tradition that i think it's become. >> it's the true right of passage. how will the voters feel about it? we'll have to wait and see. thanks. we'll see you back tomorrow. >> good night. a shakeup in the tech world that has implications for all of our futures. tonight on "laura coates live." >> what happened over the last few days could change the shape of the future for you, for me, for everybody. you heard about this guy named sam altman, right? the leader of one of the most influential and artificial intelligence companies. and he was fired over the weekend. altman is the leader of open a.i., the company that created chatgpt. he was suddenly out of the company. it was mysterious. and he said he was fired over concerns that he was not always truthful with the board. we meant to what that means. but two days later, altman was hired by microsoft where he could be even more powerful to run a brand-new division with all of the many, many -- all the resources of one of the biggest tech companies. but the saga might not be over. the employees of open a.i. are not pleased. they are threatening to head for the exits unless altman is not brought back. this is not your average story. this is about implications of humanity. i'm going to talk to kara swisher, who knows this story inside and out. and just talked to the microsoft ceo who hired altman. >> every technology ever invented was a tool and a weapon. how can you make sure that the use of the tools gets propagated and the weapons not so much? >> we'll have much more in a moment. but the issue here is more than who comes out on top in a important power struggle. there's some that say it can improve our lives with advances from science to medicine to art to the movies we watch and the usic we listen to. a song where artificial intelligence copied the voice of drake. an anonymous tiktoker used a.i. to generate that song. and the artists themselves had nothing to do with it. listen to this. ♪ >> coming up, we talk to legendary producer, pete rock and ian schwartzman. who wins the battle over artificial intelligence? and what does it mean for all of us? i want to bring in the person on the front of the reporting of sam altman. cnn contributor and host of "the pivot". kara swisher. you must have whiplash. you interviewed the microsoft ceo. what happened? what's going on? >> which part? which part? it started friday and it is still going. we don't play bingo here in silicon valley. chatgpt plays it for us. >> how about chess? >> it beats us at chess. it is a corporate struggle in a lot of ways. it's about power and that's what is happening here. a lot of people expect it. big wfunding by microsoft and other investors to commercialize this for other people. kind of like the first internet company and the first e-mail company or like google. a lot of people felt like under sam's leadership things were going well. but the board did not and fired him suddenly. i think everybody was surprised, including microsoft, which owns 49% of open a.i. it's been a drama since then because they were in negotiations to bring him back and that didn't work out. and he felt they sandbagged him on that one. they brought in another ceo and replaced the interim ceo. and the board's been relatively silent and nontransparent. it's only three people. one of the board members that was part of the firing of sam altman has changed his mind and signed a letter, asking the board to step down -- himself to step down. >> do we have any idea of what sam altman did? we have an ambiguous statement of why he left. >> nobody can. nobody understands it. it's more of a relationship thing. they keep saying it's nothing specific. i think eait's a power struggle between him and others on the board that have different ideas and different directions. and one of them has shifted to the altman side. we'll see what happens. it's really -- they call it alignment issues. it was very unspecific. if you get fired -- it's an alignment issue and they never told you about it or warned you about it. there were tensions between the board and sam. but it's not specific. it's a very nontransparent board that will not say what they did. and in fact, it turns out to be a cloddish board. >> one of the things you say that is an interesting dynamic at play, is there's a debate of those called the a.i. doomers. and those on the other end that want to push the technology further and faster. does the outcome of all of this give one side an advantage? >> no. you heard the interview there. there's middle ground. there's promise with the technology. we have an opportunity to put guardrails in place, so they don't become weaponized as the previous -- social media and things like that. there's an opportunity for government and companies to play a role. i think the worries are it consolidates under companies like microsoft or meta or anything else. and the innovative companies, young companies, are able to participate equally. open a.i. has been around for a long time. it's a relatively young company. one thing that has been striking is employees. they are up to the 770 employees said they would leave in the board doesn't fire itself and bring back sam altman and other executives who left. >> can it survive then without those employees? without sam altman? is open a.i. gone as a result? >> i guess. it has a lot of stuff. it has sxhers that some was building. the profit part of it. it's done well. it's expensive to do what they're doing. i don't know. it's unclear. other companies could come in, i guess. the founders could find other way to fund it. but the computing power is vast, why open a.i. hooked up with microsoft. others didn't like that. elon musk was one of the founders of open a.i. he created his own company. he could come in here. other people could. anything could happen. but microsoft will have more control. that's for sure. it will want a board. >> it's only monday. >> kara, got to have you back. and we won't play bingo next time, my friend. >> you don't have to. in the new cyberspace. >> look, i pointed out at the top of the show, this technology has implications far and wide. artists in particular can worry about what this means for their livelihood. and the future of the craft. joining me now, two people died to the industry, pete rock and executive ian schwartzman. i'm waving to you back. both of you waving to me. thank you so much. i'm glad to have both of you on today. let me begin with you, pete. it's only right. you hear the conversation about a.i. you seem to be against a.i. in music. tell me why. >> okay. one of the negative reasons why is the fakers. you know? using our likeness and our voice. that's, like, major. you know what i mean? for me, to sound like me, use my likeness and maybe get paid or however it works, it doesn't do us any good. you know what i'm saying? and it takes away from our creativity and how we work hard to do for our fans. >> ian, you think it's the opposite. it could be a tool to help artists get new opportunities. you think that's the case? >> i happen to, yes. i think that is the case. i think is going to be a brand-new opportunity for artists just like pete rock and others, to create new rights categories, new revenue streams and creatively, expand their horizons into spaces they haven't been able to go to thus far. so, i see this as an enormous opportunity. it's going to bear a ton of fruit for pete rock and others in the music industry. >> you're nodding your head. you agree with that, pete? >> hey, if ian's saying it, i believe it. ian's a good guy. i trust him. that was my only concern with the a.i. but if ian says, you know, what he is saying is true, i'm up for it. >> we solved all of the problems now, in about two minutes. bravo. ian, tell me about this. how do artists get paid and credited? when you're talk about a.i., it's at the forefront of legislation. people are not as well versed in it. how do you secure the rights for an artist that will have to be reactive of finding if technology is out there, having people use it and get around in a retroactive way. how do they get that money? >> you know, i think this is a brand-new thing we're experiencing right now. i feel like, obviously, we have to get a couple of the issues under wraps here. one being the copyright issue and the other being royalty sele collection. right now in the united states, they only acknowledge human creative compositions to collect royalties. this is two categories that we need to quickly evaluate and put guardrails in place so it doesn't get out of control in a negative way. like i said, i feel like it poses a much bigger upside than down side. it will create a ton of new opportunities for artists. i feel like that needs to begin now, sooner or later. >> pete -- >> that's definitely -- >> go ahead, pete. >> i agree. making sure we get the residuals for the hard work we get. >> people were critical of the use of samplers throughout careers. they thought that using small portions of other songs to make a beat and infuse their own music crossed a kind of line because there was not the legislation or the rights that were asigned to different artists that could protect everyone at play. do you see this as being different than, say, sampling, pete? >> well, for me, i'm an originator. i started in hip-hop sampisampl. that's something that we do. it's something t hurt taught us, the school before me taught me. with that, you know, there's nothing like human interaction in an organic way to create. that's the most important thing for me, to be able to create music organically. that's what it goes for. creatively, what they put in the universe. if you have technology, there could be an argument that says it's going to lead to people not having the creative credit they deserve. having real true original forms of instruments, of music, of s melody, of pete beats or verses. >> different tools like autotune or the mpc, he's are technologies that help pete and other muse siticians take them e creative next level. i don't see this as a threat. i see it for another way for artistic geniuses like pete rock to take the craft to the next level. i don't think it will lose its individuality. it will take the thought process to a level they've been unable to take it to this far. >> i hope you're right. it hasn't been kind to people in power. between your arguments, pete rock and ian, since my husband is from the bronx, i'll defer to pete rock. sorry, ian. >> i can't be mad at that. that's the iconic pete. we love pete. >> thank you, ian. >> nice to have you both on. pete rock, ian schwartzman. thank you so much. next, a ruling today on one of our most fundamental constitutional rights. undercutting the voting rights act of 1965. how it could shake u up the 202 election. next. a likely showdown at the supreme court over voting right. the 8th circuit court of appeals brushing aside decades of precedent on who can bring a case on race. hobbling section 2 of the voting rights act of 1965. the court ruling that only the d.o.j. itself can bring lawsuits, even though challenges brought by groups like the naacp and the aclu have been pivotal in protecting the right to the ballot overtime. the case the brought by the arkansas chapter of the naacp and the alaskao arkansas state arguing it did not give black voters enough representation. arkansas is one of the states immediately impacted by the ruling. joining us now is the mayor of little rock, arkansas. we're less than a year away from a presidential election. we have the census data that was used to tray to establish more maps for proper representation. and now, you have litigants that can't bring cases under section 2. what is your reaction to this? >> it's a clear bad decision as it relates to public policy, overall progressiveness, within these united states of america. little rock stands at the crossroad of civil rights. as you understand, we were the first to help test the brown versus board of education, as it relates to educational civil rights. and we find ourselves at the same crossroads as it comes to minority voters within the state of arkansas. grateful for the descending vote by judge smith. what he share d was right. it takes private citizens to stand up for themselves and not solely wait on the protection of its government agents. >> i've been a civil rights attorney for the voting section of the u.s. department of justice. they cannot possibly, nor can the d.o.j., take every case they've ever heard of. there's not the resources involved. that's why often times litigants take matters in their own handses despite of the d.o.j. decision. in the lone dissent, they looked at the number brought over the decades. he said, over the past 40 years, there's been at least 182 successful section 2 cases. of those 182 cases, only 15 were brought solely by the attorney general. if that means 15 out of 182, i won't do the math at 11:00 at night. that means there was success in spite of and instead of the d.o.j. now that goes away. >> what you have right now is the continued assault against the voices of the people. we're here today because we have legislative packing. and some would say cracking, as well, as it relates to the delusion of the vote. we understand that it was stated there were clear criticisms as it relates to those voters. however, he is focused on section 2. that's the reason we're also here today. as judge smith said, we should not solely rely upon the government agents. we have to rely on the private citizens for right of action. that's the hallmark of the pillars that built the walls of civil rights. because of the naacp and because of the big six, they ensured we had right to vote and a voice at the seat at the table. that should not take a step backwards. >> you talked about packing and cracking and putting all minorities in one district, hoping they wouldn't have the necessary voting strength by separating them out. they always are diluted. a really important way of trying to dilute the voting power. however, there is pushback. today, as you know, arkansas' republican attorney general tim griffin highlighted this decision and said this is going to curb meritless actions brought by private litigants that the attorney general might not have ever signed off on. is there evidence to suggest this would actually be meritless actions being brought? >> to my knowledge, there has not been meritless actions being brought as it relates to voting rights. the only folks looking to suppress the rights of voters is the legenislative body. there was clear packing and cracking. even in my particular district. i've been split into two, because of a mere interstate at the point in time. we know this to be true. that's the reason we are here. and the only suggestion on the private rights action has gone before us because of the rights of others. we're grateful to the history of the naacp and the aclu and other civil rights organizations that continue to fight for the voices of the voiceless. >> what is this going to mean for your district? for your community? to have this decision. >> i think what it means for us is to understand that what's recently happened in alabama is pivotal, to continue to forward of the movement of the voters right act. this is similar. we find ourselves for alabama. we know and believe and don't anticipate for the u.s. supreme court to take a step back. i'm grateful that the circuit courts in the fifth and the sixth district, that all surround the state of arkansas, they believe that there is a private rights of action clause. we're grateful for that. we know in a the u.s. supreme court will be looking at that, as well. >> mayor frank scott jr. thank you for joining us today. this is a very nuanced issue. however, it seems clear to many who have been litigating for quite some time. thank you so much. >> thank you. now, the big question for democrats heading into 2024, you might have guessed it because today is his birthday. president biden's age. another thing is giving the party pause? will vice president t harris b seen as a polilitical liababili? wewe'll answerer that quesestio nenext. in order for small businesses to thrive, they need to be smart, efficient, savvy. making the most of every opportunity. that's why comcast business is introducing the small business bonus. for a limited time you can get up to a $1000 prepaid card with qualifying internet. yep, $1000. so switch to business internet from the company with the largest fastest reliable network and that powers more businesses than anyone else. learn how you can get $1000 back for your business today. comcast business. powering possibilities. it's my birthday today. i want you to know, it's difficult turning 60. difficult. >> happy birthday, mr. president. joe biden's 81st birthday, fueling debate about his age ahead of the 2024 election. surprise, surprise. republicans going so far as to raise the prospect of vice president kamala harris as a way to undercut biden. >> we all know joe biden thinks he's going to run and win this election and hand it off to a president kamala harris. that should scare all of us. >> a vote for donald trump is a vote for kamala harris. >> if we muff this one and biden gets in again, you may end up as kamala as president. >> it's pronounced kamala. she's been the vice president for several years now. even some top democratic lawmakers are lukewarm about vice president kamala harris being the best running mate. but the question is, why is that? let's talk about it. ron brownstein is here and ashley harris. i was talking about pronunciation. i messed up ashley allison's name. that was karma. you have kamala harris, here, as well. we're going to have a fun information with that one. tell me, ashley, i mispronounced your name. i'll deal with you first. why is this thought to be a winning strategy by republicans to try to attack vice president kamala harris? >> i think leadingly is rooted in misogyny and some racism. she's the first woman. she is the first woman of color to hold this office. it is a fear factor that the united states is not ready for an individual. i think, you know, she struggled in the beginning stages of what was her role going to be as vice president. i think she has found her lane, fighting for reproductive rights, fighting for a full teaching of history and putting it at folks who are trying to take away our freedoms and our justice. i don't think it's a winning strategy. but it can rally the base up. >> there are democrats also who don't see her as the winning ticket. listen to this, over the summer. >> is vice president kamala harris the best running mate for this president? >> he thinks so. that's what matters. >> i don't know what i can say other than she will be an excellent running mate and excellent vice president. i don't know if president biden has named his running mate. we're going to a convention next summer. >> not like a resounding, yes, she is the person. ron, ashley mentioned the right idea of finding the right mix for her, what she is working on. you and i were having a conversation that i was picking your brain in the green room about. that's this structure between a vice president and a president, that she kind of breaks the mold in some respects. how? >> the most common model over the last half-century. think about jimmy carter, walter mondale, ronald reagan, bill clinton, al gore, even donald trump/mike pence. in all of those cases, it was an outsider running at the top of the ticket, picking someone that was reassuring to the public and the political establishment who had more tenure here and knew where the keys to the restrooms were and all of that. literally and figuratively. you look at the other examples where you had insider presidents. george w. bush in 1988 and joe biden in 2020. and each of them picked