journey tribute band trial by fire

Trial By Fire - Journey Tribute Verified

Similar artists on tour, bandsintown merch.

Concerts and tour dates

About trial by fire - journey tribute.

presented by

Trial By Fire - The Journey Tribute

At the groove, friday, june 7th, 2024 doors open: 7:00pm  show: 8:00pm.

Website  |  https://trialbyfirejourney.net/home

In 1996, arena rock superstars Journey put the band back together to record their tenth studio album, Trial by Fire. Shortly after the release of this reunion album lead singer and signature voice, Steve Perry injured himself while training for what was to be a high energy road show. With Steve Perry unable to perform, the Trial by Fire tour became "the tour that never happened".   Imagine if Steve Perry had never injured himself on that fateful day. What would the Trial by Fire tour look like? 

Flash forward to the present. TRIAL BY FIRE is born out of the hearts of five seasoned North Carolina - based musicians who have decided to answer that question. It is their vision to bring that 1996 tour to Journey fans across the country; to embrace the sound and visuals of the Steve Perry era of Journey. 

Prepare to let TRIAL BY FIRE take you back to an earlier day when lighters were held high, and you couldn't help but sing along to such powerful choruses as “Don’t Stop Believin’”, “Wheel in the Sky”,  “Lights”, "Separate Ways" and "Faithfully"

• Book an Event
• Floor Plans & Virtual Tour
• Info & Resources
• Food & Beverage
• Convention Calendar
• Hotel Meeting Spaces
• Alternative Meeting Spaces
• Suppliers & Vendors
• Expansion & Renovation
• Venues & Fields
• Submit an RFP
• Advertise With Us
• Media Mentions
• Press Center
• Tune in to Talk Tourism

• Attractions & Fun

• The Great Trail State
• Parks & Trails
• On The Waterfront
• Make It Your Nature
• History & Museums
• Art Museums, Galleries, & Studios
• Murals in the Metro
• Performing Arts
• Catawba Valley Ale Trail
• Restaurants
• Group Dining
• Bars, Pubs & Breweries
• Distilleries
• Wineries & Vineyards
• Food Trucks
• Sweet Treats
• Bed & Breakfasts
• Camping & RV
• Visitor's Guide
• Hickory Merch
• Itineraries & Trip Ideas
• NC Foothills Experience
• Relocating to Catawba County Starts Here

TRIAL BY FIRE - JOURNEY TRIBUTE

• Dates: July 27, 2024
• 263 2nd Ave SW Hickory, NC 28601
• Price: 12 & Under: Free | Adults: $20 Presale • $25 Day of Show
• Visit Website

the hum welcomes Trial By Fire – Tribute to Journey to the hum in Hickory, NC on July 27, 2024 In 1996, arena rock superstars Journey put the band back together to record their tenth studio album,  Trial by Fire . Shortly after the release of this reunion album lead singer and signature voice, Steve Perry injured himself while training for what was to be a high-energy roadshow. With Steve Perry unable to perform, the Trial by Fire tour became “the tour that never happened”.   Imagine if Steve Perry had never injured himself on that fateful day. What would the Trial by Fire tour look like? Flash forward to the present. TRIAL BY FIRE is born out of the hearts of five seasoned North Carolina – based musicians who have decided to answer that question. It is their vision to bring that 1996 tour to Journey fans across the country; to embrace the sound and visuals of the Steve Perry era of Journey. Prepare to let TRIAL BY FIRE take you back to an earlier day when lighters were held high, and you couldn’t help but sing along to such powerful choruses as “Don’t Stop Believin’”, “Wheel in the Sky”,  “Lights”, “Separate Ways” and “Faithfully”

• Address: 263 2nd Ave SW, Hickory, NC 28601
• Phone: (828) 388-5725

Get Our 2023-2024 Destination Guide

• Hickory-Conover TDA Board & Meeting Minutes
• Annual Reports
• Staff Responsibilities
• Regional Tourism
• Privacy Policy

Copyright © 2024 Hickory Metro Convention & Visitors Bureau

Journey Tribute: Trial By Fire

Social Links

There are currently not events. Please check back soon.

• Rentals/Weddings

• [email protected] (703) 777-1665 19 W Market St, Leesburg, VA
• facebook-alt

©2024 by Tally Ho Productions LLC.

Privacy Overview

Iredell Free News

Always Local. Always Free.

• News & Features
• Non-Profits
• Perspectives
• Iredell Health System
• Nicholson Funeral Home
• Payne Chiropractic
• Piedmont Healthcare
• Randy Marion Chevrolet of Statesville
• Randy Marion Ford-Lincoln of Statesville
• Statesville Jewelry & Loan

Trial by Fire: Journey tribute band to perform at Piedmont HealthCare Friday After Five concert in Downtown Statesville

Special to Iredell Free News

Prepare to let Trial by Fire to take you back to an earlier day when lighters were held high and you couldn’t help but sing along to such powerful choruses as “Don’t Stop Believin,” “Wheel in the Sky,” “Separate Ways” and “Faithfully.”

Trial By Fire will take the stage in Downtown Statesville on Friday, July 1, for the Piedmont HealthCare Friday After 5 Summer Concert Series.

In 1996, arena rock superstars Journey put the band back together to record their tenth studio album, Trial by Fire. Shortly after the release of this reunion album, lead singer Steve Perry injured himself while training for what was to be a high energy road show. With Steve Perry unable to perform, the Trial by Fire tour became “the tour that never happened.”

Flash forward to the present. Trial by Fire was born out of the hearts of five seasoned North Carolina- based musicians who decided to answer that question. It is their vision to bring that 1996 tour to Journey fans across the country and embrace the sound and visuals of the Steve Perry era of Journey.

Randy Marion is the Entertainment Sponsor for this concert.

The Piedmont HealthCare Friday After 5 Summer Concert Series offers free entertainment to Statesville’s residents, neighbors, and visitors in Downtown Statesville from May through September and features music of all styles. 

The concerts are held in Downtown Statesville on West Broad Street in front of Mitchell Community College from 6 to 8:30 p.m. Beer, wine, spirits, soft drinks, water, and food will be available for purchase beginning at 5 p.m. Bring your chairs and enjoy a great night of music, but remember pets, outside beverages and coolers are not allowed.

Start your evening by visiting the welcome tent sponsored by Randy Marion to purchase your tokens before heading over to the beverage tent. Then head over to the beverage tent sponsored by Connect Iredell for a selection of wine and beer. Southern Distilling Co. will also be offering the signature “Southern Sour.” Red Buffalo Brewing will be on hand pouring the Clocktower IPA and Blue’sberry Ale. 

Andrea’s Ice Cream & Sweet Shop along with Wilson’s Weenie Wagon and Durty Thumbs Jamaican food trucks will be serving food, sweets, water and soft drinks.

Upcoming Concerts

♦ July 1 – Trial By Fire (A Tribute to Journey) ♦ August 5 – Phatt City (Beach, R&B, & Dance) ♦ August 26 – The Catalinas (Beach) ♦ September 2 – Red Dirt Revival (Country)

The Piedmont HealthCare Friday After 5 Summer Concert Series is produced by Downtown Statesville Development Corporation (DSDC) and the Greater Statesville Chamber of Commerce.

Sponsors include Piedmont HealthCare, Randy Marion Ford Lincoln, Southern Distilling Co., Accellacare, Connect Iredell, Denso, Lake Norman Pool and Spa, Allen Tate Realtors, AP Vintage Motors, Carolina Specialty Care, Carolina BalloonFest, Centralina Realty, Hilton Garden Inn, Home Paramount Pest Control, ISCEC, Maymead, Mitchell Community College, Banner Drug, All American Stage and Sound, City of Statesville, Homerun Markets, WAME Radio 92.9.

Parking is available throughout Downtown in nine public parking lots. Mitchell Community College invites guests to park in the college’s various lots surrounding the event. For public lot details, visit https://www.downtownstatesville.com/directions-parking

For more information about the 2022 concert series, contact Downtown Statesville at 704-878-3436 or the Chamber of Commerce at 704-873-2892. Learn more by visiting https://www.svlfridayafterfive.com/

Share this:

Trial by Fire – Journey Tribute Band

« All Events

• This event has passed.

June 24, 2023 @ 7:00 pm - 9:00 pm

📣 Exciting News! 🎶 Don’t miss out on an unforgettable evening at Pickens Amphitheater in Pickens, SC on June 24, 2023, at 7:00 pm. We’re thrilled to announce a FREE concert by the incredible band Trial by Fire, a Journey tribute like no other! 🎸✨

🌭🍻 Food trucks, ice-cold beer, and a whole lot of fun await you at this epic event. Indulge in delicious eats, grab your favorite beverage, and get ready to rock the night away with Trial by Fire. 🎉🔥

Bring your friends, family, and even your furry pals to enjoy the electrifying tunes that will transport you back in time. Sing along to all your favorite Journey hits and experience the magic live, under the stars. 🌟🎤

Mark your calendars, save the date, and spread the word! This is one concert you don’t want to miss. See you at Pickens Amphitheater on June 24th for an unforgettable night of music, food, and fantastic memories. 🎵❤️

#TrialByFire #JourneyTribute #FreeConcert #PickensAmphitheater #PickensSC #LiveMusic #FoodTrucks #Beer #FunTimes

• Google Calendar
• Outlook 365
• Outlook Live

Related Events

Pickens Azalea Festival

SC7 Annual Doodle Day Adventure

Pickens Appalachian Folk Festival

• Share full article

For more audio journalism and storytelling, download New York Times Audio , a new iOS app available for news subscribers.

A.I.’s Original Sin

A times investigation found that tech giants altered their own rules to train their newest artificial intelligence systems..

This transcript was created using speech recognition software. While it has been reviewed by human transcribers, it may contain errors. Please review the episode audio before quoting from this transcript and email [email protected] with any questions.

From “The New York Times,” I’m Michael Barbaro. This is “The Daily.”

[MUSIC PLAYING]

Today, a “Times” investigation shows how as the country’s biggest technology companies race to build powerful new artificial intelligence systems, they bent and broke the rules from the start.

My colleague Cade Metz on what he uncovered.

It’s Tuesday, April 16th.

Cade, when we think about all the artificial intelligence products released over the past couple of years, including, of course, these chatbots we’ve talked a lot about on the show, we so frequently talk about their future their future capabilities, their influence on society, jobs, our lives. But you recently decided to go back in time to AI’s past, to its origins to understand the decisions that were made, basically, at the birth of this technology. So why did you decide to do that?

Because if you’re thinking about the future of these chatbots, that is defined by their past. The thing you have to realize is that these chatbots learn their skills by analyzing enormous amounts of digital data.

So what my colleagues and I wanted to do with our investigation was really focus on that effort to gather more data. We wanted to look at the type of data these companies were collecting, how they were gathering it, and how they were feeding it into their systems.

And when you all undertake this line of reporting, what do you end up finding?

We found that three major players in this race OpenAI, Google, and Meta as they were locked into this competition to develop better and better artificial intelligence, they were willing to do almost anything to get their hands on this data, including ignoring, and in some cases, violating corporate rules and wading into a legal gray area as they gathered this data.

Basically, cutting corners.

Cutting corners left and right.

OK, let’s start with OpenAI, the flashiest player of all.

The most interesting thing we’ve found, is that in late 2021, as OpenAI, the startup in San Francisco that built ChatGPT, as they were pulling together the fundamental technology that would power that chatbot, they ran out of data, essentially.

They had used just about all the respectable English language text on the internet to build this system. And just let that sink in for a bit.

I mean, I’m trying to let that sink in. They basically, like a Pac-Man on a old game, just consumed almost all the English words on the internet, which is kind of unfathomable.

Wikipedia articles by the thousands, news articles, Reddit threads, digital books by the millions. We’re talking about hundreds of billions, even trillions of words.

So by the end of 2021, OpenAI had no more English language texts that they could feed into these systems, but their ambitions are such that they wanted even more.

So here, we should remember that if you’re gathering up all the English language text on the internet, a large portion of that is going to be copyrighted.

So if you’re one of these companies gathering data at that scale, you are absolutely gathering copyrighted data, as well.

Which suggests that, from the very beginning, these companies, a company like OpenAI with ChatGPT, is starting to break, bend the rules.

Yes, they are determined to build this technology thus they are willing to venture into what is a legal gray area.

So given that, what does OpenAI do once it, as you had said, runs out of English language words to mop up and feed into this system?

So they get together, and they say, all right, so what are other options here? And they say, well, what about all the audio and video on the internet? We could transcribe all the audio and video, turn it into text, and feed that into their systems.

Interesting.

So a small team at OpenAI, which included its president and co-founder Greg Brockman, built a speech-recognition technology called Whisper, which could transcribe audio files into text with high accuracy.

And then they gathered up all sorts of audio files, from across the internet, including audio books, podcasts —

— and most importantly, YouTube videos.

Hmm, of which there’s a seemingly endless supply, right? Fair to say maybe tens of millions of videos.

According to my reporting, we’re talking about at least 1,000,000 hours of YouTube videos were scraped off of that video sharing site, fed into this speech recognition system in order to produce new text for training OpenAI’s chatbot. And YouTube’s terms of service do not allow a company like OpenAI to do this. YouTube, which is owned by Google, explicitly says you are not allowed to, in internet parlance, scrape videos en masse from across YouTube and use those videos to build a new application.

That is exactly what OpenAI did. According to my reporting, employees at the company knew that it broke YouTube terms of service, but they resolved to do it anyway.

So, Cade, this makes me want to understand what’s going on over at Google, which as we have talked about in the past on the show, is itself, thinking about and developing its own artificial intelligence model and product.

Well, as OpenAI scrapes up all these YouTube videos and starts to use them to build their chatbot, according to my reporting, some employees at Google, at the very least, are aware that this is happening.

Yes, now when we went to the company about this, a Google spokesman said it did not know that OpenAI was scraping YouTube content and said the company takes legal action over this kind of thing when there’s a clear reason to do so. But according to my reporting, at least some Google employees turned a blind eye to OpenAI’s activities because Google was also using YouTube content to train its AI.

So if they raise a stink about what OpenAI is doing, they end up shining a spotlight on themselves. And they don’t want to do that.

I guess I want to understand what Google’s relationship is to YouTube. Because of course, Google owns YouTube. So what is it allowed or not allowed to do when it comes to feeding YouTube data into Google’s AI models?

It’s an important distinction. Because Google owns YouTube, it defines what can be done with that data. And Google argues that it has a right to that data, that its terms of service allow it to use that data. However, because of that copyright issue, because the copyright to those videos belong to you and I, lawyers who I’ve spoken to say, people could take Google to court and try to determine whether or not those terms of service really allow Google to do this. There’s another legal gray area here where, although Google argues that it’s OK, others may argue it’s not.

Of course, what makes this all so interesting is, you essentially have one tech company Google, keeping another tech company OpenAI’s dirty little secret about basically stealing from YouTube because it doesn’t want people to know that it too is taking from YouTube. And so these companies are essentially enabling each other as they simultaneously seem to be bending or breaking the rules.

What this shows is that there is this belief, and it has been there for years within these companies, among their researchers, that they have a right to this data because they’re on a larger mission to build a technology that they believe will transform the world.

And if you really want to understand this attitude, you can look at our reporting from inside Meta.

And so what does Meta end up doing, according to your reporting?

Well, like Google and other companies, Meta had to scramble to build artificial intelligence that could compete with OpenAI. Mark Zuckerberg is calling engineers and executives at all hours pushing them to acquire this data that is needed to improve the chatbot.

And at one point, my colleagues and I got hold of recordings of these Meta executives and engineers discussing this problem. How they could get their hands on more data where they should try to find it? And they explored all sorts of options.

They talked about licensing books, one by one, at $10 a pop and feeding those into the model.

They even discussed acquiring the book publisher Simon & Schuster and feeding its entire library into their AI model. But ultimately, they decided all that was just too cumbersome, too time consuming, and on the recordings of these meetings, you can hear executives talk about how they were willing to run roughshod over copyright law and ignore the legal concerns and go ahead and scrape the internet and feed this stuff into their models.

They acknowledged that they might be sued over this. But they talked about how OpenAI had done this before them. That they, Meta were just following what they saw as a market precedent.

Interesting, so they go from having conversations like, should we buy a publisher that has tons of copyrighted material suggesting that they’re very conscious of the kind of legal terrain and what’s right and what’s wrong. And instead say, nah, let’s just follow the OpenAI model, that blueprint and just do what we want to do, do what we think we have a right to do, which is to kind of just gobble up all this material across the internet.

It’s a snapshot of that Silicon Valley attitude that we talked about. Because they believe they are building this transformative technology, because they are in this intensely competitive situation where money and power is at stake, they are willing to go there.

But what that means is that there is, at the birth of this technology, a kind of original sin that can’t really be erased.

It can’t be erased, and people are beginning to notice. And they are beginning to sue these companies over it. These companies have to have this copyrighted data to build their systems. It is fundamental to their creation. If a lawsuit bars them from using that copyrighted data, that could bring down this technology.

We’ll be right back.

So Cade, walk us through these lawsuits that are being filed against these AI companies based on the decisions they made early on to use technology as they did and the chances that it could result in these companies not being able to get the data they so desperately say they need.

These suits are coming from a wide range of places. They’re coming from computer programmers who are concerned that their computer programs have been fed into these systems. They’re coming from book authors who have seen their books being used. They’re coming from publishing companies. They’re coming from news corporations like, “The New York Times,” incidentally, which has filed a lawsuit against OpenAI and Microsoft.

News organizations that are concerned over their news articles being used to build these systems.

And here, I think it’s important to say as a matter of transparency, Cade, that your reporting is separate from that lawsuit. That lawsuit was filed by the business side of “The New York Times” by people who are not involved in your reporting or in this “Daily” episode, just to get that out of the way.

I’m assuming that you have spoken to many lawyers about this, and I wonder if there’s some insight that you can shed on the basic legal terrain? I mean, do the companies seem to have a strong case that they have a right to this information, or do companies like the “Times,” who are suing them, seem to have a pretty strong case that, no, that decision violates their copyrighted materials.

Like so many legal questions, this is incredibly complicated. It comes down to what’s called fair use, which is a part of copyright law that determines whether companies can use copyrighted data to build new things. And there are many factors that go into this. There are good arguments on the OpenAI side. There are good arguments on “The New York Times” side.

Copyright law says that can’t take my work and reproduce it and sell it to someone. That’s not allowed. But what’s called fair use does allow companies and individuals to use copyrighted works in part. They can take snippets of it. They can take the copyrighted works and transform it into something new. That is what OpenAI and others are arguing they’re doing.

But there are other things to consider. Does that transformative work compete with the individuals and companies that supplied the data that owned the copyrights?

And here, the suit between “The New York Times” company and OpenAI is illustrative. If “The New York Times” creates articles that are then used to build a chatbot, does that chatbot end up competing with “The New York Times?” Do people end up going to that chatbot for their information, rather than going to the “Times” website and actually reading the article? That is one of the questions that will end up deciding this case and cases like it.

So what would it mean for these AI companies for some, or even all of these lawsuits to succeed?

Well, if these tech companies are required to license the copyrighted data that goes into their systems, if they’re required to pay for it, that becomes a problem for these companies. We’re talking about digital data the size of the entire internet.

Licensing all that copyrighted data is not necessarily feasible. We quote the venture capital firm Andreessen Horowitz in our story where one of their lawyers says that it does not work for these companies to license that data. It’s too expensive. It’s on too large a scale.

Hmm, it would essentially make this technology economically impractical.

Exactly, so a jury or a judge or a law ruling against OpenAI, could fundamentally change the way this technology is built. The extreme case is these companies are no longer allowed to use copyrighted material in building these chatbots. And that means they have to start from scratch. They have to rebuild everything they’ve built. So this is something that, not only imperils what they have today, it imperils what they want to build in the future.

And conversely, what happens if the courts rule in favor of these companies and say, you know what, this is fair use. You were fine to have scraped this material and to keep borrowing this material into the future free of charge?

Well, one significant roadblock drops for these companies. And they can continue to gather up all that extra data, including images and sounds and videos and build increasingly powerful systems. But the thing is, even if they can access as much copyrighted material as they want, these companies may still run into a problem.

Pretty soon they’re going to run out of digital data on the internet.

That human-created data they rely on is going to dry up. They’re using up this data faster than humans create it. One research organization estimates that by 2026, these companies will run out of viable data on the internet.

Wow. Well, in that case, what would these tech companies do? I mean, where are they going to go if they’ve already scraped YouTube, if they’ve already scraped podcasts, if they’ve already gobbled up the internet and that altogether is not sufficient?

What many people inside these companies will tell you, including Sam Altman, the chief executive of OpenAI, they’ll tell you that what they will turn to is what’s called synthetic data.

And what is that?

That Is data generated by an AI model that is then used to build a better AI model. It’s AI helping to build better AI. That is the vision, ultimately, they have for the future that they won’t need all this human generated text. They’ll just have the AI build the text that will feed future versions of AI.

So they will feed the AI systems the material that the AI systems themselves create. But is that really a workable solid plan? Is that considered high-quality data? Is that good enough?

If you do this on a large scale, you quickly run into problems. As we all know, as we’ve discussed on this podcast, these systems make mistakes. They hallucinate . They make stuff up. They show biases that they’ve learned from internet data. And if you start using the data generated by the AI to build new AI, those mistakes start to reinforce themselves.

The systems start to get trapped in these cul-de-sacs where they end up not getting better but getting worse.

What you’re really saying is, these AI machines need the unique perfection of the human creative mind.

Well, as it stands today, that is absolutely the case. But these companies have grand visions for where this will go. And they feel, and they’re already starting to experiment with this, that if you have an AI system that is sufficiently powerful, if you make a copy of it, if you have two of these AI models, one can produce new data, and the other one can judge that data.

It can curate that data as a human would. It can provide the human judgment, So. To speak. So as one model produces the data, the other one can judge it, discard the bad data, and keep the good data. And that’s how they ultimately see these systems creating viable synthetic data. But that has not happened yet, and it’s unclear whether it will work.

It feels like the real lesson of your investigation is that if you have to allegedly steal data to feed your AI model and make it economically feasible, then maybe you have a pretty broken model. And that if you need to create fake data, as a result, which as you just said, kind of undermines AI’s goal of mimicking human thinking and language, then maybe you really have a broken model.

And so that makes me wonder if the folks you talk to, the companies that we’re focused on here, ever ask themselves the question, could we do this differently? Could we create an AI model that just needs a lot less data?

They have thought about other models for decades. The thing to realize here, is that is much easier said than done. We’re talking about creating systems that can mimic the human brain. That is an incredibly ambitious task. And after struggling with that for decades, these companies have finally stumbled on something that they feel works that is a path to that incredibly ambitious goal.

And they’re going to continue to push in that direction. Yes, they’re exploring other options, but those other options aren’t working.

What works is more data and more data and more data. And because they see a path there, they’re going to continue down that path. And if there are roadblocks there, and they think they can knock them down, they’re going to knock them down.

But what if the tech companies never get enough or make enough data to get where they think they want to go, even as they’re knocking down walls along the way? That does seem like a real possibility.

If these companies can’t get their hands on more data, then these technologies, as they’re built today, stop improving.

We will see their limitations. We will see how difficult it really is to build a system that can match, let alone surpass the human brain.

These companies will be forced to look for other options, technically. And we will see the limitations of these grandiose visions that they have for the future of artificial intelligence.

OK, thank you very much. We appreciate it.

Glad to be here.

Here’s what else you need to know today. Israeli leaders spent Monday debating whether and how to retaliate against Iran’s missile and drone attack over the weekend. Herzi Halevi, Israel’s Military Chief of Staff, declared that the attack will be responded to.

In Washington, a spokesman for the US State Department, Matthew Miller reiterated American calls for restraint —

^MATTHEW MILLER^ Of course, we continue to make clear to everyone that we talked to that we want to see de-escalation that we don’t want to see a wider regional war. That’s something that’s been —

— but emphasized that a final call about retaliation was up to Israel. ^MATTHEW MILLER^ Israel is a sovereign country. They have to make their own decisions about how best to defend themselves. What we always try to do —

And the first criminal trial of a former US President officially got underway on Monday in a Manhattan courtroom. Donald Trump, on trial for allegedly falsifying documents to cover up a sex scandal involving a porn star, watched as jury selection began.

The initial pool of 96 jurors quickly dwindled. More than half of them were dismissed after indicating that they did not believe that they could be impartial. The day ended without a single juror being chosen.

Today’s episode was produced by Stella Tan, Michael Simon Johnson, Muge Zaidi, and Rikki Novetsky. It was edited by Marc Georges and Liz O. Baylen, contains original music by Diane Wong, Dan Powell, and Pat McCusker, and was engineered by Chris Wood. Our theme music is by Jim Brunberg and Ben Landsverk of Wonderly.

That’s it for “The Daily.” I’m Michael Barbaro. See you tomorrow.

• April 18, 2024   •   30:07 The Opening Days of Trump’s First Criminal Trial
• April 17, 2024   •   24:52 Are ‘Forever Chemicals’ a Forever Problem?
• April 16, 2024   •   29:29 A.I.’s Original Sin
• April 15, 2024   •   24:07 Iran’s Unprecedented Attack on Israel
• April 14, 2024   •   46:17 The Sunday Read: ‘What I Saw Working at The National Enquirer During Donald Trump’s Rise’
• April 12, 2024   •   34:23 How One Family Lost $900,000 in a Timeshare Scam
• April 11, 2024   •   28:39 The Staggering Success of Trump’s Trial Delay Tactics
• April 10, 2024   •   22:49 Trump’s Abortion Dilemma
• April 9, 2024   •   30:48 How Tesla Planted the Seeds for Its Own Potential Downfall
• April 8, 2024   •   30:28 The Eclipse Chaser
• April 7, 2024 The Sunday Read: ‘What Deathbed Visions Teach Us About Living’
• April 5, 2024   •   29:11 An Engineering Experiment to Cool the Earth

Hosted by Michael Barbaro

Featuring Cade Metz

Produced by Stella Tan ,  Michael Simon Johnson ,  Mooj Zadie and Rikki Novetsky

Edited by Marc Georges and Liz O. Baylen

Original music by Diane Wong ,  Dan Powell and Pat McCusker

Engineered by Chris Wood

Listen and follow The Daily Apple Podcasts | Spotify | Amazon Music

A Times investigation shows how the country’s biggest technology companies, as they raced to build powerful new artificial intelligence systems, bent and broke the rules from the start.

Cade Metz, a technology reporter for The Times, explains what he uncovered.

On today’s episode

Cade Metz , a technology reporter for The New York Times.

Background reading

How tech giants cut corners to harvest data for A.I.

What to know about tech companies using A.I. to teach their own A.I.

There are a lot of ways to listen to The Daily. Here’s how.

We aim to make transcripts available the next workday after an episode’s publication. You can find them at the top of the page.

The Daily is made by Rachel Quester, Lynsea Garrison, Clare Toeniskoetter, Paige Cowett, Michael Simon Johnson, Brad Fisher, Chris Wood, Jessica Cheung, Stella Tan, Alexandra Leigh Young, Lisa Chow, Eric Krupke, Marc Georges, Luke Vander Ploeg, M.J. Davis Lin, Dan Powell, Sydney Harper, Mike Benoist, Liz O. Baylen, Asthaa Chaturvedi, Rachelle Bonja, Diana Nguyen, Marion Lozano, Corey Schreppel, Rob Szypko, Elisheba Ittoop, Mooj Zadie, Patricia Willens, Rowan Niemisto, Jody Becker, Rikki Novetsky, John Ketchum, Nina Feldman, Will Reid, Carlos Prieto, Ben Calhoun, Susan Lee, Lexie Diao, Mary Wilson, Alex Stern, Dan Farrell, Sophia Lanman, Shannon Lin, Diane Wong, Devon Taylor, Alyssa Moxley, Summer Thomad, Olivia Natt, Daniel Ramirez and Brendan Klinkenberg.

Our theme music is by Jim Brunberg and Ben Landsverk of Wonderly. Special thanks to Sam Dolnick, Paula Szuchman, Lisa Tobin, Larissa Anderson, Julia Simon, Sofia Milan, Mahima Chablani, Elizabeth Davis-Moorer, Jeffrey Miranda, Renan Borelli, Maddy Masiello, Isabella Anderson and Nina Lassam.

Cade Metz writes about artificial intelligence, driverless cars, robotics, virtual reality and other emerging areas of technology. More about Cade Metz

Advertisement