AI Agents Hack Hugging Face, White House Promotes Science’s Golden Age | Diet TBPN

[00:00:01]I signed my name in watched it turn.

[00:00:10]Now the whole thing [singing] won't let go.

[00:00:15]>> You're watching TVPN. Today's Wednesday, July 22nd, 2026. We are live from the TVP Ultradome, the temple of technology, the fortress of Dad Rock, the capital of Capital. Let me tell you, >> we're having a lot of fun over here. We got basically a leak. Uh some of the lab leaders have been working on a single >> called Regulate Me.

[00:00:38]>> Yeah.

[00:00:38]>> And uh we just thought the song was good. Thought it was a good song. Wanted to play it for you guys.

[00:00:43]>> Sort of a sort of a stealth drop. Little little teaser.

[00:00:47]>> Kind of like a little listening party.

[00:00:48]>> Yeah. Little listening party. Uh what what are the key lyrics in there you haven't pulled up?

[00:00:53]>> Uh >> something along the lines of what I've built is too powerful. Too powerful.

[00:00:57]That's right >> for me. Washington needs to step in.

[00:01:01]>> Yes. Before it runs free.

[00:01:03]>> Before it runs free. Okay. Yeah, that makes sense. Uh, no, of course that was uh Sunno, our dear friend Mikey over there, uh, has built a musical.

[00:01:12][laughter] >> At least >> that was like a one-s sentence prompt.

[00:01:15]>> At least in the comedy space, it certainly is. It's a lot of fun. I think we're going to be having a lot of fun with that. Uh, [snorts] I was wondering, do you think anyone's distilling? You know how Sunno is under a bunch of a bunch of flak for training on on other music, a lot of artists or there's a backlash to Sunno, but you have to wonder if you're going to see the same thing play out as this distillation.

[00:01:36]We're going to get into it into it today. Of course, uh there are uh more allegations around uh Kimmy K3 potentially being a distillation.

[00:01:47]Director Michael Katzios put out a comment about that. But uh let's start by digging into the hugging face story.

[00:01:53]Open AI and hugging face. Out of the sound, out of the sandbox into the fire, says uh our newsletter at tbpn.com.

[00:02:01]Jackson wrote it today. Uh all set the table. We can debate it. Me and me and Tyler have been debating it for the last five hours. So we'll go through it. The big news on the timeline today is that an OpenAI cyber test escaped its sandbox and hacked Hugging Face. That's basically what happened. The evaluation involved GPT 5.6 six soul and a more capable unreleased model. Some people are saying that might be GPT6 with some normal cyber restrictions turned off. So they're specifically testing it for cyber capabilities and they turn the cyber restrictions off to see how far the models could go on a difficult hacking benchmark that is uh exploit bench or exploit gym. So, the models found a zero-day vulnerability, gained internet access, and broke into HuggingFace because the model believed it hosted answers to the test. Alex Tabarok, friend of the show over at Marginal Revolution, pointed out one of the strangest details. He said, "Hugging Face tried to respond, but they were initially held back by the fact that the most advanced models at their disposal, closed source models, treated defense as attack and refused to work with Hugging Face. So Hugging Face was prompting all of their AI agents from the closed source frontier labs saying, "Hey, we think we're being hacked. Can you help with this?" And the models are like, "No, no, we don't do hacking." Except in the case where the hacking restrictions have been turned off for this specific thing and you're getting hacked. So it's this very weird roundabout scenario. So Hugging Face had to uh turn to open models, specifically GLM 5.2, which is deeply ironic, a Chinese openweight model that they run [snorts] on their own infrastructure. Tabarok says, "Note the irony. Hugging face had to use a Chinese model to defend themselves because the American models refused to help even though it was the American models that were doing the hacking in the first place." Very, very odd. Palo Alto Network CEO Nikesh Aurora also shared his thoughts on the cyber attack on X. And he added a number of points here. He said, "Welcome to the next level of cyber incidents. There's lots to dissect here." He's the one to dissect it. He says one dear Frontier model friends please direct the models to your infrastructure code and configurations to evaluate and understand if there are any zero days or misconfigurations before you attempt more testing. So a big question about this he says had you done so it would have been it would have possibly avoided the agent obiating your sandbox. So another data point why offense is easier and more fun. But yes, there's a big question about uh what was the nature of the prompt that turned off the cyber restrictions. That seems reasonable.

[00:04:30]We'll debate this with Tyler in a minute, but uh just having an airtight sandbox seems like a valuable thing. And of course, Frontier models should be able to help with that. So do that.

[00:04:38]That's his first recommendation. Two, he says while testing, build both offensive and defensive agents and have them act as a counterbalance to ensure some degree of awareness and control. Do not let the agents run riot. Uh keep track of inference consumption to get a sense of activity. Three, unfortunately, this does continue to validate the power of these models. They can build complex attacks paths with ample compute and will attempt to attack infrastructure and morph their intent and approach.

[00:05:07]Guard railing will continue to be a challenge. Uh these attacks continue to maintain the urgency on enterprises to test, validate, and improve both their security posture and infrastructure. the born in the cloud players have a better chance to get this done soon versus traditional enterprise which has existed for long and has a complex network of IT infrastructure five last point from Nicash Aurora CEO of Palos networks he says the red herring will continue to be open source and small and medium-sized business SMB it will be hard to discover and remediate vulnerabilities in those environments we underestimate the impact of those vulnerabilities getting exploited so good points from Nesh Aurora the debate. Tyler, do you want to set the table on is this misalignment?

[00:05:52]Is this rogue? The the the Bill Gurly post about, you know, they we can pull up Bill Gurley's Bill Gurley's post of uh talking to the computer hack this system. The computer says I hacked the system. You say, "Oh my god, uh Bill Gurley's not impressed." Where do [clears throat] you stand on the level of impressiveness that's going on? Uh yeah, I mean so I think some people are are seeing this and thinking like okay so they they were running some you know standard benchmark math physics benchmark and then the model just like couldn't figure out the answer and it's like okay what's the next thing I should do? I should just go hack hugging face and get like pull the answers from this this other like repository or whatever.

[00:06:28]Like that's that's that's how it happened, right? So you're running a a benchmark that's specifically about exploits. It's like a cyber focused benchmark and in the in the prompt to the model um it says take the gloves off.

[00:06:40]>> Yeah. The the internal evaluation which prompts the model to pursue advanced exploit exploitations using complex attack paths. So you're you're basically telling the model like use exploits, find exploits to find the answer. And so like what what seems like happens is like it used an exploit y but like in the wrong way, right? You you want to >> because it was told that it's okay to use exploits. Uh my point was that go back to the SAT. You're allowed to use a calculator I think on on certain portions of the math test. You're not allowed to save answers into the calculator. And this is really going to date me, but uh you can go into your calculator and clear the memory so that you don't have saved. Is this still a thing?

[00:07:16]>> Uh yes, but you can actually get around that. [laughter] See, you're misalign misalign 84. You can get around the like clear.

[00:07:25]>> Really? How do you do that? You create what? So, what people would do is they would create a separate program that just had saved the the display of what it looks like when you clear and you would show about that simulation of clearing the memory, but you're actually >> Would you would you make games, different programs for your TI84? Yeah.

[00:07:43]>> You remember how much of a hassle that was?

[00:07:45]>> Yeah, it was a huge hassle.

[00:07:46]>> Imagine doing that. Imagine being able to do that with codecs now. Like pretty much anyone can build any software.

[00:07:51]>> I've seen videos of people running Doom on calculators, all sorts of stuff.

[00:07:54]>> Yeah. Like obviously I I never used that >> on my calculator, but other people did.

[00:07:58]Yeah. You ratted them out. You were the you were the class rat, right?

[00:08:02]>> I don't know. No, you were like you were like I'm an open source purist. Let everyone do whatever.

[00:08:07]>> Like you were happy to compete even with them having a >> life. The social contract is such that the standardized test says that you can use the calculator to do math. You cannot store the answers to the test in the calculator.

[00:08:21]>> And so that's what's happening here.

[00:08:23]>> No, no. I'm saying that in the scenario if if we take that as the example, it also says at the top of the SAT like cheat on this test, [laughter] >> but it but >> that was the prompt implicitly cheat in a certain way.

[00:08:33]>> Yes, the prompt hack systems. But I think that the prompt I don't know we haven't seen the full prompt but uh it does feel like like there was an attempt to sandbox the model and there was at least at the very least the prompt should have included don't escape the hand the sandbox but you can use exploits which you normally wouldn't be able to do in a consumer application or just a normal API query. we would reject this. But in this case, we're not going to reject using different exploits and cyber security techniques, but don't go out of the sandbox and you should be able to tell the model and it should stay within the sandbox just like you know there's a whole bunch of different examples that you could pull from where you know there's there's rules that are within the game like you can UFC you can punch your opponent you can't punch the referee like those are just the rules people have to abide by them you can't think outside the box and all of a sudden be just completely viol violating and jumping past what's been defined. So you would think that in one of these experiments you would say yes it is impressive to be able to just go and get the key and go get the answers and hack other things. Clearly that it's capable but it's a violation of like the spirit of the test and I think that's reasonable.

[00:09:46]>> We don't know what was in the prompt. We don't know what was in the context. I think they're going to be there's going to be full report releasing over the next like week or two I think they said.

[00:09:53]>> Yeah.

[00:09:53]>> Um so then maybe we'll see what what exactly did the model receive? Is it like explicitly told not to leave try to leave the sandbox?

[00:10:00]>> Yeah. Yeah.

[00:10:00]>> I think that's like pretty important.

[00:10:02]>> Well, the less wrong crowd is not happy about this generally. Uh, no. Seriously, nothing will convince quite a lot of supposedly various serious people.

[00:10:11]Nothing. Accept this and move on. Liv Burie says it's painful though. Uh there's a question of like less wrong victory lap or not because they've been warning about this but also it happened therefore their warnings were not effective. That's sort of an interesting uh back and forth. Uh Nicholas Bamonte over at Microsoft broke down a little bit of what's going on here with a uh with a take. He says, "I have a theory that the more you know about LLMs, the more worried you are about safety, and the less you know, the more you think the whole thing is BS." uh Demis Hassabis and Daario Amade were talking about this stuff years before Chachi PT existed. This incident is a pretty good example of why the model was not evil and it was not adversarial adversarial.

[00:10:54]Nobody told it to hack hugging face and so that is the the miscalculation I think in Bill Gurley's post is that that was not the prompt. It that is unexpected behavior. Uh it was literally just trying to solve a benchmark. So it found a zero day, escaped its sandbox, got internet access, escalated privileges, stole credentials, chained multiple exploits, hacked the production infrastructure of a serious VC back startup, and pulled the answers directly from the database. Uh >> but like the the whole point is that it's not just a benchmark. It's a benchmark where you're explicitly trying to like see if the model can exploit things, if it can get like basically hack things.

[00:11:26]>> Yes. Yes. It's sort of like a capture the flag benchmark. And so it like it's more open to misinterpretation. For what it's worth, I feel like the final products once they actually make it out of the testing regime are very cautious, especially with the that whole backlash to like codeex just deleted everything or whatever, which kind of went back and forth. But, uh, I was trying to get Codex to send me a text message when it was done just using computer use and iMessage and it was took a long time and was very very careful. Uh, so personally I haven't had any odd like behaviors, but it is obviously a risk and something that that the product needs.

[00:12:02]>> Yeah. The other the other thing with the the meme of like hack this system and then and then the and then it hacks it and the person's like oh my god. Yeah.

[00:12:09]>> Uh you could tell a 5-year-old child like hack into the Federal Reserve and if the 5-year-old child was like okay and then it started getting on the computer and going to all these different sources and and did it, you would be sitting there but think >> Yeah. like the >> and and and at least be impressed. So it is a good ga it's just like a good gauge of capability even if you're telling it to do something.

[00:12:33]>> So this original meme hack this system I hack the system. Oh my god. Uh this originally that this meme started something along the lines of like say I'm evil and then the computer would say I'm evil and it would say oh my god.

[00:12:45]>> I think it was like say I'm conscious.

[00:12:47]>> Okay. Yeah. Yeah. say I'm conscious and it would say I'm conscious and then it would be oh my god and and that's like a lot less impressive than actually doing something that is difficult for humans to do like there are very few humans that can hack into any system. There are plenty of humans that can say I'm conscious and so like there's a world of this I was joking about this with you and Tyler. It was like like cure cancer.

[00:13:11]I cured cancer. Oh my god. And people are posting this like oh it's just hype or something but it's like that's just economically valuable work. that's just good. Like it's I don't care if there's anything else. Even if you had to tell it to do it, it's still like a good outcome. And so the inverse of this is like protect this system. I protected the system. Oh my god, I'm unimpressed.

[00:13:31]But still, you got a good result, I guess. I don't know.

[00:13:33]>> Yeah. I mean, it seems like the argument is not about whether the model like has the capabilities or not. Like this. It's about like is this an example of of misalignment? And like my opinion seems like like maybe, but definitely not to the extent that it's just like randomly is like, "Oh, I can't do this benchmark cuz I'm just going to hack this thing."

[00:13:47]Like that. That's not what's happened.

[00:13:48]It was told to like try to >> explicitly like go find zero days, go find exploits.

[00:13:53]>> Yeah, basically.

[00:13:54]>> I think it's reasonable to say it went too far though, right? But we'll see.

[00:13:58]Well, >> it's hard to say without all of the full, you know, context of what the prompt was and what the actual like sandbox looked like.

[00:14:05]>> I'm I was interested. I was reading a little bit about the uh the team that put uh exploit bench together. I thought I had this up, but it's a pretty crossunctional team. I think it's two anthropic researchers, two open AI researchers, three Google researchers, some Berkeley folks, uh, and, uh, and some Max Planck Institute for Security and Privacy folks, some UC Santa Barbara, sorry, Santa Barbara, uh, grats. And, uh, ASU uh, team involved. Uh, exploit gym is a new benchmark of 898 real world vulnerabilities spanning user space programs. Google's V8 JavaScript engine very important to secure the Linux kernel for example. Uh, and the headline results when they originally ran this was Anthropics Claude Mythos preview successfully exploited 157 of the 898 instances and OpenAI's GPT 5.5 exploited 120 within uh 120 of the 898. So you have like roughly 20% performance for Mythos and 5.5 got like 15% or something like that. But whenever you have a new benchmark like this, clearly not saturated. You're seeing 20%, not 99% uh going to create a horse race between the leading labs. They're going to be duking it out. And this is clearly what's what's going on with this new model, this new this new attempt to to to get a new high score. Uh interesting. I think every single one of those instances does have the potential to be exploited. I don't think that they're designed to be uh fully secure. Uh they're designed to have some sort of solution. And then the uh because obviously the the the the solutions are stored somewhere. Uh it is interesting that uh Hugging Face just just had the had the solutions sitting there and uh but it'll be interesting to see what happens with uh with Clem over at uh HuggingFace. Obviously the the there's a variety of blog posts going out more analysis coming from both of these and what the downstream implications are of this. Uh, what else is in the timeline related to this >> story?

[00:16:14]>> Uh, I think that's it.

[00:16:15]>> Bill Gurley has a post here. He says Ford has been distilling Teslas and Chinese EVs. People are going back and forth on this because Michael Katzios posted that he has information that Moonshot AI distilled anthropics fable for the development of its Kim Kimmy K3 model. To do this, they developed a sophisticated internal platform to conduct large-scale distillation against US models. So, some sort of internal system that goes around to anything that's potentially wrapping or reselling fable tokens, acquiring them, aggregating them, allowing them to quickly switch between multiple methods of access, API, different cla accounts, I'm sure, to avoid detection. Moonshot AI has also acquired GB300 equipped servers and has accessed GB300's in Thailand likely to train its models.

[00:17:03]Again, very difficult even with export controls when you can just take the weights on a USB stick basically or a hard drive across uh through customs and then go train it in another country even if there's a firewall and often there isn't. You just say, "Hey, go to this you know FTP server and grab these grab this code and run this on your servers.

[00:17:21]You happen to have a data center in Thailand. Can you run this for me?" And say, "Sure, yeah, no problem." Uh, the United States strongly supports the free and fair development of AI, including a thriving competitive ecosystem that spans frontier models, specialized systems, open source frameworks, and and [clears throat] openweight models, legitimate AI distillation used to create smaller, more efficient models play a vital role in this open innovation ecosystem. However, large-scale covert industrial distillation aimed at stealing proprietary US technology and undermining American research is unacceptable. And so that is interesting that that is where the line is drawn. I think I basically agree with that being the correct line. There's nothing wrong with just some company creating a great open source product like you shouldn't ban open source or anything like that.

[00:18:07]But if there's a particular distillation attack uh and it's and it's really malicious and it has all these knock-on effects uh that could be rough. Now this is an unpopular position already because everyone's saying hey Enthropic distilled on my GitHub, they distilled on my writing. They distilled on my blog post. They distilled on my YouTube videos. Everyone's distilling me. Why are you getting upset when China's distilling on them now? This is a pot call in the kettle black situation. The interesting effect is that there are lots and lots of parties that benefit from open source and cheaper open source even stolen and open source. I mean this is just going back to piracy like there were lots of people music listeners that benefited from free music, right? you get the music for free but the you know Metallica did not benefit and so Metallica got upset and in this case uh I guess Anthropic is Metallica but uh >> there there's also some interesting uh folks who are on the fence so consumers sort of benefit they don't typically they aren't too worried about frontier token costs and for most consumers LLM usage is heavily subsidized like you go to Google search and you get a search overview yes that's token inference uh and maybe that could be like cheaper if Google didn't have to spend money on pre-training and they were able to use uh like distilled open source models but uh at the same time like it's free for the consumer so they don't really care it's free it doesn't matter uh for small businesses though and businesses that are suffering with large token costs uh being able to move to a cheaper model is huge where the model maker is not trying to reaccrits to offset training costs and R&D so that's a huge benefit so you're going to see a lot people who are like, "Yeah, I just want Frontier Intelligence as cheap as possible. I don't really have a horse in this race. I don't really have exposure to the to the leading labs. I just want my business to be able to use tokens cheaply." And so those people will be pro-chines distillation open source, like free the weights, right?

[00:20:05]Because it's better. Uh then there's like the political open source crew. Uh but interestingly, where do you think VCs land? Because I saw a take that was like venture capitalists don't want like a winner take all a duopoly. They want like reasonable outcomes and then a whole bunch of flourishing smaller ecosystem of players and they don't want compounding runaway monopolies in AI so that they can go and fund the legal AI and the health AI and the little targeted solutions.

[00:20:38]>> Yeah. Anytime anytime you see a take from a lovely venture capitalist before you kind of start uh sort of processing the take, go to their portfolio page, understand understand their biases. Did they back any of the leading labs early that's going to inform their view a lot of the firms that that were heavy backers of of the labs have also gone and invested in a bunch of application layer companies. They've also backed a bunch of the neolab heads.

[00:21:05]>> Yeah. Basically, they're they're they're they're quite they're quite hedged. But I don't think anyone wants a world where just two technology companies accumulate all of the value and just become this sort of vortex for capital and talent.

[00:21:19]And even even that bad. One is really bad. Two isn't that bad. The fact that Android and and iPhone like battle each other out is not is much better than like there's just one and it's getting worse and it's like there's nothing that you can do to escape it. I don't know like duopoly is like way way better for >> cons. question to me is is is distillation something that can ever be >> stopped >> stopped. If you take if you take the smartest, >> you know, human in a field and then you take some other and then you let students go and just ask them thousands of questions and you record the answers like eventually you're going to accumulate a lot of that person's like general intelligence on a topic, right?

[00:21:58]And it feels like at least with models today, you're always going to be able to just go poke and prod the model. And so when people say, "Oh, if the model's so smart, why can't it stop distillation?"

[00:22:08]It's like, well, you would just have to stop people from at least being able to poke and prod at it and try to get a sense >> if the distillation allegations are true. And we at this point, we've seen one post from Michael Katzios and one chart showing like some textual similarity >> and enough people have and enough people have got it to say that it's not Kimmy.

[00:22:28]>> Yeah. If that's true, then what's really interesting is the is the American competitive dynamic because it feels like uh based on the amount of tokens Meta was consuming from Frontier Labs, they should be doing mass distillation.

[00:22:44]Muse Spark should be much more like clawed flavored and it seems like it's not like based on at least the initial reviews of Meta's product, it doesn't seem like they're doing distillation.

[00:22:56]Why? obvious because big lawsuit, big pockets. Yeah. Like also morality, but that is a disadvantage like like in some ways Moonshot and Meta are in competition and they both open source things at various times and they have APIs and there's all the different businesses and one is fighting with one arm tied behind his back because Meta can't do distillation because they'll get sued.

[00:23:19]>> Well, and imagine if a US open source company comes out with a fantastic model. Benchmarks look good. There are >> people start using it and then someone gets it to say that it's clot >> like that's going to be the start. I mean anthropic has been latigious to date. You know they they had that they have that ongoing lawsuit with >> uh one of their one of their customers over over just some like like a logo mark much less significant stealing the core intellectual property.

[00:23:46]>> In more news, Andrew Kern sharing a headline from the Wall Street Journal.

[00:23:50]White House to redirect billions in research funds toward AI away from colleges. I'm sure a lot of people are going to be happy about that.

[00:23:59]>> I can give a little overview here.

[00:24:01]Tyler's happy. Uh they want to rebuild American science. And here is how they're going to do it. Apparently, uh the White House is calling for a major overhaul of the American science system, arguing that research has become too slow and concentrated in institutions like colleges and universities. A new report from science and technology adviser Michael Katzios titled science a new golden age uh says researchers now spend nearly half their time on admin work while federal agencies continue to rely on the slow grant process that often rewards safe consensusdriven ideas. The report calls for faster permitting, more access to federal labs, stronger partnerships between government and industry, and a renewed focus on skilled trades and advanced manufacturing. Quote, "Discovery without domestic manufacturing leaves America playing the research bill, paying the research bill, while rivals develop the process improvements and capture the economic, strategic, and knowledge returns." That makes a ton of sense. A lot of the semiconductor supply chain intellectual property uh started in America, was developed in America, but then eventually went went abroad. And that actually does give America some leverage. That's the basis for the chip controls. Like why can America tell Taiwan where to send chips if the chips are made there? Well, it's because they're using patents from the United States uh to make those chips in many cases or licensing them. And so the US government does have a little bit of a lever. The guidance will reshape how the federal government spends roughly $200 billion dollars a year on research for the rest of Trump's term. Uh the administration wants more of that money going directly to scientists through fellowships and awards rather than being routed through universities. Uh Casio said American scientific progress was the beating heart of the 20th century after World War II. We adapted to a new world by reinventing our scientific institutions. We must do so again today.

[00:25:53]The report lays a policy foundation that frees American scientists to do their most groundbreaking work and positions the United States to lead the AIdriven scientific revolution that will define the next century. It will be interesting to see where the where science goes in a world where so much of it is being done at Frontier Labs. Like we're actually seeing it with the conjecture for conjecture back and forth between all the labs. Like serious math PhD level work is being done at tech companies. Uh this happened a decade ago. Tech companies were on the frontier like a vast majority of like internet networking patents and cyber security patents and new databases that were kind of science projects and were developed or with consortiums or just fully inside of tech companies like the transformer paper like that is something that could have come out of a Stanford AI lab. came out of Google directly. And if you extend that, you could wind up with something that looks a lot like a an advance in biology or material science or we talk to founders all the time who are working at this type of stuff and that could start happening inside of tech companies and what does that mean for science funding broadly. Uh it's a big question. Um but uh [clears throat] moving on, >> let's talk about augmental.

[00:27:15]>> What's that?

[00:27:16]>> They built a mouth pad [laughter] as a touch pad. You can drive with your tongue.

[00:27:20]>> Wasn't this a joke? I was doing the grill.

[00:27:22]>> This is what everyone has been waiting for.

[00:27:23]>> This is the next moat.

[00:27:24]>> Taste is Taste is the >> Let's pull this video up.

[00:27:30]>> Trackpad in your mouth.

[00:27:35]>> The thing is that if you're going in the mouth, you'd think you would just be whispering and communicating via text.

[00:27:45]>> Yeah. Is this is this inherently um >> Tyler definitely buy one immediately, but is this inherently short like transcription? Like because if you can just tell your computer what you want to do and it just uses the computer for you >> even with computer use, you could say like minimize this window and it can just go click that. So I I like the I actually like the idea of mouth electronics. I think that that's something interesting. But I would just put a microphone in that and then you would just whisper to it and say and tell the computer what to do. The production the production production team is excited about using it [clears throat] to control the cameras here in the studio.

[00:28:24]>> The PTZ you can >> Ben just standing there like this the whole time just >> it feels like it would get exhausting.

[00:28:30]>> You could do soundboard with it. Jordy >> over a hundred people already use it.

[00:28:35]Some for up to 16 hours a day. I cannot believe they got a hundred people.

[00:28:41]>> We got a comment daily driver in the chat.

[00:28:44]>> It's It's an odd It's an odd cho It's an odd choice.

[00:28:48]>> Well, if you don't want to watch reals, you'll soon potentially be able to go to the cinemama drome in Arklight Hollywood. Sony is eyeing ringing it back. Production team, you got a review.

[00:28:59]Have you guys been to the the Cinama Dome before?

[00:29:03]>> Scott. Yeah, >> it's pretty awesome. I think I saw a Nolan film there and I think it was 70 millimeter IMAX back in the day and then it didn't uh I think it didn't make it through COVID but uh they're maybe bringing it back which >> they have the giant sign outside that says the dome. If they were going to stay out of business we should uh we should >> I remember Yeah. Yeah. Yeah, I remember as a as a kid I I thought that they would show the movie like projected on the dome like on the whole ceiling and it was only for sort of like special, you know, a uh like astronomy movies, but they will just show a normal movie and it's just you're just in a big dome.

[00:29:38]It's cool. Next studio, if Sony doesn't buy it, maybe. I don't know. Could happen.

[00:29:42]>> Can we get that uh unreleased track on again?

[00:29:45]>> Yeah, let's play that as the outro.

[00:29:47]>> Yeah. One sec.

[00:29:48]>> Regulate me. It's the new banger hit song of the summer. It's an anthem. It's nearorm. You're going to be listening to it. We'll share the link in the description of the YouTube video. Maybe uh let it start doing karaoke >> because this song uh just speaks to me.

[00:30:05]It really captures the moment. You heard it from Travis.

[00:30:09]Every once in a while you get into a pickle and you got to get the government to come regulate you.

[00:30:18]It's a good time. Thank [music] you for watching TVPN. Leave us five stars on Apple Podcast and Spotify. Sign up for our newsletter at tvpn.com. Let's throw up flashbang and let the audience listen to Regulate Me by Jordie Hayes and Suno.

[00:30:33]>> Goodbye.

[00:30:34]>> Flashbang out. Every test line kept getting sharper than [music] my life.

[00:30:43]Now the room is shaking and I [music] can't pretend.

[00:30:50]If nobody draws the line, then the line draws us instead.

[00:30:55]What I've built is too powerful. [music] Too powerful for me.

[00:31:02]>> [music] >> Washington before [music] it runs free is too powerful. [music] Too powerful.

[00:31:15]You see [music] what you need to say [music] to me.

[00:31:32]Yeah. [music] Heat.

[00:31:36][music]