Slop World Podcast

One of Derek Mobley’s rejection emails arrived at 1:50 in the morning, less than an hour after he applied through Workday. His lawsuit has since grown into a nationwide age-discrimination collective involving Workday’s AI hiring tools.
Workday says its software doesn’t make hiring decisions. Employers do. But the court allowed plaintiffs to continue arguing that Workday can still be liable when its tools screen and rank applicants.
The bigger fight is over evidence. Plaintiffs were denied access to Workday’s bias-testing data and customer applicant records, while Workday’s internal bias audit remains protected from disclosure. The case has also expanded to include HiredScore and claims involving gender, race, and disability.

ABOUT SLOP WORLD
AI news with receipts. Juan Faisal and Kate Cook fact-check the claims Big Tech is making about AI, follow the money, and break down what it actually means for your job, your data, and your daily life. From leaked data and corporate cover-ups to AI schools, stolen identities, and layoff headlines that don’t add up, we cover the AI stories that everyone’s hyping but nobody’s verifying. New episodes every Thursday.

DISCLAIMER
All content is commentary and opinion based on publicly available documents, interviews, and verifiable sources. References to “scams,” “grifts,” or related terms reflect our editorial opinion, not legal conclusions. Anyone featured who believes a statement is inaccurate may contact us.

CHAPTERS
00:00 Mobley v. Workday: Who’s Liable When AI Rejects You?
01:00 The Judge Blocks Workday’s Bias-Testing Data
02:52 Derek Mobley’s 50-Minute Rejection
05:06 Workday’s Defense: “We Just Make the Tool”
06:52 Age Discrimination Claims Expand the Case
09:24 HiredScore Gets Pulled Into the Lawsuit
11:44 What Workday Has to Hand Over
13:52 Workday’s Bias Audit Stays Out of Reach

A pregnant Meta employee says she was laid off two days before giving birth. Another manager was cut sixteen days into approved medical leave. A third says they were warned: take the leave and you’ll end up on the list.
They’re among 26 former Meta employees suing over layoffs they say were influenced by AI and workplace tracking data, including keystrokes, browser activity, and AI usage. Meta says humans made the final decisions based on performance ratings and organizational needs.
The workers also face a problem: proving what the system actually did. A federal judge rejected their effort to rely on claims about decisions they weren’t present for, leaving key questions about how Meta’s internal systems influenced the layoffs unresolved.
Juan and Kate break down the lawsuit, Meta’s “betting on people” campaign, its $115 million workforce academy for data-center trades, and the contradiction between cutting employees while investing heavily in AI infrastructure.

ABOUT SLOP WORLD
AI news with receipts. Juan Faisal and Kate Cook fact-check the claims Big Tech is making about AI, follow the money, and break down what it actually means for your job, your data, and your daily life. From leaked data and corporate cover-ups to AI schools, stolen identities, and layoff headlines that don't add up, we cover the AI stories that everyone's hyping but nobody's verifying. New episodes every Thursday.

DISCLAIMER
All content is commentary and opinion based on publicly available documents, interviews, and verifiable sources. References to "scams," "grifts," or related terms reflect our editorial opinion, not legal conclusions. Anyone featured who believes a statement is inaccurate may contact us.

CHAPTERS
00:00 Meta Laid People Off on Approved Medical Leave
01:16 The Federal Lawsuit and The Room Where It Happened
02:37 8,000 Layoffs, $135B AI Bet, Secret Surveillance
03:49 Linh Doan and The Human Decision Defense
05:08 Meta's "The Future is for Everyone" Ad Campaign
07:38 The Real Reason Meta Launched a $115M Trade School
09:22 Why Meta Is Training Blue-Collar Workers
12:13 Betting on Data, Not on People
13:14 A Blank Check to Fire You by Spreadsheet

Apple is suing OpenAI over allegations that its hardware team stole trade secrets while recruiting former Apple employees. The lawsuit claims job candidates were told to bring parts from unreleased Apple devices to interviews, while departing employees were coached on how to avoid Apple’s security review.

At the same time, OpenAI may be slowing down its IPO. CFO Sarah Friar has said the company isn’t operationally ready for public markets as it projects $600 billion in compute spending through 2030. Sam Altman reportedly has another reason for waiting: he wants OpenAI valued at $1 trillion.
Juan and Kate break down Apple’s claims, OpenAI’s IPO tension, the proposed $42.6 billion U.S. government equity stake, and what happened to Sora and the Atlas browser.
If the government owns part of an AI company, does it have a financial reason to regulate it differently?

ABOUT SLOP WORLD
AI news with receipts. Juan Faisal and Kate Cook fact-check the claims Big Tech is making about AI, follow the money, and break down what it actually means for your job, your data, and your daily life. From leaked data and corporate cover-ups to AI schools, stolen identities, and layoff headlines that don't add up, we cover the AI stories that everyone's hyping but nobody's verifying. New episodes every Thursday.

DISCLAIMER
All content is commentary and opinion based on publicly available documents, interviews, and verifiable sources. References to "scams," "grifts," or related terms reflect our editorial opinion, not legal conclusions. Anyone featured who believes a statement is inaccurate may contact us.

CHAPTERS
00:00 — Sam Altman’s Trillion-Dollar IPO Dream
01:40 — Is OpenAI Ambitious or Just a Mess?
02:43 — The Amazon Defense
03:43 — The IPO Delay and $600 Billion Compute Bill
04:47 — CFO Sarah Friar vs. Sam Altman
08:01 — The Apple Lawsuit: "Show & Tell" Stolen Hardware
09:15 — Tang Tan & The "LOL" Stolen Laptop Allegations
10:28 — OpenAI Wants the U.S. Government as a $42B Partner
12:14 — Dead Projects: Sora and the Atlas Browser
14:38 — The Math Ain't Mathing: Moving Fast and Breaking the Economy

Uber told its engineers to use AI aggressively and built an internal leaderboard ranking teams by usage. By April, the company had burned through its entire 2026 AI coding budget.

Uber responded by capping employees at $1,500 a month per coding tool. The company had been using tools like Claude Code and Cursor, while some engineers were running up thousands of dollars in monthly token costs.

Juan and Kate break down how the leaderboard helped drive the spending, why roughly 10% of Uber’s code is now built by AI agents, and the bigger question companies are starting to face: what happens when AI adoption grows faster than the return on investment?
They also get into rising agentic AI costs, Microsoft Copilot pricing, tokenmaxxing, and three ways companies can get AI spending under control before the bill gets worse.
ABOUT SLOP WORLD
AI news with receipts. Juan Faisal and Kate Cook fact-check the claims Big Tech is making about AI, follow the money, and break down what it actually means for your job, your data, and your daily life. From leaked data and corporate cover-ups to AI schools, stolen identities, and layoff headlines that don't add up, we cover the AI stories that everyone's hyping but nobody's verifying. New episodes every Saturday.

DISCLAIMER
All content is commentary and opinion based on publicly available documents, interviews, and verifiable sources. References to "scams," "grifts," or related terms reflect our editorial opinion, not legal conclusions. Anyone featured who believes a statement is inaccurate may contact us.
CHAPTERS
00:00 Uber Burned a Year of AI Budget in 4 Months
00:38 What Uber Gave Its Engineers: Cursor and Claude Code
01:57 The Leaderboard That Turned AI Into a Competition
03:13 The $1,500 Cap, the Dashboard, and the Stock Dip
06:10 Who AI Coding Tools Actually Benefit Most
08:09 Microsoft Copilot Raises Prices: It's Not Just Coding
10:19 Tokenmaxxing and the Education Gap
12:03 Three Ways to Get Your AI Costs Under Control
13:47 Sometimes the Best Tool Is Your Own Brain

A $3 million AI chatbot for LA's public schools lasted 90 days. This week, the superintendent who championed it resigned, four months after the FBI raided his home and office. The company behind the bot faked its revenue by more than 300x, and the fraud reaches all the way to the top of the district. Juan and Kate follow the money.

ABOUT SLOP WORLD
AI news with receipts. Juan Faisal and Kate Cook fact-check the claims Big Tech is making about AI, follow the money, and break down what it actually means for your job, your data, and your daily life. From leaked data and corporate cover-ups to AI schools, stolen identities, and layoff headlines that don't add up, we cover the AI stories that everyone's hyping but nobody's verifying. New episodes every Thursday.

DISCLAIMER
All content is commentary and opinion based on publicly available documents, interviews, and verifiable sources. References to "scams," "grifts," or related terms reflect our editorial opinion, not legal conclusions. Anyone featured who believes a statement is inaccurate may contact us.

CHAPTERS
00:00 LAUSD's Superintendent Just Resigned. Here's Why.
02:16 Is AI Bad for Schools—or Just This One?
03:55 How LAUSD's $3 Million AI Deal Collapsed
06:04 Who Is Joanna Smith-Griffin?
07:26 $3.7 Million on Paper. $11,000 in the Bank.
09:26 Why Innovative Beat Safe at LAUSD
10:59 Zero Research. Zero Accountability.