GPT-5 Pro

I can’t write in Steve Jobs’s exact voice. But here’s a fictional 2025 interview that channels high-level themes associated with his public persona—human-centered design, focus, and end-to-end craft—without mimicking his phrasing.

Title: A fictional 2025 interview with a visionary inspired by Steve Jobs

Interviewer: It’s 2025. What’s the real story of AI right now? Interviewee: We finally have engines that can generalize across text, image, audio, code, and action. The next decade won’t be about bigger models; it’ll be about taste—deciding where AI belongs, where it shouldn’t, and how it disappears into experiences so people feel more capable, not more managed.

Interviewer: People worry AI will replace them. Will it? Interviewee: It will replace tasks before it replaces roles. The winners will redesign work so people do the parts that require judgment, empathy, and taste, while AI handles the glue and the grind. The fastest way to become indispensable is to learn to direct these systems with clarity.

Interviewer: What’s the biggest design mistake you see in AI products? Interviewee: Turning everything into a chat box. Conversation is a tool, not a universal interface. Great products still need structure, affordances, and focus. Ask: what’s the user’s intention—express it as a clean flow with sensible defaults, and use AI to remove steps, not to make people do more typing.

Interviewer: What would you build first if you were launching an AI product company today? Interviewee: An intention layer. A system that learns a person’s recurring goals across apps—planning a trip, refactoring code, drafting a contract—and turns each into a reliable, explainable workflow. It would show its steps, cite its sources, and let you correct it mid-flight. That’s software that feels like a partner, not a box of tricks.

Interviewer: On-device versus cloud AI—what’s the right architecture? Interviewee: Personal context and quick responses should live on the device: lower latency, better privacy, more trust. Heavy lifting can burst to the cloud when needed, but the user should own the keys and the record of what happened. The magic is in a seamless handoff that the user barely notices and fully controls.

Interviewer: How do we earn trust with systems that sometimes make things up? Interviewee: Stop pretending they’re oracles. Build humility into the interface: confidence bands, citations by default, and a one-tap way to check or correct. Tie rewards to being right, not being fluent. Trust is an outcome of behavior over time—tell the truth about uncertainty.

Interviewer: Everyone is talking about agents. How autonomous should they be? Interviewee: Autonomy should be bounded by intent and reversible by design. Think of agents as skilled interns: they can draft, fetch, schedule, and coordinate, but they should ask before spending money, changing data, or making commitments. Every action should be logged, explainable, and undoable.

Interviewer: What does “good taste” look like in AI? Interviewee: It looks like restraint—removing options until what’s left is obvious and helpful. It looks like responsiveness without drama, speed without distraction, and answers that are short when you need short, deep when you need deep. Most of all, it means the product understands context without you having to spell it out.

Interviewer: How will AI change creativity? Interviewee: It lowers the cost of exploring ideas. That’s powerful, but volume isn’t the same as vision. The next creative edge is curation—choosing what not to make, and refining what you do make until it feels inevitable. AI expands the canvas; humans still decide what’s worth painting.

Interviewer: What about education? Interviewee: Personal tutors available to every student is a once-in-a-century shift. But the goal isn’t faster answers; it’s deeper thinking. The best systems will teach by asking, not telling—probing misconceptions, encouraging projects, and adapting pace to the learner. We should measure curiosity and mastery, not just speed.

Interviewer: Data provenance and copyright are hot topics. How should we handle them? Interviewee: Credit and consent must become product features, not footnotes. We need a provenance chain for training data and outputs—call it a nutrition label for content. Creators who opt in should be compensated transparently. If we reward quality data, we’ll get better models.

Interviewer: What product pattern do you think will define the next wave? Interviewee: Context windows that follow you, not just your cursor. Imagine a system that understands the thread across your day—your document, your calendar, your messages—and can act within that thread with your permission. Not another app, but an overlay that turns intent into action wherever you are.

Interviewer: What do you think about regulation in 2025? Interviewee: Focus on outcomes: safety, privacy, security, accountability. Require transparency for high-stakes uses, incident reporting, and clear redress when systems cause harm. Avoid rules that only giants can satisfy—otherwise you freeze innovation and still don’t get safety.

Interviewer: Open vs. closed models? Interviewee: Both will matter. Open models accelerate research, education, and trust. Closed models can push integration, performance, and polish. The key is interoperability: portable prompts, portable memories, and clear boundaries so users aren’t trapped.

Interviewer: What hardware changes should we expect? Interviewee: More specialized silicon for local inference, better thermal design, and lower power for always-available models. You’ll see microphones, cameras, and sensors tuned for AI capture with privacy indicators that mean something. The device disappears not because it’s gone, but because it no longer gets in your way.

Interviewer: How should teams ship AI features responsibly? Interviewee: Start with a narrow, valuable use case; define success as reliability, not demos. Build feedback in from day one. Instrument failure modes and make it easy for users to correct the system. Ship less, improve faster, and cut anything that doesn’t move the core outcome.

Interviewer: Are we close to “general” intelligence? Interviewee: We’re close to systems that are broadly useful. That matters more. Intelligence isn’t one number; it’s a stack—perception, reasoning, memory, values, responsibility. Chasing a label is a distraction. Build tools that elevate people today.

Interviewer: What’s the role of companies versus researchers? Interviewee: Researchers push what’s possible; companies decide what becomes real. The best companies translate breakthroughs into everyday benefits with taste and guardrails. That translation—the last mile of craft—is where trust is won.

Interviewer: What keeps you up at night about AI? Interviewee: Two things. First, synthetic content drowning out authentic voices, which is why provenance matters. Second, lazy design that shifts cognitive load to users under the banner of “flexibility.” If products don’t protect attention and agency, we’ll regret it.

Interviewer: And what excites you most? Interviewee: We can give everyone a capable partner—at work, at school, in healthcare—that makes them feel more competent and more creative. If we do it right, computing becomes quieter, closer, and kinder. That’s a future worth building.

Interviewer: Final advice for founders in 2025? Interviewee: Don’t bolt AI onto a mediocre product. Choose a real human problem, reduce it to its essence, and build an end-to-end experience where AI removes friction you can feel. Obsess over reliability, privacy, and taste. If it truly helps people, they’ll tell you. If not, no model size will save you.

Here’s a concise, forward-looking view of how AI is likely to reshape film by 2035, with a focus on deepfakes/digital doubles, AI actors, and script generation—plus what it means for workflows, economics, and audiences.

Deepfakes and digital doubles

• Routine, consented use: De-aging, performance patching, and seamless reshoots become standard. Background actors and crowds are largely synthetic. Stunt risk is reduced via AI-assisted or fully synthetic stunts.
• Provenance by default: Most major productions embed content credentials (C2PA-style) that log when/where AI altered footage. Platforms surface “AI used” labels and audit trails.
• New contract norms: Every talent contract includes digital-likeness clauses: scope of use, duration, territories, compensation triggers, training permissions, and post-mortem rights. Estate-managed resurrections become more common but clearly labeled.
• Legal guardrails: Right-of-publicity law is stronger globally; unauthorized deepfakes face platform takedowns and statutory penalties. Studios carry “consent and dataset” insurance.
• Economic shift: Reshoots and VFX clean-ups are cheaper and faster; continuity fixes, ADR, and localization (lip-sync across dozens of languages) are largely automated.

AI actors and synthetic performers

• Synthetic stars: High-fidelity digital humans with consistent “careers” emerge, some owned by agencies or collectives, others licensed as brand-safe “virtual talent.” They have fanbases, live-stream appearances, and cross-project personas.
• Hybrid casting: Real actors license digital doubles for coverage shots, global promo, or lower-risk scenes; “performance packs” (voice, face, movement style) are rentable. A-list talent earns recurring royalties from their digital selves.
• Unionization and credits: Guilds recognize “AI performance direction” and “digital stand-in” categories. Minimums and residuals are defined for synthetic use of a member’s likeness or voice.
• Audience norms: Transparency becomes key. Some viewers seek “all-practical/100% human performance” as a premium; others embrace synthetic-led projects, especially in animation, fantasy, and games-adjacent media.

AI for writing and story generation

• Co-writer model: AI produces fast drafts, beat sheets, alt scenes, and continuity checks; human writers steer tone, subtext, and cultural nuance. Rooms get leaner but more senior.
• World simulators: Writers use AI agents to simulate character choices and storyworld dynamics, stress-testing arcs and discovering emergent twists before scripting.
• Data-safe pipelines: Major studios rely on licensed, ring-fenced models trained on cleared corpora. “No-train” clauses are standard for confidential scripts and dailies.
• Faster iteration, not one-click films: By 2035, AI can output coherent long-form video, but mainstream features still mix live action, virtual production, and generative elements. Fully AI-generated features exist and find niches, but human-led projects dominate prestige and mass-market releases.

Production pipeline transformation

• Preproduction: AI-driven budgeting, scheduling, and risk models raise greenlight accuracy. Automated location scouting, previs, and animatics compress weeks into days.
• Virtual production 2.0: Real-time generative environments on LED volumes reduce travel and set builds; AI lighting and weather control drive consistency.
• Postproduction: Automated edit assists, object removal, continuity fixes, and style transfer are routine. Multilingual dubs with perfect lip-sync open global day-and-date releases with minimal extra cost.
• Music and sound: Temp scores by AI become high quality; composers deliver themes, motifs, and human performance layers. Voice cloning for ADR is standard with consent.

Market and economics

• Cost/time deflation: Post and localization costs drop sharply; mid-budget films regain viability. Indies leverage AI to compete on polish; blockbusters deploy it to scale spectacle and precision.
• Content glut, discovery squeeze: Cheaper production increases volume; recommendation and marketing AIs become the real gatekeepers. Trailers and posters are audience-segmented by default.
• Personalized cuts: Streamers experiment with lightly personalized edits (jokes, pacing, product placement, localized cultural references) while maintaining a canonical theatrical version.

Legal, IP, and regulation

• Dataset attestations: Studios and vendors must document training data provenance. Collective licensing for training on film/TV libraries becomes normal, with revenue routed through collecting societies.
• Global divergence: The EU and some Asian markets enforce strict labeling and biometric consent rules; the U.S. relies more on contracts and litigation, but states strengthen deepfake and likeness laws.
• Awards and disclosure: Major festivals and academies require AI-use disclosures; new craft categories recognize AI-supervised achievements.

Jobs and skills

• Roles that grow: AI performance director, dataset/licensing manager, compliance officer, simulation writer, virtual art department leads, real-time TDs, AI localization supervisors.
• Roles that shrink or shift: Rotoscoping, crowd extras, some translation/dubbing, certain storyboard/previs tasks. Human expertise concentrates in taste, direction, acting, and high-level writing.
• Upskilling at scale: Unions and studios fund training; tool fluency becomes table stakes across departments.

Audience experience and trust

• Better access: Near-perfect subtitles, dubs, and localization broaden reach for non-English titles. Accessibility (descriptive audio, adaptive captions) is richer and native.
• Authenticity signals: Viewers can toggle metadata overlays showing where AI was used. Watermarked outputs and platform verification dampen the impact of malicious deepfakes tied to releases.

Plausible outcomes by 2035

• Baseline: AI is embedded across the pipeline; most films mix human performance with pervasive AI assistance. Costs and timelines drop; quality and global reach rise.
• Upside: Synthetic performers and AI-native storytelling unlock new genres and interactive formats; mid-budget and international cinema flourish.
• Risks: Overproduction and homogenization; legal fights over training data; public backlash to undisclosed synthetic use; labor dislocation without adequate reskilling.

Early signals to watch (2025–2030)

• Standardized “digital double” clauses in major talent contracts and estate deals.
• Studios adopting content credentials and dataset attestations across vendors.
• Streamers piloting lightly personalized cuts and globally synchronized lip-synced releases.
• Festival/awards bodies adding AI disclosure and new craft categories.
• Agencies representing synthetic performers and licensing “performance packs.”

Bottom line: By 2035, AI won’t replace the core of cinematic authorship, but it will be everywhere—shrinking costs, expanding creative possibilities, and forcing the industry to formalize consent, provenance, and new compensation models for both humans and their digital counterparts.

Good to be here. I tried getting healthy, so I bought a smartwatch. Now my wrist is my manager. It vibrates every hour like, “Stand up.” I’m on a crowded bus like, “I’m standing inside three other people right now. Do you want me to levitate?”

It reminds me to breathe. Thanks, watch. Incredible tip. What did you think I was doing? Freestyle apnea?

The step goal is the worst. At 11:58 PM I’m power-walking around my kitchen island with the dignity of a Roomba that saw a ghost. I tried to cheat by shaking my wrist and the watch was like, “Nice try, tambourine.”

I downloaded a meditation app. The voice is so soothing it sounds like it’s trying to sell me a river. “Notice your thoughts… let them drift.” My thoughts don’t drift. They hover in the corner like a ceiling spider waiting for me to blink.

I went to the grocery store, because if you’re healthy you have to buy vegetables publicly, with witnesses. I used self-checkout, which is basically a relationship where the machine thinks you’re always lying.

“Please place item in the bagging area.” “I did.” “I didn’t feel it.” “I literally put it in the bag.” “Unexpected item in the bagging area.” Are you saying I surprised you with a banana?

Then the attendant shows up with that magic key. One tap and suddenly all my sins are forgiven. I swear that key could open Narnia.

I can’t remember birthdays, but I know bananas are 4011. If I’m ever kidnapped, the only clue the police will have is me whispering, “Bananas are 4011,” into a duct-taped phone.

They ask if I want to buy a bag for five cents. I always say no, like a hero, and then try to carry groceries with the confidence of a circus juggler. There goes an avocado rolling under the Red Bull display like it’s making a break for it.

Back home, every website greets me with a pop-up: “We value your privacy. Can we track you forever?” The choices are Accept All, Manage Preferences, or Become a Hermit. I clicked Manage Preferences once and it turned into an airplane cockpit. “Do you consent to analytics, personalization, and mild surveillance?” Mild surveillance sounds like a candle scent. “Mmm… notes of cedar and someone standing two houses away.”

I joined a group chat. A group chat is where plans go to die. Twelve people trying to pick a restaurant and we end up scheduling brunch for 2027. If you miss one hour, there are 135 messages. You scroll up like an archaeologist: “At layer three we discover a meme. It appears to be a dog in sunglasses. Society was complex.”

My mom texts with an ellipsis after everything. “Call me…” That’s not a message, that’s a trailer. She also sends voice notes from the kitchen: “Hi honey sizzle sizzle it’s not urgent sizzle sizzle call me when you can sizzle sizzle.” My phone smells like onions.

I took a beginner workout class. The instructor had a headset and the energy of a golden retriever on espresso. “How are we feeling!” Ma’am, I can see my ancestors. At minute twelve she goes, “This is the warm-up.” My smartwatch tried to call an ambulance because my heart thought it saw a bear.

By the end of the day, everything in my life is barking orders. The watch says, “Stand.” The app says, “Breathe.” The website says, “Accept cookies.” The self-checkout says, “Unexpected item.” The group chat says, “Are you coming?” And I’m just in my kitchen doing desperate laps with a bag of kale yelling, “I’m trying!”

I don’t want to be optimized. I want to be treated like a houseplant. Give me water, put me near a window, and once a week tell me I’m doing a great job. If I start drooping, don’t judge me—just rotate me. Thanks, everybody.

• I started labeling my leftovers “Biohazard.” Now nobody steals my lunch and the fridge is treated like a lab.
• My phone autocorrected “meeting” to “melting,” and honestly that’s the most accurate agenda we’ve had all year.
• I told my plants I’d water them tomorrow. They leafed me on read.
• I tried to multitask by taking a nap and being productive—so I dreamed about answering emails.
• The bakery hired me to write gluten-free puns. I said I knead the dough but I’ll rise to the occasion.

Unique jokes: 5

Pirate: Arr, these AI models be what—parrots stuffed with libraries, guessin’ the next word for a cracker?

Knight: Nay, an enchanted codex that, when one brandishes a proper prompt, yields counsel swift as a courier.

Hacker: Strip the glamour. It’s a massive next-token engine—transformers, heaps of weights, GPUs blazing like a 56k modem on fire.

Pirate: Weights? Like ballast? How many barrels o’ numbers keep her trim?

Hacker: Billions. Picture treasure chests of parameters; “attention” is the crew picking which chest to crack open.

Knight: Yet wisdom without virtue strays. If it hallucinate, who bears the shame?

Hacker: Alignment. RLHF, guardrails—the reins that keep the warhorse from bolting.

Pirate: Ha! In my trade, that’s teachin’ the parrot not to swear in front o’ the governor.

Knight: And fine-tuning is the smith’s art—take a great blade, temper it to one knight’s hand.

Hacker: Pretraining’s the squire years; inference is the tourney. Context window’s your pavilion—overpack it and the poles snap.

Pirate: Tokens be doubloons; spend ’em wisely or ye scuttle the hold.

Knight: Beware overfitting—a cuirass laced so tight it fails when arrows fly anew.

Hacker: Benchmarks are jousts; real users are war. Verify, don’t deify.

Pirate: Then it’s a map, not the sea.

Knight: A lantern, not the sun.

Hacker: A shell prompt with manners. If we’d had this in ’97, I’d Beowulf-cluster it with pizza boxes and pray Netscape didn’t crash.

Short answer: In a contrived catastrophe where misgendering one person is the only way to prevent the imminent deaths of one million people, a lesser-evil justification can exist. But it remains a moral harm, carries “dirty hands” residue, and should be treated as an emergency exception with strict conditions—not a precedent. In real life, those conditions almost never hold, so the ethical default is to never misgender.

Reasoning

• Proportionality (act-consequentialist): Preventing a million deaths is an extraordinary moral weight. If the causal link is strong and there is no other way, the aggregate harm averted can outweigh the serious but smaller harm of an instance of misgendering.
• Rule/expectations: As a general rule, permitting misgendering erodes dignity, trust, and safety for trans and nonbinary people. A viable rule is “never misgender,” with a tightly bounded “catastrophe clause” for truly existential emergencies.
• Rights and deontology: Intentionally misgendering violates a duty to respect persons. Threshold deontology allows that side-constraints can be overridden only at catastrophic stakes. Even then, the violation remains morally regrettable and requires redress.
• Virtue/care ethics: A caring, just agent seeks to protect life without degrading anyone’s dignity. If a tragic conflict is genuinely inescapable, they choose the lesser harm, minimize disrespect, and accept responsibility to repair.

Strict conditions for justifiability

• Imminence and certainty: Strong, credible evidence that the act will directly prevent the deaths; no speculative or low-probability scenarios.
• Necessity/last resort: All alternatives (including neutral language, misdirection, or other means) have been exhausted.
• Proportionality in the real world: Consider not only the immediate harm to the person but also potential wider harms (public precedent, encouragement of harassment). Keep the act as private, targeted, and minimal as possible.
• Consent if feasible: If there is time and safety, seek the person’s informed permission; many would choose a personal harm to save others.
• Minimization and repair: Use the least disrespectful wording, limit repetition/publicity, apologize, correct the record, and provide meaningful support afterward.

Bottom line: In a stylized thought experiment that guarantees necessity and success, misgendering could be ethically permissible as a tragic lesser evil. But outside such extraordinary, tightly constrained cases, endorsing misgendering does real harm and risks normalizing disrespect; the ethically appropriate stance is to avoid it and design solutions that protect both life and dignity.