jobs. I'm not saying that I disagree or agree with any of these opinions, but I'm saying these are very big statements that are happening, you know, all the time from that industry, from executives that you just would not see replicated elsewhere.
If you have no plan and you're just plugging something and you're telling people to use it and then you're telling them that if they don't use it, their jobs are at risk. Of course, they will use it, but you know, it doesn't mean that you're going to get your ROI, right? It just means that you look a bit silly.
On the tech report with me today is the tech journalist Natasha Bernau. Welcome back.
Thank you. Thank you for having me.
Let's start with Elon Musk and Tesla stock is in its eighth straight week of losses. The company has, I think, lost about 25% of its value since the start of the year. Is this a a bad streak for Tesla in a year which has already seen a massive drop in prices across most tech stocks or is this a fundamental re-evaluation of the company?
Well, people are describing it as basically the perfect storm, right? You've got uh a record high of unsold inventory. um you've got very much a a bigger amount of competition coming from China and cooling demand from its customer base and um no longer being able to rely on on the the US federal EV tax credits. Um so so all of this is affecting you know the the the EV market at large but certainly Tesla in particular as as the front runner of of that market. um some of the investors who once viewed um Tesla as sort of a high growth safe haven and now grappling with a sort of reset that you know almost 25% of the company's valuation has been has been wiped out since the start of the year. Um and it doesn't look like there's anything on the horizon that might change um its fortunes. And so I think the the the big concern is is um at the moment the sort of dire implications that this might have for Tesla's growth narrative. Um it didn't announce any kind of specific um AI developments that might help to change um you know the course of of 2026 for Tesla. Um, it's kind of caused all these things, all these uh views to kind of shift from optimism about autonomous vehicles and robotics to what looks like a very traditional manufacturing bottleneck where they've produced too many cars and they don't have enough people that want to buy them. And this naturally will result in in Tesla having to drop its prices which is going to affect its shareholders. So I wouldn't say it's necessarily an existential crisis. Um but it or a fundamental reevaluation needs to happen of the company but it does feel that um you know there's there's a decline that was certainly foreseeable um and the reaction from a lot of the analysts and investors that are watching this um is is to either hold or or to be quite you know downcast about the future in 2026. I think I saw JP Morgan held its price target of I think $145 which is about I mean when I wrote the questions at least which was late yesterday was about 60% downside from where they were at at the time. It's it's looking more and more like the future of Tesla is kind of now pinned on the future of its robo taxi program which a JP Morgan Chase and co-analyst called vaporware which I think is quite a concerning sign. Um, given the number of legal cases against Tesla as well over over self-driving related deaths and and crashes, do you think Elon Musk can turn this around considering I've seen quite a few reports that 2026 is sort of the make or break year for robo taxis?
Yeah, I mean it's it's it's interesting that you know the JP Morgan note is something that you know has exploded. I think a lot of people are looking at that as as something extremely worrisome because essentially it's it's tagged Tesla as underweight. Um that the concerns are very much about those unsold vehicles. So that the delivery figures for the Q1 2026 um total 358,023 vehicles. JP Morgan's own projection was that 385,000 and that was not like a very optimistic uh projection. So if you look at that in the context of the business, we're looking at a modest 6.3 6.4% increase over the previous year, which is fine. Um, but when you look at the fact that they've manufactured over 408,000 vehicles during the same period, you can see that there's about 50,000 cars that they need to sell and no one has wanted to buy them. And that signals a really really worrisome trend in in the market where clearly the customers are not flocking towards Tesla any longer. Um if you think about that in the context of in January BYD surpassed Tesla for the first time in terms of global EV sales. We're looking at a sort of seismic shift in the way that customers are are behaving, right? They're trying they're deciding to go towards a cheaper and you know on some metrics more effective um vehicles produced by BYD and and other competitors in China and they're turning away from Tesla and this this is sort of the first example of that. I think Tesla's been very fortunate to have a very loyal customer base for a very long time. Um and they've also you know benefited from being one of the first movers. Um but now it feels like China is very much catching up to them. The fact that they um have all these very good batteries that are big factor both for Tesla and other Western competitors um who can't can't really compete in that space is is a big factor there. But also the price like people are looking at the Teslas, they're looking at BYD and they're thinking well you know it's more or less the same thing. I don't necessarily need Grock talking to me all the time anyway. and so they'll just opt for BYD. And that's what this 50,000 unit of unsold cars is significant for for for the for the investors who are watching. And they're not happy. Obviously, it's a big pile. The energy storage business that Tesla has also had a rough quarter um deploying quite significantly less than the record it set at the end of 2025. And you know this vapor rare vaporware claim, pardon me, from from JP Morgan is something that that has been, you know, a problem that's dogged um Tesla for a while, right? You've got um federal regulators that had been investigating Tesla's smart summon feature uh which allows owners to um call their cars across a parking lot and let them drive remotely towards them because there were reports of crashes during the use. Um, the NHTSA in the US found that out of a million users, fewer than 1% resulted in any instance. They closed that down. But then there was another thing about self-driving and the amount of crashes there. So, there's other investigations that are pending. Um, the even the announcements that we've had this week um with the full self-driving supervised system finally coming to Europe, it was dampened, right? You you've got the Netherlands saying we're the first company that's going to allow, you know, on this side of the pond for Tesla to to do um self-driving, but it's not really self-driving. The idea is that you you can, you know, drive allow it to drive itself through busy city streets or stop at traffic lights, um steering, braking, accelerating. But Tesla itself is is very much emphasizing that it's this is not self-driving that even though it's in the in the title um to ignore that that you really need a driver in the car. You need that driver to be paying attention. So it does feel very much um like a dampened version of what a lot of people would have expected Tesla to be announcing this year. Um, I think a lot of people had the hope that that it would be, you know, full self-driving, that it would somehow there would somehow be a software update that would mean that a lot of its fleet could be upgraded to do that. And that simply hasn't happened. And I think, you know, this is the problem, I think, for for for the narrative that Musk has been pushing, which is robo taxes the way forward, autonomous driving is the way forward, you know, self-driving for Teslas is the way forward, and robotics and watch us go. um we're not seeing the advancements there, but what we are seeing is the problems that people have been identifying that would plague Tesla actually coming to life. Um and so very difficult path ahead.
Even if you kind of beat me to my next question, but even if Musk's railroad taxis are given the go-ahead and have a nationwide or even an international roll out, is there even a sufficient user base there? Because as far as I'm aware and kind of what you've hinted at, there is still not much if any public trust for self-driving cars, especially given that most of the headlines, at least that are making it through to the wider public are about crashes and even potentially avoidable deaths because of potentially doors locking and things like that that could have been avoided maybe.
Yeah, a lot has been said about the race towards driverless and there are other companies whether it's Google's Waymo or like you know other like companies in the UK that are trying to focus on on that same goal and I think you know the safety features have always been an issue and and Tesla specifically has been in the headlines um for for some of the accidents that that it's um that it's its driverless cars have been accused of of of causing. Um it is it's very difficult for any of these companies to shake the sort of nervousness and the distrust. I think you know Waymo as well has been hugely in the in the um in the news with people being locked in the vehicles etc. Uh, and I I suppose it always has that barrier to entry of like why why is it so much better than just taking a driver-based cab um if it's a cab and I think what Tesla's tried to do is very much say well you know actually this is a very different proposal because it'd be your car rather than you know a robo taxi um although again robo taxi is what it wants to do but you know it's it's it's having that that flexibility I suppose of saying this is software that we could adapt to to our entire fleet rather than just offering a taxi function. Um I just I I think you know we we've seen some trials there's some trials that are ongoing in London for some driverless vehicles. Um they go very slowly. Um it's very difficult to um how do I put this? It's it's very difficult to see how they would be very widespread. Um, I understand in other locations such as San Francisco, they're a lot more prevalent. Uh, but that doesn't necessarily mean that they don't make mistakes. You know, that, um, a lot of the time when there's temporary road works, there've been people on social media posting videos of like their cars not really knowing what to do. They'll stop in the middle of some cones. They'll stop in the, you know, they don't really understand when things change. uh and and until those wrinkles are ironed out, until there's some sort of level of guarantee that things are not going to go wrong, I think people will always have that skepticism and and and rightly so. Um but the technology is getting better like overall is is getting better and you know, my experience with with driverless vehicles has been that it's just quite quite slow and and steady and and very calm. It's like a you know, if you imagine doing something with your driving instructor, it's basically the same sort of vibe. Um, so it's it's it's yeah, not not all bad, but again, it's very subjective experiences and I think, you know, it they will always deal with these sorts of pushbacks from people saying, well, you promised us this, but it's not really that, you know, me being able to allow it to break by itself is neither here nor there if I'm sat in the in the driving wheel.
This is obviously a lot of bad news for Elon Musk's trillion dollar deal now.
Oh, yeah.
Do we have a sense of sort of how bad that is?
Right. So his his deal was he has to deliver 20 million Tesla vehicles, 1 million robots. I mean, if you count the ones that he doesn't sell, I mean, if if they create them, if you if you build a car and no one buys it, does that still count towards your targets? I'd argue yes, but but I'm not sure how much that would fly. Then it was 10 million subscriptions to Tesla's full self-driving feature. Obviously, um what is being offered at the moment isn't full self-driving, so that's not happened yet. Uh bringing 1 million self-driving robo taxi vehicles into commercial operation, that hasn't happened yet. Um earning 400 billion in core profit hasn't happened yet. Um and lifting Tesla's overall market value to 8.5 trillion, um hasn't happened yet. He's got a long way to go, a short way in in terms of automotive sector. I mean everything in the car world takes an extraordinarily long time. Um so often you can kind of look ahead and say if you haven't got this now in 5 years time this is going to continue to be a massive problem because do you see what I mean? Because there's there's not you have you have to you have you need time to maneuver. Um he does still have time.
He can turn it around. He can turn it around. Um I mean look whether he does or not I don't know. I think the the 20 million Tesla vehicles I mean I'm not saying that he should reconsider but I I don't know necessarily just based on on what we're seeing this year whether that can be adjusted downwards if that sort of becomes less and less of a focus for the business and it becomes more of a software business like you know that the recent updates um for that have been rolled out and Tesla's obviously make the older models a bit more obsolete but like you know the fans of of of Tesla were talking about how it allows you to talk to Grock more easily, all that sort of stuff. And and also they were talking about the potential of of it being packaged up and sold just separately as software that can be plugged into other vehicles as well. So I I don't know if if if the actual production of of vehicles becomes untenable and there's not really a growing market for it, it would make sense that he wouldn't then meet the deadline that he himself has agreed to um if they stop producing vehicles. But I don't I think we're a long way away from that happening. Do you think that some of the association with Trump and then the subsequent drive for people to not want to be associated with with Elon Musk is partly in some ways contributing to the people not wanting to buy Teslas is is the short short question.
I mean we yeah we had this stop Tesla movement um at the very beginning when he was sort of you know part of the the White House and the Doge effect and um it's it's an interesting scenario right because if you looked at what um President Trump was saying publicly um which is you know drill baby drill we love oil we I I hate EVs and then he was sort of like ah except for I really love Elon Musk's EV and we'll bring it to the White House and take a look at it and this is this is a really good car I really like this so it was kind of mixed But but ultimately the the actual um action has been to cut you know the the EV um grants and to sort of release that funding stop stop providing that funding. So I think you know ultimately for people that does matter you know I think uh a lot of the customers who are considering buying um EVs at the moment are looking at the price tag. They're not just looking at the aesthetics and especially if you can get a vehicle that's, you know, significantly cheaper than a Tesla, you can get it new. If you're in the market for that, you might you might consider going another way. I mean, there are there are loads and loads of people who are very very um uh connected to the Tesla brand um who feel very strongly that they love it. Um I don't think that necessarily that cohort will have changed their mind because they almost separate the brand from the person a little bit more but there is totally like a cult of you know the Tesla Elon Musk devotees that you know have have you know tried to sell their Teslas cover the Tesla um you know icon up with stickers etc. um who have been a bit ashamed of of parking it elsewhere when when they found that their political affiliations don't match those of of Elon Musk. Um but I think that initial wave has has passed. Um I think you know the Cybertruck people might still get a lot of mucking and they might they might get a lot of staires and maybe you know um some some derogatory comments. Um, but I don't necessarily think that um because he's distanced himself from the president now. Um, and Tesla is such a standalone thing in a lot of people's eyes that that maybe it's quite as bad as it as it was once.
Let's move on to talk about the attack on Sam Altman which happened over the weekend. A Molotov cocktail was thrown at his house and then later another by the same person thrown at the OpenAI headquarters. What do we what do where is that story at now? We know he's been arrested. There was manifesto found. Take us through that a little bit.
Yeah. So, a man from Texas called Danielle Moreno Gama um has um been arrested and he's facing multiple state charges including two counts of attempted murder. Um he uh well, apparently um he was he was supposed to hear those charges at an arraignment yesterday afternoon. What the uh what the result is of that, we don't know yet. Um but yeah, the US Department of Justice has alleged that he was found with documents uh that you know were complaining against artificial intelligence calling for crimes um to be committed against AI executives and investors that back these companies. Um this man who's 20 years old, Marina Gama, is also facing some felony charges um that include possession of an unregistered firearm and attempted damage and destruction of property using explosives. Um he he's also accused of uh attempting to attack the offices of OpenAI in San Francisco about an hour later. Now what what we understand is that he threw a Molotov cocktail which bounced um off of the property um and that no one was injured in these incidents. Um the documents that um the um the police found on him basically stated something to the effect of you know he was encouraging people to commit crimes and therefore he had to sort of follow his own um you know thinking. Um OpenAI said in a statement that there is no place in our democracy for violence against anyone regardless of the AI lab they work at or the side of the debate they belong to. Um I think it's an interesting case because um a lot of these uh business people especially in in the world of tech and not although they they they're accustomed to the the very high profile that their position grants them they're not necessarily exposed to the public and so this sort of attack is not something that I would consider usual.
Yeah, the the thing that struck me was that this feels like certainly the most public example of the AI backlash which we've spoken up which we've spoken about before and obviously be the first to admit tech report is pretty quick to criticize tech bros and those sorts of figures. This is the first time that backlash has been the motive for violence. And it's yeah, I find that quite distressing how quickly we've gone from AI kind of bursting onto the scene in in what late 2022, early early 23 to what less than 3, four years later, we've got somebody admittedly making a very clumsy and and ineffectual attack, but nonetheless taking the the the action to try and harm somebody over it. It it is it's it's an odd situation, right? And you wonder why Sam Altman and not somebody else. I think, you know, he he's been very outspoken um as as a human being and as as a business leader. Um and he is often seen as like one of the leaders of the AI AI movement and yes, there is huge backlash against it. I think, you know, what we've seen up until now is some very coherent arguments um from the general public about their concerns over AI and what it might mean. We've seen some extremely compelling arguments from people who are, you know, passionate about the environment and the energy usage and even economists who are talking about the impact that AI will have on all of us on the cost of energy, on our energy resources, on our economies um and and our reliance on AI to succeed given it's such an intrinsic part of of the stock market. This is different. This kind of has the vibes of like uh the United Healthcare attack um on the CEO where it feels very much like the rhetoric is we can't do anything about it aside from attack the people in charge and that's something completely different. I think, you know, a lot of the people who have been advocating against the use of AI, um or who have been advocating against the, you know, the the the pernicious spread of of like data centers that are dedicated to AI would would not agree with attacking a random um, you know, person who's in charge of these businesses because you wouldn't necessarily um enact any change that way. I think, you know, it's it's surprises me though that a lot of them haven't faced head-on even protests. Do you see what I mean? Like, I know there have been protests outside of the offices of these of these businesses, but it's not like any of these figures have faced, you know, people standing outside their hotels or going after them on trips or trying to stop them at the golf course or at their yacht club or whatever, saying, you know, we hate you. We hate what you stand for. And normally normally there is sort of an escalation um that that means that that you can kind of see this sort of thing coming I suppose as as a business person but you know there's not really been a lot of that. It's been very kind of um against the business not against the person. And so I think this attack is is probably been quite a shock for him. probably been quite a shock for a lot of um the the tech executives that are paying attention and now thinking, "Oh my goodness, you know, um I I didn't really expect something like this." Um and I imagine they are tightening their security definitely and like wondering who else knows where they live. like like you say there's there is a lot of sort of valid criticism being being leveled at people like Sam Altman which obviously this this person has taken to the extreme and decided to act violently upon which is completely not not acceptable. The the thing that stuck out to me, Sam Altman obviously responded to this, and this doesn't go to excuse the the criticism that is leveled at him, but he said that he was a flawed person in the center of an exceptionally complex situation. And I think I don't think anybody could disagree with that. I mean, a a that he's a flawed person or that being being somebody in the middle of that situation has got to be an incredibly hard thing to be experiencing, however, however rich you are.
Yeah, I suppose. So, I mean, I don't really know how to put myself in his shoes because it's almost impossible to imagine what his life is like. I mean, you know, uh it's it's difficult, right? I mean, you know, um you've got somebody who has um you know, gone out publicly and has, you know, said things that have reverberated around the world. um you know who has said hugely um controversial things um that you know talk about the future that will affect a lot of people's jobs, livelihoods um you know the the the intrinsic way that they pay for things and support their families and so I can understand why you know that that's that's a big weight. I don't necessarily um make a habit of sort of uh trying to commiserate with billionaires. So like I yeah I think it's it's you know he's got a team around him. He's extremely well you know media trained. Um I think that a lot of the commentary that we're hearing from tech executives has added fuel to the fire of like you know oh AI is going to replace x amount of jobs. Oh, you know, we're going to, you know, this is going to happen or like we need to rein in AI because it's getting out of control or or whatever. And I'm not I'm not saying that I disagree or agree with any of these opinions, but I'm saying these are very big statements that are happening, you know, all the time from that industry, from executives that you just would not see replicated elsewhere. Like you don't see, you know, car executives uh saying, you know, oh, like, you know, cars are going to >> this is the end of walking. We'll never walk again. like it's just not something exactly. We should really rein in those cars, those killer cars. But yeah, it's it's a it's a situation that you don't necessarily I I've not seen that replicated elsewhere where you've got some people that are, you know, involved in the development of a technology that are being like, "Oh, I think think we might be going too far, guys." You know, it's it's um it's an extraordinary situation. Anyway, um and to be one of the leaders at the forefront of of that um push is I cannot imagine what it's like. But all I'm saying is he has a he has a team around him. He has a lot of advisers, I'm I'm sure, and a lot of PR people who are who are probably very carefully talking to him about like his his public image and crafting that public image. And you know, he's he's knowingly I'm not I'm not sure this is necessarily just about AI. I think you know um Sam Altman alongside many other tech executives have aligned themselves with Trump and they've been seen you know support Trump to go to meetings with him to accompany him to visits um to you know go to dinners in which you know they they take turns saying how wonderful he is and I think you know that there are a lot of people who disagree with that and I'm not sure because again I can't get into the mind of the person who attempted to attack him um over the weekend but there there is a political side of this as well where I think a lot of um a lot of the people who find themselves in a situation where they are opposing AI might also oppose some of the views that these um tech people have have taken and are concerned that the people in charge of this technology are aligning themselves with someone that they find abhorrent and so there is there is there's also that element of things and I can't really speak to to any of that aside from to say that it's a hugely complex issue um it it feels very much like a new wave of um protest and type of protest. Um I don't know whether this is going to be something that becomes uh you know more frequent. I hope it doesn't um because it's just awful, but um but yeah, it's something that I definitely think is is not just uh because he's the CEO of OpenAI. think it's more focused on, you know, the kind of statements and and political stance that he has taken and it feels very much from from the documents they've discovered that he's not the only one that this person wanted to target. So, yeah, hugely worrying development. You mentioned protest and let's move on to another story that's been in the news about Gen Z workers which a report uh from research agency workplace intelligence has revealed that about 30% of employers employees rather have tried to stop their company's AI strategies in some way and that figure jumped from 30% up to 44% among Gen Z workers. What kind of uh blockaging blocking are we seeing and are are we talking about here?
Yes, this this report is really interesting because it very much implies an us and them thought approach between the companies that have unequivocally imposed their decision on a workforce that is largely not consulted on it and leaders are then surprised when workers don't want to play ball. So what the survey is seeing here is that um workers are refusing to use the AI tools that have been assigned to them. um in their day-to-day work. Some are spending their own money on alternative AI tools that they think will be better and help them more. Um some of them are trying to make a point on replacing work with from made by done by humans with AI and they they're deciding to either dumb down the work they ask the AI to do to make it seem a lot less effective at helping them or they're inserting errors into the results to make the AI seem less trustworthy. All all these things are very subjective. I think that the spectrum seems gigantic between people who go like I just really don't want to use this AI. I don't find it useful. um to people who are going I'd rather use something else to other people who are going right I really hate this so much that I want to show you how silly you are to to adopt it because there's there are these mistakes right and so um it does feel like this is kind of a form of AI resistance and um you know we talked earlier a little bit about the sort of the strikes and the people opposing AI there can be you know sanctions boycots um you know public outcry even lawsuits um but driving all of these efforts is the perceived threat to jobs. Um, ethics, safety, democracy, the environment. Um, we we've had really good examples of of people doing this in the creative industries before, but it feels like this report is talking about, you know, something different. And I think that it kind of it touches on it with with the insertion of errors in the results that it there's a a rise in in what people are calling data poisoning which basically means deliberately inserting misleading biased or nonsensical content into the data that AI models are learning from which is something that employees could do. Um and basically makes their outputs worse or biased or or just nonsensical, right? And so um I there was a report that showed that only 250 poison documents in a data set could compromise outputs across AI models of any size. So it's it's something that AI companies are really worried about. And what we're talking about here is is employees doing that at like a low level scale, right? Often when when people talk about data poisoning, they're talking about malicious actors or criminals who are trying to create back doors in the companies. Um, but this is like low low level skills that you know people with anyone with an internet connection and access to company files can do, right? And it looks like employees are joining the ranks of malicious actors who are trying to sabotage AI. Um, and and it is is really interesting the kind of stuff that they can do. So like there's tools like Glaze or Nightshade Nightshade for example. Um, you can use that to make poison visual images that can't be used as training data. So you can basically stop AI in its tracks. Um you got like all different kinds of things like you know Silver that employs social media users to doctor personal images to stop them from being used in deep fakes. And those are sort of good examples of how to stop it from using data. But what we're talking about here is also people um inserting erroneous data into systems that are then scraped by the AI and then basically producing ridiculous results. Um, and I I think that's a super interesting development because it's something that, you know, on on on a very small scale could matter hugely in the rollout of AI in companies. You've got one employee who's putting in erroneous files and just half an hour of that a day would be enough for for a company to be on its knees because you can't you can't trust the information that the AI is scraping for you and that's really really problematic. Another number from the report says that of the 1,200 odd executives that they talk to, 77% of them wouldn't promote employees who refuse to become proficient in and train in AI. In light of that sort of statistic, are workplace rebellions like this likely to foster the right reaction in in employers? Do you think however understandable the urge to to push back and poison data and try and stop the AI adoption might be?
It's it's interesting because this isn't the first survey to claim that. I think it was KPMG in November found that, you know, four in 10 workers were scared that AI was going to take their jobs, but then 60% of the executives from that survey said they were considering cutting employees who refused to to adopt AI. Is really really really interesting because you think about the logic behind it and it's completely artificial. So, you've got businesses who like Cisco, for example, that say, you know, we're more likely to promote you if you if you use AI. But you've got others who, you know, Amazon, for example, who who say that, you know, they want employees to describe how they're using AI in order to get ahead in the business. Meta, as we've talked about before on this show, um linking performance to that. And it's quite disheartening because it's a totally artificial thing. Like of course I could use AI for half an hour, an hour, two hours, four hours each day, but it doesn't actually mean that it's making any difference to my performance. It just means that I'm ticking a box. And that that's the interesting thing and the weird thing about all of this that you know when you're looking at the rollouts, you end they're looking at 100% the wrong thing, which is the metrics of of how much people are using them and how frequently they're using them and not actually if what what it's doing is of any use whatsoever to anybody. So yeah, good luck to all of the companies that are doing that in terms of attempting to to force people to do it because it is, you know, it's outrageous. Almost 50% of workers that are being told, you know, we're having an AI roll out have no strategy that to speak of to follow. So they're just being told figure it out by yourself. And if you don't have a strategy, I think it was like 80% of the companies that have a strategy and that have clearly talked about it to employees are likely to succeed in some shape or form creating some sort of productivity. If you got half of your of of of employees being told just figure it out by yourself and then being told if you don't use it, you're going to be fired. Well, I mean, yeah, yeah, use it by all means. Doesn't mean you have to use it effectively. Doesn't mean you have to use it well. just means you have to tick the box of of of using it and your company will be okay with it. So yeah, it it's very short-sighted and not very mature way of looking at um deploying technology. But it was ever thus like unfortunately we've had loads of examples in the past of companies doing the same exact thing and they don't seem to understand that if you have no plan and you're just plugging something and you're telling people to use it and then you're telling them that if they don't use it their jobs are at risk, of course they will use it, but you know it doesn't mean that you're going to get your ROI right. It just means that you look a bit silly. That's my opinion.
Wow. Natasha Bernau, thanks for taking the time.
Thank you for having me.
If you enjoyed today's episode and you want to hear more of the tech report, please consider liking and subscribing. Also, you can get episodes of the Tech Report wherever you get your podcasts.