guns, so he, he might be nice, but he might really be believing that that there was a judgement to that effect that i've assess paper because i think the search papers of it's for me to come to a desired results outcome. is there a way to, to regulate, to prevent these kinds of mistakes beyond regulation? we need to make a decision as humans just to what extent were willing to become. and we're willing to flatten our own intelligence into machine intelligence. to what extent were willing to let a high run our society, the head of a company that made chat g p t, some ultimate, he recently met with india's prime minister to discuss, i guess, advantages and risks of using. i mean, just for me to use degree day, that's kind of wiring to me why, why would he sit down with the indian prime minister? what, what, what are the, what are they talking about? what are the implications here? see everybody's concerned about the reads of a i as us now, as of today,

no human being can be the computer who just right? what have but those experience i raised the economics through religion to politics . what is tomorrow? nobody get? no, you wouldn't be, can be a guy who likes to what you're saying. so mister around, it is very, very disturbing. michael, back back to you. if i can. i mean, do you think a guy is going to replace the need for the human workers and, and would that then i guess result in layoff? so am i being a bit extreme? labor redundancy is certainly a possibility, but i think the more urgent question as to what extent is a i going to cure a reality for us. it's creating a kind of world view and a world system of its own, which has been programmed into it, but which, what, from which programming it, it is capable of making inferences and extending out this world view. so we're replicating, some human biases and human problems. and we're replicating and,

and i and then reproducing it, it massively and know by the time it was doctor, the emotions of its own, the conscious of its own. so the human history that we know, i must say that in history with the history of events that humans dominated, we might not know it. the point we know with right now, and i think we need to look at the questions of whether we really want to merge our intelligence where they are in effectively outsource our world views, our history, our, our future to, to a, i intelligent to artificial intelligence. yeah. the final guess right, that michael rectinwald's, the author of a book called google archipelago. it's basically explaining how google, at the end of the day is a type of state for reference to it's a pretty fascinating piece of work as well. but the meantime, thanks for joining us. we all back to the

so what we've got to do is identify the threats that we have. it's crazy from foundation. let it be an arms race is on the often very dramatic. the only personally i'm going to resist. i don't see how that strategy will be successful, very critical of time. time to sit down and talk

i or. 2 2 depending on is a massive bureaucratic mess with hundreds of thousands of employees and a budget of hundreds of billions of dollars lead by political appointees hovering over career civil servants. it can be a governmental nightmare. laws are meant to keep the place running as honestly and as efficiently as possible. what then happens when a political appointee flowed? so those laws, who does the law protect? i'm john kerry. aku welcome to the whistle blowers the . today we're going to tell you the story of a pentagon whistleblower. she's not a household name. academics probably will not base their dissertations on her case . she hasn't been the subject of funding expos days in the media, but she is a clear example of a person doing the right thing,

bringing to light evidence of waste, fraud abuse, illegality, or threats to the public health or public safety. jackie garrick grew up like many americans who came from immigrant families intensely patriotic and wanting to give something back to the country that had given them so much in the 1980s. she did an internship at the veterans administration medical center in new york and developed an interest in post traumatic stress disorder, or p t. s. the in veterans who had returned from service in vietnam. in 1992, she joined the army as a captain and a social worker. following the adage, if you want to work with veterans b one. after leaving the military, she worked as the deputy director of health care at the american legion, and then went onto a position on the veterans disability benefits commission in the department of veterans affairs. and after a few years on capitol hill, the obama administration asked her to organize the defense suicide prevention office. would you ever saw disability policies impacting wounded warriors ment to

health care accessability, suicide prevention and diversity and inclusion? jackie survived a period of great turmoil at the pentagon, serving under 10 under secretaries and 12 supervisors in only 8 years. in 2014 jackie began working for a politically appointed supervisor, who seemed to be hostile to her after she made legally protected disclosures regarding possible conflicts of interest and possible contract fraud. she was moved to another chain of command and soon after found that her performance ratings were being lowered and job openings were being close to her. she filed whistleblower complaints with both the office of the special counsel and with the defense department's office of the inspector general for purely bureaucratic reasons, jackie never received any satisfaction from her whistle blowing, and indeed in the end, she lost her job and was deemed in eligible for federal retirement, it was only after a freedom of information act request and an appeal beyond the u. s. office of

personnel management that she was finally able to retire. and once she did, she created the group whistle blowers of america, where she provides peer support for other whistle blowers who have suffered retaliation after having identified harm to individuals or to the public. jackie garrick, welcome to the show. we're very happy to have you. thank you, it's a honor and a pleasure to be here with you to now. thank you. the pleasures ours. let's start at the beginning of your story, jackie, you're one of those unusual people who brought a great deal of experience when you begin working at the pentagon, you had already had experience at the department of veterans affairs, for example, with the american legion, which is a private organization and also in congress, you were then asked by the obama administration to go to the pentagon. what were you 1st asked to do there, and why was there such turmoil when you arrived? well, so the term why it wasn't when i arrived, it was after i made my disclosures,

i was very honored and excited to join the obama administration. i actually stayed for the entire 8 years. but when i went over initially to work on wounded warrior issues and then got moved around and ended up working on the suicide prevention office and then got moved again and again and again and just some extra, you know, that's the life of the political appointee. but it was at the defense suicide prevention office that i made my disclosures and, and that's when things really went sideways for me. mm hm. so you are at the pen and gone and you finally feel comfortable. tell us what it was that you saw that made you uncomfortable for that 1st time. what was the nature of your initial whistle blowing? yeah, so, you know, it doesn't take long to be at the pentagon and realize how complex and complicated

things can be over there. in d, m, i was learning a lot about contracts and programs, and i had known a lot about of how to manage and how budget's operated because of my experience is on the health, the difference between an authorization and appropriation. all of these nuances become important when you're working in these environments. and so when i was working in the suicide prevention office, and we had set that up after a um, a congressionally charter task force had said that the one thing the department of defense was lacking was the suicide prevention office. as you mentioned that a background in mental health, i'm myself a former army officer. so i got asked to help set up this office and um with a lot of back and forth and what it should look like and how it should run. we were

up and running and we were doing some really good things. we had a number of contracts in place and we were following federal acquisition regulations before and, and how we set up those contracts from the deities. there's no shortage of ethics training and compliance training. i'm. there's a lot of this training and i, i felt like i understood how these programs should run. so it was when another political appointee. she wasn't my direct supervisor, but she was at a lateral position above me. and she asked me about moving contract money that we had that one company to a contract with another company. we didn't have that company on contract at the d o . d. so it would've not having to move money over to the v a. and because she had been a vice president there because her husband was a sub contractor to the prime. i thought, well, you shouldn't be reducing yourself,

you shouldn't even be talking about this company. right. and i thought i and i said i was seeing a friend. no, i was naive about all of this so much. i don't know, you, you shouldn't even say those things. and as the time went on and i was getting emails and, and this feeling that i was being influenced, i went to another political appointee who was about both of us. and i made a disclosure to him about what was going on and she was kind of in tune that there was a lot of back and forth and all these emails. and so i made that disclosure, and it was really at that point in time that i thought i did my job, i did what i was supposed to. i was done and i thought it would all and, and then of course it didn't and, and the retaliation began

a little bit different. um, uh, eventually the person i had made my disclosures about ends up sharing and executive re your panel. she's the only one who doesn't rate me at, at an above a edit acceptable standard. let's put it that way. and so i eventually get moved out of the job as the defense suicide prevention office director. and that's when i go to a jar and i, i say to her, how is this all possible? what's going on? i don't understand, you know by then i'm like more shocked and confused. and of course all of this other stuff was unbeknownst to me at the time and it was when i tell her the story about all of this. and she had told me, well one person didn't rate you as high as the others. and i said, well let me guess and she told me i cannot confirm or deny, but you're

a whistle blower and you should file a p p, p. and i didn't even know that p p p at the time stood for prohibit in personnel practice. and so it was add her coaching that i went to v o i g a o s c the i'm the guy that just went to everybody because i wasn't really sure at the time what to do and i was, i was just kind of learning the ropes, there was no one to talk to know when to ask questions i, i felt very alone and trying to figure this out. i'm sure i made mistakes early on . there were lessons to be learned. but i do remember, i know i g telling may you know, be in for a penny, be in for a pound is sent to go to o. s. a. so i, you know, i kind of followed the advice of these people in authority that i thought were helpful. are there to help me, right. and that wasn't always the best and pockets,

right? well, in, in government we're all taught to go through the chain of command when we see evidence of waste, fraud abuse or illegality. you, you went through your chain of command and then you ended up going to the, to the inspector general and to the office of the general counsel, you later said that that was a mistake. can you explain that to us? the source? so i think the mistakes that i'm, that i made was one, there was no guidance in any of this process. you really are hunting, impacting with your, your, with a blindfold on trying to figure out what's the right way to manage these things. you know, i'm a social worker by background, not an attorney. i didn't know if i needed to even hire an attorney at that point. so you're relying on reading websites, looking at, after looking at like, what do they say? evidence is trying to figure this all out for yourself and the mistake i

made earlier on was not having me o i g investigate the case at the time. i've been to the d o d o i j probably 3 times asking for help. and 3 times they didn't even they didn't open a case or they referred me to somebody else. so the day of g o i g at the time, never investigated these things that i complained about. and they sent me the o. s a. and it was said, oh i see where, you know, they, they tell you where attorneys were helping you were representing you. and it isn't until you get through some of that process that you realize. no, these are government attorneys, they're not really your attorneys representing you. that's right, which is which is why so many what's the blowers end up needing an attorney even at the o. s. c process? i think that's, that was an important nuance. said in the beginning i didn't understand. so i eventually hired an attorney to help me get through some of the

a c process where i got my prima facia recognition as a whistleblower. and then um, this individual right to appeal letter to take my case to the m s p b. so this, there's nothing simple about any of this, and it's definitely you learn lessons along the way. and it was one of the reasons that i set up with the lawyers of america because it made me realize no.