Return to Transcripts main page

Quest Means Business

Musk Sues Open AI; CEOs Highlight New Uses For Artificial Intelligence; Biden Says The US Will Airdrop Aid Into Gaza; Rep. Gerry Connolly (D-VA), Is Being Interviewed About Biden Airdropping Aid Into Gaza; Thousands Of Mourners Pay Their Final Respects To Navalny; Dubai Is Investing Heavily In A.I. Aired 3-4p ET

Aired March 01, 2024 - 15:00:00   ET



RICHARD QUEST, CNN INTERNATIONAL HOST: It is already the end of the week and the NASDAQ is at a record high. There is an hour left to trade on Wall

Street, the markets, we are going to show you how they're looking. All arrows of the triple stack and it's the best day in a sense, with the

NASDAQ up one-and-a-quarter percent.

We'll get into the nitty-gritty of it in a moment. The markets and the events that you and I need to talk about over the next hour or so.

Elon Musk says he is suing open AI, accusing it of abandoning its founding ideals in pursuit of profit.

Defiant mourners are chanting "no to war" as Alexei Navalny is laid to rest.

The judge in Florida picks apart Donald Trump's schedule in his classified documents case.

We are live from New York, new month has arrived. It is March. It is March 1st, I am Richard Quest, I mean business.

Good evening.

We begin with our business agenda and Elon Musk, who is taking open AI to court in a fight that really is at the heart of the future of AI. Musk's

lawsuit is accusing AI and its CEO some element of abandoning their founding purpose. It was created as a nonprofit, and it was to develop AI

for the benefit of all humanity.

Now, the reason he has standing is he helped start OpenAI and left in 2018. Now, it operates as a for profit entity, and is valued around $90 billion.

There is no comment yet on the lawsuit.

Clare Duffy is with me. All right, so they went from nonprofit to profit, but what gives Musk the right to say I'm going to sue?

CLARE DUFFY, CNN BUSINESS WRITER: Well, look, Richard, I mean, I think you do have to look at this in the context of this long running feud that Elon

Musk has had with OpenAI, with Sam Altman, and by extension with OpenAI's business partner, Microsoft, essentially, since ChatGPT blew up and made

OpenAI into a household name. Elon Musk has been raising his frustrations that this company that he helped to found has sort of abandoned in his

mind, its founding mission and its founding organizational structure, and that is what has become the basis of this lawsuit.

Musk is alleging that by making its most advanced AI model private and available for purchase, OpenAI is essentially avoiding, it is essentially

letting go of this founding document.

And I want to read to you a bit from this founding document, which is included in the lawsuit. It was written in 2015 and it lays out that OpenAI

would be a nonprofit corporation developing AI technology and interestingly, it says here: "The resulting technology will benefit the

public and the corporation will seek to open source technology for the public benefit when applicable. The corporation is not organized for the

private gain of any person."

But Richard, I think the key here and my big question is if Elon Musk were still involved with this company, if he were still making money from

OpenAI, if he were the one making money, I should say from OpenAI, if you were getting credit for this game-changing technology, what do you have a

problem with this in quite the same way? I don't know that he would.

QUEST: Right. But if a judge turns around and says, all right, well, yes, you know, this thing changed its purpose, and they're entitled to do that.

But Mr. Musk, why are you entitled to sue?

DUFFY: Well, I mean, I think you know, Elon Musk is saying he was part of the company from its founding. He was part of this founding document.

QUEST: Right.

DUFFY: He invested $44 million in helping this company, this nonprofit entity, whatever you want to call it, get off the ground. And so I think

that's where he is coming from here.

I think there is the potential for this lawsuit to have huge ramifications, even if this is sort of like sour grapes from Elon Musk, there's huge

potential implications not only for OpenAI's business, but also for Microsoft.

What Musk is seeking here is, you know, there is some financial damages, but he is the richest person in the world. What he really wants is an order

that will force open AI to make all of its technology, all of its research, open to the public and to no longer financially benefit from this

technology, and that I think really could undermine OpenAI's business and also the business, this huge ambitious AI business that Microsoft has built

on the back of OpenAI's technology.

QUEST: I was just about to ask you to just bring me up-to-date with where we stand with Altman AI, OpenAI, and Microsoft who is where at the moment?


DUFFY: Right. I mean, so OpenAI has for a long time said that it is still a nonprofit corporation, but it just has this commercial entity within it

that, in part allows employees to benefit in some way from the technology that they're developing. They have this partnership with Microsoft, this

commercial partnership that really allowed Microsoft to get ahead, get out ahead of a lot of the competition in this AI arm's race, because it early

on decided to invest in OpenAI and create this partnership.

We still don't know a lot about the true corporate structure of OpenAI, the true -- you know how this partnership with Microsoft is structured and I

think that's one of the really interesting things that we all could get out of this lawsuit, if it makes it to discovery is more information about how

OpenAI is structured, and how this partnership with Microsoft works -- Richard.

QUEST: Clare, I'm very grateful. Clare Duffy, watching that side of it.

The point that Clare, of course, is making is the significance that AI has, as CEOs across the world try to find new ways to use AI, if you will, to

find the key that will unlock its productivity gains, whether it's hotel groups, news companies, boats, everybody -- everybody highlights AI's



GEOFF BALLOTTI, CEO, WYNDHAM HOMES AND RESORTS: Chat AI today is handling up to 50 percent of their questions, including the question you just asked.

Is the pool open? Is it not? Is breakfast included? Is it not?

DAVE FOULKES, CEO, BRUNSWICK CORPORATION: We need more AI really evolved to help the boat understand the environment, react to the currents and waves

and winds, to make sure it's successful in docking every time.

MATHIAS DOPFNER, CEO, AXEL SPRINGER: Translation, technical production, factchecking to a certain degree aggregation of information that is out

there anyway, we can delegate that to bots, to artificial intelligence and focus at the same time of the very essence of our business and that is the



QUEST: That's the fascinating part because Boston Consulting Group says many CEOs have yet to adopt the technology and 90 percent are still waiting

for it to move beyond hype.

Two-thirds -- two-thirds, 66 percent are ambivalent or dissatisfied with their progress.

Rich Lesser is the global Chair of Boston Consulting Group.

Rich, I know you're not pouring water on the potential for AI. I get that, but what your study tells me is that it is failing to make the gains so far

that people have been promised.

RICH LESSER, GLOBAL CHAIR, BOSTON CONSULTING GROUP: Richard, I think you have to disaggregate the numbers. I think there are two separate things

going on. One is we've had AI going for a while. We've had predictive AI for seven, eight years that people have been trying to roll out, and there

is a subset of companies, the top quarter, which is not so different than your stats that you quoted that are really making progress and embracing it

and embedding it and many others that are finding it's easy to do pilots, but hard to scale; easy to build algorithms, but hard to build data

platforms for all the people processes.

Then there's generative AI, which is truly revolutionary, even within the AI space, that we're only literally 15 months into -- 15 months to the day

and that's early on.

Technology normally takes years to roll out, but people are making bigger and bigger priorities, not leveraging it.

QUEST: I'm going to confess my ignorance between the two AIs that you've just talked about. So forgive me because I think I might be part of the

mass here. Generative, and the predictive, what is the fundamental difference between those two?

LESSER: Well, predictive AI or the ability to build very, very large algorithms that can take mostly quantitative data inputs and provide a

prediction, say, you know, based on these inputs, we predict this is the next best product to offer a customer, or this is how a certain activity is

likely to happen.

QUEST: Right.

LESSER: Generative AI is the ability to take massive amounts of unstructured data, language, pictures, videos, and actually interpret it

and then like -- and turn it into, you know, output that reads like text or looks like images.

QUEST: Right. So company -- on the predictive side, I was always told, you know, every bit of software that's now created has an element of AI in it.

It doesn't matter what you call it, it is in there somewhere.

But what this study that you've done, and it is fascinating says is, as you say, getting the benefits into execution. Of course we'll get better at it,

but we are a long way from that.

LESSER: I would say leaders are getting benefits more and more now. They are finding ways to get their whole people retrained, to use the


I would say many other companies have struggled and struggled less on the ability to do small scale pilots and more on the ability to scale.


QUEST: So Rich, give me an example, within Boston Consulting, give me an example of when you do something and somebody says, ah, Rich, there's an AI

component that will help to X, Y, Zed. What sort of things are you using that for?

LESSER: I think you use it, for example, we have massive amounts of knowledge that we've accumulated and we have created tools that allow our

consultants to say, rather than having to be very specific and exactly when they want to ask a more general question, and to have our ability to go

through the knowledge that we've accumulated, and help people translate into much more usable information. That's would be a simple thing. We use

it to help people translate data into information that's in a presentation form that they can use.

So basic tools that people can use day-to-day in their work to be more productive.

QUEST: But when you sit down with your senior staff, and you know, with your CTO and all the technology people, do they say to you, ah, yes, Rich,

we are adding this bit of AI in which will do X, Y Zed? Or is it now just so ingrained? That really, you can't necessarily identify that?

LESSER: I think more and more of the tools that we build to help our teams have these technologies embedded in them. And I think, particularly -- I

mean, generative AI is new, so I don't want to overstate. I think the study correctly says before early on, but more and more we're finding for

ourselves and for our clients, that as you look to build tools, you want to handle unstructured data, you want to create output, that's easy for a

customer to understand and for an employee to understand you're using generative AI to do it.

QUEST: Rich Lesser, I am grateful for you, sir. Have a good weekend. Thank you, sir.

President Biden says the US will soon start air dropping aid into Gaza. Lives, he says are at risk and on the line.


JOE BIDEN, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: No excuses because the truth is, aid flowing to Gaza is nowhere nearly enough now. It is nowhere nearly


Innocent lives are on the line and children's lives are on the line and we won't stand by and let -- until they -- until we get more aid in. We should

be getting hundreds of trucks in, not just several.


QUEST: Now the inability to deliver aid safely was in large part responsible for one of the worst tragedies of the war on Thursday. The

Palestinian Health Ministry in Gaza says at least 115 people were killed. Israeli troops opened fire at a food site. The US Department of State says

it is pressing Israel for answers.

MJ Lee is in Washington and with me now at the White House. This is -- I mean, we can look at this at two levels. We can look at it as simply a

humanitarian decision by the administration, but bearing in mind, MJ that it's Israel, the closest ally they're talking about. This was a well and

truly big slap in the face to Israel as well.

MJ LEE, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Well, I mean, I think President Biden was pretty blunt in announcing this, that he is doing this because

the reality on the ground is that the amount of aid that is going into Gaza is not enough and hasn't been enough for a long time.

He said this is equivalent to the US trying to pull out all the stops. And yes, I think inherent in that statement is that Israel isn't doing enough.

You know, we know that senior US officials have been putting and trying to put a ton of pressure on their Israeli counterparts to do more. We've seen

this with USAID Administrator Samantha Power, who has been in the region, meeting with the Israeli prime minister and the defense minister, and

putting all of these ideas out there, including opening up more humanitarian aid corridors, the airdropping of aid that just got announced,

that's been an idea that's been out there for a while.

So the pressure has been on Israel from really all sides to do more. And again, I think this announcement sort of underscores that the Biden

administration clearly feels like the situation is completely untenable and the US had to intervene in this way.

The question, of course, is whether this will end up making that much of a difference. I think a lot of experts would say this is akin to sort of a

Band-Aid on a problem, and that is I think why it's so important that in these same remarks, the president called for a "immediate ceasefire." And

he talked once again about this negotiation that is ongoing to --

QUEST: All right, sorry, do forgive me because we've just been listening to John Kirby a moment or two ago, Admiral Kirby, and he was making clear that

this is one of the most difficult military operations that you do in peacetime because putting it crudely and bluntly, you don't want the things

to drop on people and kill them. So you have to be extremely careful.


But the fact that the US is now doing this does take the United States in its relationship with its allies into very different areas.

LEE: Yes, what Kirby said was that the modalities of how exactly this would be executed, including when these air drops will start, how much aid are we

talking about, and particularly the point you just made, you know, you are dropping aid into one of the most dense areas on Earth and people in that

Strip are already of course, suffering a ton. So how can you do it in a way that ensures their safety? I mean, that is going to be a big question.

Clearly, the calculation was made, though, that doing this is better than not doing it, and particularly the situation that we saw yesterday that you

were just talking about, where just the incredibly tragic scene of dozens and dozens of people dying, because they were simply clamoring to get their

hands on food, and aid and other just life necessities. They were trampling over each other so that they could feed themselves and feed their family.

So yes, none of this is tenable. And again, as I was just saying, I think the focus is all the much more on the hostage negotiations and the

ceasefire deal. The fact that the president is talking about a ceasefire, calling for an immediate ceasefire, when I think even just a few weeks ago,

the word ceasefire was one to be avoided in Washington, I think that actually speaks remarkable volumes as well.

QUEST: I'm grateful to you. Thank you. MJ Lee at the White House. Thank you.


The Georgia election subversion case against Donald Trump. Now, the defense attorneys are giving closing arguments. It is all about the push to

disqualify the district attorney who brought the case, that's Fani Willis who you see there. We will talk about after the break.


QUEST: Closing arguments are underway in the hearing that could potentially disqualify the Fulton County district attorney, Fani Willis. Now, she is

the one who charged Donald Trump and 18 co-defendants in the Georgia election interference case.

The defense says her romantic relationship with Nathan Wade, the prosecutor that she had to lead created a conflict of interest. And they accused her

of benefiting financially from the relationship.

One of the defense lawyers says it's a matter of public confidence.


JOHN MERCHANT, DEFENSE ATTORNEY FOR MIKE ROMAN: The reason why the appearance of a conflict is so prescient here is because if this court

allows this kind of behavior to go on and allows DAs across the state, by its order to engage in these kinds of activities, the entire public

confidence in the system will be shot, and the integrity of the system will be undermined.



QUEST: Joey Jackson is with me.

All right, help me understand this, Joey. Assume for the purposes of this question that the conflict is found. She is disqualified, bish, bash, bosh.

Does that make one jot to the indictment against Trump et al?

JOEY JACKSON, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Yes, I think that's a great point to be sure. I mean, let's talk about the two distinct issues, right?

Right. On the one hand, you have the argument that there was this relationship and predicated upon the relationship, the prosecutor

presumably received a financial benefit because of all these trips and dalliances and lunches and et cetera.

And so the issue is, right, at the end of the day, let's assume, as you noted that that's all true, that they did have a relationship, who cares

when the relationship began? Who cares what they did in that relationship? How does it impair, impact, affect or otherwise, deal with indictment

against Mr. Trump and now 14 co-defendant? Why do I say 14, Richard? That's because four have already pled guilty, and including three of his that is

the former president's election attorneys.

And so it's a very good point, right, in your question, which is that notwithstanding the theater, and the reality TV that we're seeing, playing

out with regard to who she was with, and when and what they did, does it impair, affect, or influence the integrity of the indictment, the nature of

the evidence, the competence of the evidence, the strength of the evidence, that's what the case is ultimately all about.

However, the judge determined that they're going to have a hearing to see whether or not the integrity of the proceeding was impaired in any way and

that's what's happening.

QUEST: Right, but when you say the integrity was impaired, which proceeding? The proceedings of the indictment, in so far, or I mean -- I'm

trying to sort of get to worst case-best case scenario here.

Assuming she loses on every single front, does the judge turn round and say, in that case, bearing in mind that, this indictment must fail, we will

go back to the grand jury.

JACKSON: Okay, so let's parse this out and let us parse it out that way. When I talk from the beginning, when I talk about the integrity of the

proceeding, what happens is, is that when a defendant is indicted, there is a process.

In this particular instance, 18 defendants were indicted, plus Trump, what is that process? That process is a grand jury. A grand jury is composed of

citizens from that locality in Georgia, their job is not to assess guilt or innocence, their job is twofold.

Is there a probable cause to believe that a crime was committed, and that the defendants before the grand jury committed it? After a grand jury

indicts, the defense attorneys get discovery. That's information that speaks to the alleged guilt of their clients, they review that and make

certain challenge motions. This is one of them. It's an evidentiary hearing.

And then ultimately, the case goes to trial. When or if a case goes to trial, you get to establish if you're the prosecutor, if you do beyond a

reasonable doubt, there's guilt. That's the proceeding. That's the way it should be.

Now, having addressed that issue, that's what the case is. All this theater, this case is about the issue of subversion of an election in

Georgia allegedly by the defendants. That's the hearing. That's the process, as it should play out, very quickly, Richard.

This, however, goes to show this being the preceding we are hearing, Fani Willis, she's the prosecutor in Georgia, she was involved with the special

prosecutor prosecuting the Trump case. What if any effect did that have on a case? That's the ultimate issue.

Now the judge has to make a determination of whether there was a relationship and should the indictment be thrown out? Should Fani Willis be

thrown off of the case and leave the indictment to stand and another prosecutor be appointed to prosecute the case? All of that is fair game for

this proceeding.

QUEST: And thank you for that. That's excellent, clarifying the way forward, but let's assume again, worst case scenario. The judge says that

the prosecutorial misconduct was so great that the indictment must fail. Can the new prosecutor go back and have a second go at the grand jury?

There's been no verdict, therefore, double jeopardy doesn't seem to be an issue here.


JACKSON: That's exactly right and so here's the issue, right? Now the judge can make that determination. A judge can say that your conduct was so

abysmal, Madam Prosecutor and special prosecutor, that I'm not only removing you off of the case and your offices off of the case, I want you

to have nothing to do with the case, and by the way, the indictment stinks, the integrity of the process is impaired. This is all done. Let's have a do

over. That's the issue. The judge can do that.

In the event that that's the case, Richard, what will end up happening is, is that this special counsel in Georgia would appoint a special prosecutor.

The timeline of the case moving forward would be impaired because obviously a new prosecutor can look at it anew. They will then present the case,

again, if they chose to, to another grand jury.

I have already explained that process. By majority vote, they decide is there a reasonable cause to believe a crime was committed that they

committed it, and then the case would go forward. That all is what the Trump team would love, because that would push it way back well into 2025.

The election would be over. And by the way, I think that's the play here, to push this back, move this off, get it off the table any way you can,

that would be a huge win for Trump's team and the defense.

QUEST: Keep the notebooks close at hand as we work our way through rules of procedure, rules of evidence. We're going to need them all before we

finished here, Joey.

Excellent as always. Thank you, you clarified beautifully for me.

Now this idea of the timeline that Joey was talking about? Well, a judge has not yet determined whether Donald Trump's classified documents trial,

which is meant to be in May should be pushed further, closer to November or even thereafter.

Today's hearing is over and the prosecutors want to start the trial on July the 8th. Trump's lawyers say it won't give them enough time to prepare

discovery, preparation, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. They say the timing is unfair since they have other cases to prepare for though arguably

that's their problem, no one else's.

The Trump New York hush money trial, that's the Stormy Daniels one, that is set for March 25th. The Supreme Court is hearing arguments over Trump's

presidential immunity in the federal election interference case, that's in April, and the GA subversion trial is proposed for August, but that could

go any which way backwards, bearing in mind what we know about what Joey has just been talking about.

Katelyn Polantz is with me.

Luckily, you only have to deal with which bit of it today.

KATELYN POLANTZ, CNN CRIME AND JUSTICE SENIOR REPORTER: Richard, I am in Florida, where a five-hour hearing with Donald Trump in the courtroom just

took place. This is his classified documents case, the criminal case against him for mishandling national security records at his club about an

hour away, Mar-a-Lago.

And in this hearing, it was supposed to be about a trial date, it was about a trial date, but we emerged with no trial date set in this case now.

There were initial thoughts of this going to trial this spring. Now the Justice Department says July would be a good time to start this. It should

start this summer, this trial should take place then. But then the defense team stood up, it is Donald Trump's defense team as well as his two co-

defendants and they all said we have so much work to do and the prosecutors agree, there is a lot of work to do left in this case. And they said, we

believe this can't happen until August, perhaps September, perhaps even later.

And Donald Trump's lawyer, Todd Blanche, he stood up before Judge Aileen Cannon in court and argued the elephant in the room, put it all out there

saying that they want this to go -- the Justice Department wants this case to go to trial before the election. They are trying to jam it in. There's

no reason that we should do this because there's such serious issues here.

The judge did not tip her hand at all on what she was going to do. But she did hear all kinds of arguments there. And the Justice Department did

clarify they have no issue with setting a trial date or asking for a trial date that is very soon to the election. Their role in not taking steps

there, that's about charging cases not trying them.

QUEST: Yes, but what -- I'm getting confused, you know, there are so many judges and so many cases. Where does this judge stand on the idea of

justice before the election? In other words, the requirement of justice must be done and seem to be done before she is not concerned about whether

or not you know he stands in his presidential election.

POLANTZ: Richard, we don't have that much in the record to show us exactly where she will feel about that. She asked questions about that today. This

is a judge, Judge Aileen Cannon, who was appointed to the bench by Donald Trump, was confirmed by the Senate, and now is sitting here in this

courthouse in Fort Pierce, Florida.

One of the things that we do have from her previously, though, is that Donald Trump's team has asked multiple times to push this trial off until

after the presidential election in November. She did not agree to do that when she initially set a trial date for May.

We are now going to be waiting to see if she goes with that argument now, if she takes what they said today in court to heart ---




POLANTZ: And puts it after the election, or if she does pick a day in July, August, September, maybe even October.

QUEST: Something tells me, you are going to be in Florida for a very long time, particularly, during the heat of the summer as well.

Thank you very much. Thank you.

The Russian opposition figure Alexei Navalny has been laid to rest in Moscow. Supporters defied a very heavy police presence. They paid their

final respects. We'll show you what happened after the --


QUEST: Hello, I'm Richard Quest. It is a Friday but you and I have a great deal more to talk about on QUEST MEANS BUSINESS.

A rare sight in Moscow, open defiance against the Kremlin. Alexei Navalny's funeral took place.

And prices are rocketing in Cuba. The fuel hit more than 500 percent, and that ripples right way through the economy. We'll only get to those stories

after about page or two on the news headlines. This is CNN. And here on this network, the news always comes first.


In United States, if you test positive for COVID, you're no longer being asked to isolate for five days. The CDC recommends people with COVID stay

at home until they have been fever free for 24 hours without medication. It matches the advice for flu and other respiratory viruses.

Meta says it will stop paying Australian news companies for Facebook content. It says news outlets can still post on Facebook for free. Media

outlets say the move is an attack on the industry, but Australia passed a law in 2021 that requires social media companies to license news content.

America's two largest pharmacies will start selling the abortion pill Mifepristone. CVS and Walgreens say they have received certification to

dispense the drug, and will begin filling prescriptions in some states in the next few weeks.

Mifepristone has been at the center of legal challenges in the United States.

Mourners have defied the heavy police presence in Moscow to pay their final respects to Alexei Navalny. Thousands of people gathered outside the church

where his funeral service was held.

They chanted at times Navalny's name and no to war. A much more somber scene inside. His body was laid in an open casket, according to orthodox


The Burial at a nearby cemetery was attended by his parents, as a long line of mourners waited to visit his grave.

Some of them were heard, thank you for your son.

Outside of Russia, there has been paying respects to Navalny. Mourners in Berlin laid flowers at the memorial in front of the Russian embassy.

Similar scenes in London. An emotional crowd lit candles in opposition figures on it.

We go to Moscow, of course, where our correspondent Matthew Chance is there.

So, this was a -- Welcome, I want to say, Matthew. You've followed every twist and turn, and this -- the way, the authorities we're going to handle

today. And how did they do? Give me an assessment, please.

MATTHEW CHANCE, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Yes. Well, Richard, I mean, first of all, we haven't seen anything like this in Moscow for


I mean, not since the arrest of Alexei Navalny several years ago, have people who support the opposition, support him felt that they could come

out in such large numbers. And, you know, in many cases, chant anti- government slogans, certainly not without being arrested.

I mean, there was -- it was broadly anticipated in this country, that the authorities may adopt a heavy-handed approach when it came to people

attending Alexei Navalny's funeral. That's because over the past couple of weeks since he died, hundreds of people according to human rights groups

have been arrested, simply for laying flowers at makeshift memorials around the country.

Now, there have been some arrests at in Moscow and elsewhere. But basically, this mass events, which saw 1000s of people turn out, seems to

have passed off at the moment without a significant hiccup. Take a look.


CHANCE (voice over): They came in their thousands to pay their last respects. Supporters of the late Russian opposition leader, Alexei Navalny,

lining up outside the Moscow church, ahead of his funeral, an act of bravery and defiance, in a country where dissent, even grief for a Kremlin

critic, is rarely tolerated.

CHANCE: Let me ask you about the risks, because the authorities have not particularly welcomed this event. People have been detained for paying

their respects to Alexei Navalny. Are you concerned about the risk you are taking?



UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Because it's my slogan, not to think about risks. Do what you should do?

CHANCE: You hold Putin responsible for the death of Alexei Navalny?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Oh, yes. Definitely. No doubt. No doubt.

CHANCE: The Kremlin denies it. They say they had nothing to --

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Oh, and they said. If they ever see and they agree with what they have done bad, I would be the first to applaud.

CHANCE: All right. Well, this is the hearse -- the van, which is taking the body of Alexei Navalny into this church on the outskirts of Moscow, where

Russia will finally bid farewell to one of its most prominent opposition figures.

You can see thousands of people from all over the region have turned out to pay their respects, clapping as his body enters for that funeral service.

Are you surprised that the authorities have allowed this funeral to go ahead?


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I don't know what to say about it. Because I think it would be a huge mistake to not allowed to do it, you know? Because there is

so many people, and they came here to be -- pay the last respect to Alexei. And Alexei for us, and for me, personally, was like -- I don't know Russian

Nelson Mandela or the Russian Martin Luther King. So --

CHANCE: People are -- people are chanting his name at.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes, his last name.

CHANCE (voice over): Death may have silenced Navalny, but his name is now on everyone's lips.



CHANCE (voice over): Inside the church, the funeral service was short.

No political speeches, just blessings over his open casket.

Later at the cemetery, Navalny's distraught parents kiss their 47-year-old son goodbye. His wife and children concern for their own safety, stayed


But so many came in their place. Outside, crowds of mourners waited patiently for a last glimpse for the cemetery gates to open. And for

Russian police on close guard here to finally wave them through.

CHANCE All right. Well, this is the site inside the cemetery and the memorial to Alexei Navalny. People are coming here to lay their flowers.

And, as you can see, and also to fall past the actual grave site which is there.

People are picking up soil and throwing it into the ground onto the casket as a final farewell to that opposition figure.

CHANCE (voice over): A figure who in death, as in life is drawing thousands of Russians critical of the Kremlin onto the streets.


CHANCE (on camera): Well, Richard, as darkness has fallen here in the Russian capital, there are still hundreds of people outside those cemetery

gates, laying flowers, even though the cemetery is closed. And you know, there is no sign of that at the moment letting up. Back to you.

QUEST: Matthew, I'm grateful for you. Thank you. It's late at night in Moscow. Thank you, sir.

As QUEST MEANS BUSINESS continues, President Biden says the U.S. will soon start airdropping aid into Gaza.

Democratic Congressman Gerry Connolly is with -- here, he is. We'll be talking to the congressman in just a moment. QUEST MEANS BUSINESS.



QUEST: Returning to one of our top stories, the U.S. will soon start dropping aid into Gaza from the air, says President Biden, who has also

called for an immediate ceasefire.

Congressman Gerry Connolly is the Democratic congressman from Virginia and is on the powerful House Committee on Foreign Affairs.

This is quite dramatic, Congressman, when basically, I mean, we can -- we can -- we can pass the language. But clearly, the U.S. has said that Israel

is not letting enough aid in. And therefore, taking the extraordinary measure of being part of the airdrops.

REP. GERRY CONNOLLY (D-VA): Yes, I think it's a real rebuke to Netanyahu's government, that the president the United States would say, well, we've

tried to get you to increase truck supplies coming into Gaza, you haven't done that.

And therefore, we are going to do it. And we're going to do it by airlift. And with or without your consent.

QUEST: So, how far would you support the U.S. putting further pressure on Israel?

And, we're all aware, of course, you know, whether it be military, economic, or whatever, that so far, the screw -- deliberately, the screws

have not been turned that tight. Do you favor more?

CONNOLLY: Yes, I do. I believe that what happened after October 7th was not targeted. Israel used dumb bombs, it destroyed two-thirds of all the

structures, or damage them in northern Gaza, and is now threatening to do the same in the south, especially around Rafah.

30,000 civilian casualties, if that's an accurate number, is way too high a price to pay for targeting Hamas terrorists.

You can target Hamas, and you have a right to have your Israel, but not at the cost of 30,000 civilian lives, and another 60,000 injured, almost

100,000 Palestinians have either died or been injured by this invasion.

That is an unacceptable cost by any light, by any measurement. And particularly, it seems to me, given Israel foundational documents and

values, it ought to be concerned about that. But if it's not, we must be.


QUEST: So, how do you?

CONNOLLY: And so, I think more pressure --

QUEST: How does Israel -- I mean, the fundamental fear, which I expect you would, you know, agree with, is that in some shape or form, Hamas would

pardon the phrase live to fight another day, regroup, and be exactly the existential threat to Israel that the -- Israeli government fears.

And Israel is absolutely in its rights to be concerned about that. And to go after Hamas after the terrorist atrocity of October 7th. I absolutely

believe they have that right.

But not this way. Creating a catastrophic humanitarian crisis, with 2 million people at risk of starvation, and disease, and dehydration. Losing

innocent civilians, children, and women and older folks. That's an unacceptable price to be paid. There has to be a better way. Israel is

expert at tracking down known terrorists.

Years after an event, they track down the murderers of the Munich Olympics in 1972, systematically over many years. So, they know how to do it. And

they are doing it as we speak. But you can't say -- you can't say that tens of thousands of civilian casualties is the necessary price we have to pay,

or the Palestinian people have to pay. That's not acceptable

QUEST: That's exactly what the argument is, though, isn't it at the moment. That, I mean, every day that one listens to Prime Minister Benjamin




QUEST: And I'll say -- tell you, Congressman, because I asked our correspondent yesterday, after the shooting, is there a shift in opinion in

Israel or a noticeable shift? And he said, no. He said, no, there is not. Because the existential threat to the country is so great from Hamas and


CONNOLLY: I met with some leaders from the hostage community in Israel just this last week in my office. The trauma they experience on October 7th is

real and to be respected.


It -- you can't overstate it, and it's affected everyone in Israel. So, it's a natural reaction to sort of, you know, circle the wagons to decide

security is our number one concern. And we have to -- we have to do something about that to protect the population. I get that, I support that.

But the two are not necessarily linked, right? We don't have to do that at the cost of tens of thousands of civilian lives in Palestine. And, you

know, the overwhelming majority of the Palestinian population in Gaza, are innocent people, trying to make a living, trying to live their lives, their

homes have been destroyed. Their lives are now at risk because of serious medical and nutritional issues.

We must address that. And that's what President Biden was basically doing with this air-lift.


QUEST: Right. Congressman, there's so much more we can talk about, unfortunately. Look, you know, sir, you have a standing invitation on this

program, because we always like to hear the views from your committee, and I'm grateful this Friday that you've come on today. Sir, thank you very


CONNOLLY: Anytime, Richard. Thank you.

QUEST: QUEST MEANS BUSINESS. In a video share, prices rocketed, we're on the video in a moment.


QUEST: The Nvidia march forward on the stock market continues. It's up nearly four percent today, a remarkable run, pushing its valuation to $2

trillion. It's been driven by increased demand for their advanced chips for A.I.

I met the company's chief executive Jensen Huang. I was in Dubai and we discussed A.I.'s trajectory, especially in the Gulf.


QUEST (voice over): The skyrocketing rise of Nvidia share price should not be a surprise. The company's chips are widely used to power up almost

everything when it comes to A.I.

From facial and speech recognition to the Tesla cars that are being driven today, these state-of-the-art chips are the result of decades-worth of

investments that's pushed Nvidia to develop even better on stronger hardware.

JENSEN HUANG, FOUNDER AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, NVIDIA: Inventing the next is hard, especially since if you're pioneer in doing something,

constantly, constantly pushing ourselves to do that.


QUEST (voice over): For the chief executive Jensen Huang, it's not only about changing the game in this industry, he believes at the core of the

company's mantra, local, local, local.

HUANG: Intelligence cannot be standardized; cultures cannot be standardized. Common sense of different people cannot be standardized. This

region feels differently and has a very different history than different regions around the world.

And so, we need to enable every region to create their own digital intelligence.

QUEST (voice over): There is no better example of this than here in Dubai. The government's been investing heavily in A.I., aiming to become a global

leader by next decade.

This is an ambitious goal, one that Nvidia's chief executive recognizes, and is encouraging Dubai to pursue.

HUANG: It's really, really important that we democratize this technology. And that's one of the reasons why I'm here. In every single country, every

single region, there is an awakening -- the government awakening, social awakening, that the data of their culture should be refined and processed,

and turned into the digital intelligence of their own people.

QUEST: How do you prevent the balkanization does that not lead to silos, does that not lead to, we're going to protect what we've got and keep you


HUANG: It is -- it is the case that there will be some universally shared technologies. The foundational technologies of A.I. are generally shared by

everyone. It's really, really important. And enables innovations and safety in national security and transparency and explainability in alignment and

guard railing. But then on top of that, you can still build your own personal, cultural, industrial company specific A.I.s

QUEST (voice over): As they embrace Jensen Huang's vision, governments like Dubai are leveraging artificial intelligence. And in doing so, are

supercharging their own economies, and that drives even further innovation and growth.


QUEST (on camera): And you and I will take a "PROFITABLE MOMENT" after the break.


QUEST: In total, tonight's "PROFITABLE MOMENT".

Let's put it straightforwardly. We all know that A.I. is important. Can I say that one more time on this program, I think I'll probably hit myself

over the head with a break.

But making it so that it's profitable, and it works, that's the difficult bit. Because you see where we are at the moment is we're making the

sausages, we're actually in the middle of it. We don't know which way it's going or how it's going.

In 30 or 40 years-time, we'll look back and we'll say, ah, that's what it looked like. But the reality is today, we are in the middle of it, and it

seems like a bonanza boom, we're not quite sure which way it goes.


And that's the problem. But we will. The similar we'll stay around long enough to see what happens.

And that's QUEST MEANS BUSINESS for tonight.