SPEAKER_00: all right everybody welcome back to the all in podcast the number one podcast in the world episode 173 it's objectively freeberg the number one podcast i checked i looked online and uh things are cooking over here uh so much so that you may have heard we hired a new ceo welcome to the team our new fifth bestie john hill yeah golf clap everybody let's get in there with that SPEAKER_04: golf clap yes all right john welcome to the program your first day was april 1st it wasn't a joke SPEAKER_00: literally was your first day how has week one as ceo for all in been it has been wonderful SPEAKER_07: super dynamic really happy to be a part of the team all right there you have it sacks you were SPEAKER_10: a huge driver of this you spent so much time interviewing everybody going through the SPEAKER_11: resumes checking the references you know and you you really spearheaded this oh wait you did nothing SPEAKER_13: it's spelled j-o-n john yeah wait who is this sack this is john who is this okay you guys haven't met SPEAKER_05: nice to meet you likewise so john worked at the russian embassy this is just a coincidence that a couple of russian references but he worked as an intern uh for putin somehow he wound up SPEAKER_11: getting the gig uh freeberg you actually led the the the incredible search here we had hundreds of SPEAKER_33: people apply why do you think um we wound up with mr hale here yeah we had a lot of folks and we met SPEAKER_34: with a lot of folks but john really stood out with i think his experience and his thoughtfulness about SPEAKER_35: what we can do so so much of our work off the show obviously has gone into putting on the all-in SPEAKER_36: summit and we want to do more live events and john has a very strong background in building incredible live experiences and events which we think is going to be a really important extension i think we've we realized over the last two summits how much community matters for all in and how much getting people together matters and how much the live content mattered and so we want to do more of that and hopefully john can take us to the promised land fantastic john thanks for thanks for saying yes SPEAKER_11: it's awesome to have yeah all right and uh as john's first first duty he is going to next week announce the details of the all in summit 2024 our third edition chairman dictator chamath palihapitiya you've been running all in with an iron fist in the group chat your thoughts on john and SPEAKER_40: working with him and why we selected him the iron fist please go SPEAKER_45: i think that there's a really important trend that we have stumbled into which is that content creators are the modern form of demand generation for whatever else it is that you're going to consume SPEAKER_46: and i think it replaces advertising and i think it displaces traditional content and so i was really SPEAKER_45: interested in finding somebody that understood how to connect those dots in all of the different ways in which we can explore what our brand is capable of and i thought he was the best example of having done one thing extremely well at scale and curious enough to figure out the other parts so you know SPEAKER_51: i'm really excited to work with john yeah and i'll just add to that you know i've been doing events SPEAKER_53: my whole life and when i saw john's actual event history and the events you've thrown john really spectacular in the detail and i think you're gonna the same way freeberg leveled up year two of SPEAKER_55: the conference i'm i'm really excited to see how you put your stamp on it and level up year three a couple of housekeeping things here uh you know we are by the way sorry can i say one thing SPEAKER_45: absolutely there is so much room to build real communities and i think people are just so tired SPEAKER_59: and bored with everything online so i think offline experiences will be a huge value add in people's SPEAKER_53: lives yeah there's definitely a bridge from online to offline and the all-in meetups that ray's been SPEAKER_45: hosting the best the best example the best example of at scale of online to offline are dating apps and all i can see is that's a pretty dissatisfying experience for a lot of people and so outside of dating apps there aren't many really great examples where like-minded people can hang out and have fun and SPEAKER_47: you know talk learn party it's really interesting you bring this up i just finished john um hate's new SPEAKER_65: book uh the anxious generation i don't know if you've listened to it but there's a pair of books out right now bad therapy and uh this one about kids and the premise of this book shemov is screen time as SPEAKER_00: you referred to you know people being online not only is it bad for kids and adults it's also blocking SPEAKER_53: to your point real world connection and so we all want a little more real world connection and so john welcome to the team additionally i'll just uh two more housekeeping items here and then we'll get to SPEAKER_65: the show we're gonna have a one million subscriber party if you want to be part of that one million subscriber party you can increase your chances we're not announcing how we're going to give the tickets away but you can increase your chances by going to youtube right now pause the show subscribe SPEAKER_00: to the all-in podcast channel hit the bell so you get the alert for the best chance at getting one of the golden tickets to the one million subscriber party and we are at 486 000 when we add 14 000 more SPEAKER_11: we're going to do a live q a with all the besties so get in on that as well john uh any any parting thoughts here or comments uh which bestie has been the most difficult in to work with in the first SPEAKER_07: month which one has been the most delightful go it's been a pleasure across the board i think you know part of the beauty of the show is that there are so many different personalities and viewpoints and really happy to be part of the team excited for what we're going to continue building how diplomatic SPEAKER_04: who's been the worst to deal with who's been the terror be honest tell them you don't have to do we'll talk about it in your one-year review all right john great job likely you likely you who's SPEAKER_75: been the most erotic likely freeberg who's been the most stable and value add likely me and who's SPEAKER_78: been the most am i the most unresponsive i've been the easiest to deal with yeah that's why i get two SPEAKER_86: votes yeah exactly i mean it's it's just wild what's going on here it really is game of thrones and you have been put in the center of it john congratulations welcome to the iron throne watch your back all right dismissed john SPEAKER_11: you will let us know thanks john we can be helpful salute to you john thanks so much guys we got to get going here we got a big show for you everybody welcome to the show officially david sacks your rain SPEAKER_53: man shaman phai habatia chairman dictator sultan of science david freeberg i'm the world's greatest moderator welcome to the program a quick correction up top that many of you in the crypto space let us SPEAKER_11: know about immediately after the episode dropped we talked about spf getting 25 years and that broke right as we started the show and we discussed that the customers of ftx were going to get made whole there's been a lot of speculation about them being made whole however there was an important note ftx deposits are getting paid back in us dollars not the crypto that dollar amount we've learned is based on the price of their tokens at the bankruptcy date the bankruptcy date was november SPEAKER_00: 11th in 2022 super important because the report that started the run on ftx was published in november seconds a couple of days in between those two dates and a bunch of crypto plummeted solana dropped uh 50 percent between november 5th and november 11th as just one example but since then solana's been up 11x and bitcoin's up 4x ethereum doubled so if you wanted these depositors you missed that run up and so ftx customers were rightfully furious i'll pause there before i get into more details any any thoughts on this SPEAKER_92: sex yeah i mean just to hit the nail on the head here if you had left your solana at ftx you're going SPEAKER_94: to get 16 per token back and that apparently was the price at the time that they went under so according to the the judicial proceedings you've been quote-unquote made whole but the truth is that solana at this moment is trading at 188 so you have not been made whole and this is why the crypto community is David Sacks: furious and so that that basically is the correction now i thought it was interesting that the judge played into this notion and we talked about that quote from the judge last week where he said that if you go to vegas abscond with your customers money gamble it and then pay them off with the winnings then you've still committed a crime he seemed to be conceding this idea that the investors or the depositors at ftx have been made whole clearly they have not been but his quote kind of lent credence to that and the reason the judge was talking about is because spf's lawyers were clearly making this argument that his sentence should be commuted or reduced because depositors had been made whole and i think what you saw in the media coverage is that the reporters were buying into this idea of depositors being made whole i mean you guys got this from somewhere right i mean this is what the media coverage so the media the media was doing what has been doing throughout the ftx case which is carrying water for sbf and i believe that this narrative that they're trying to concoct which we now know is completely false is designed to serve a purpose and i think that purpose is to get sbf either pardoned or SPEAKER_96: have his sentence commuted because mr bankman and miss freed are huge democratic party bundlers and i think the goal here is to create the idea in the public's mind that people weren't really hurt by David Sacks: this this was just sort of youthful indiscretion or or hijinks and you know it's a bunch of hijinks SPEAKER_96: right shenanigans but shenanigans where no one's really hurt and if they can create that impression in the public's mind they can now set up getting one of their democratic party connections yeah to help push for a commutation of the sentence i think there's a narrative going on i think there's an agenda behind the narrative and it's interesting what i'm saying here yeah this pardon power is SPEAKER_11: really powerful chamath any any thoughts here on the bankruptcy judge making that call to sell the shares because obviously if crypto had tanked since that time it would look like he saved the money by selling them clearing the positions and giving them cash but what is the right thing for the SPEAKER_00: bankruptcy judge to do here keep the equities i.e the tokens or to sell it and freeze it in time David Sacks: it seems like a very difficult hold on jacob we got to correct that for just in a certain way so the trustee has been selling the tokens post run-up the point is that he's selling tokens at SPEAKER_96: current prices call it 188 and then using that to pay off depositors at 16 dollars so the only reason the depositors have been quote unquote made whole is because they're getting the benefit of this run-up but they're not paying them back at the price of their solana today they're paying them at this price that got fixed at the time of the bankruptcy so the truth is this is why no one's SPEAKER_10: getting made whole yeah this is the you know the really hard thing to track here because we couldn't find when they were selling it or how much they've been selling this seems to be being done in the SPEAKER_40: shadows or in the background and so if anybody out there as we crowdsource what's going on here SPEAKER_65: wants to keep us up to date let us know but yeah these tokens some number of them got sold at a low price some of them are getting sold i guess as time goes on shimath your just thoughts on how to SPEAKER_40: do this properly what's the proper hygiene here i mean it's we're not so great experts SPEAKER_45: no that's a great question i don't know the differences between chapter seven and chapter 11 bankruptcy law but i don't know what was filed here was a chapter seven or chapter 11 i don't i don't know but it seems that this was the only thing that they could do which was to liquidate into a common you know unit of measure because at the end of the day their auditors had to measure in a standard unit and that was probably the us dollar and so then they were trying to work backwards from that shareholder equity number to get them back to that number so yeah it was kind of logical that that this is the only thing they could do and i guess they benefited from the fact that there was a run-up but it's really unfortunate for folks so i don't know maybe in other countries had this been a differently constituted company organized in a different place SPEAKER_116: bankruptcy law could have allowed the liquidator to actually just distribute the assets on a pro rata basis SPEAKER_53: this was a chapter i don't think that would have helped that much i got the update here this is a chapter 11 and in september the judge allowed ftx to start liquidating up to 100 million SPEAKER_120: a week in delaware right this is a chapter 11 delaware file yeah chapter 11 in delaware correct SPEAKER_00: and this could increase to 200 million a week so it seems like they did they did start the liquidation later so they might have caught some of the run-up so they did catch the run-up then you could be SPEAKER_125: doubly upset right no my point my point is in different in different situations one could imagine SPEAKER_45: where the shareholders could have been allowed to vote do you want money or do you want in kind and if in kind maybe you get a pro rata distribution of all the assets which have included a whole bunch of these coins but then it probably would have included a bunch of other assets not just solana and bitcoin then eth that ripped so i think the point is that if David Sacks: they had distributed in kind meaning tokens that people would have seen oh wait i only got back one tenth the number of tokens that i put in that's the point right yeah you put in 100 solana tokens you only get back call it roughly 10 because the the price of those tokens was fixed at 16 and they can now sell at somewhere between 100 and 200 they're able to quote make you whole at the 16 price SPEAKER_10: but that's not being made whole that was what are they doing with the extra money sacks because SPEAKER_00: are they using that to make other people in this whole crater hole as well so maybe they're thinking holistically they're taking the profits of those solana holders let's say where bitcoin holders went SPEAKER_11: forex and is that going to trickle down to the equity holders who knows freeberg you have thoughts SPEAKER_132: yeah i think the plan is that that excess capital beyond what is quote owed to the account holders goes SPEAKER_36: to the equity holders because it's considered excess of the liabilities therefore it goes to the shareholders i'll also say in a traditional like brokerage you create an account and when you set up an account your account has a currency denomination it's a dollar based account or a euro based account and then you your account holds a bunch of assets and so at any given time the value of your SPEAKER_35: account is represented to you in that local currency the challenge with crypto exchanges is that there's often this representation of a wallet which is meant to hold assets that don't necessarily have the intention of being translated into a locally denominated currency and so i think that's what makes the system different in the case of a u.s exchange bankruptcy and this happens in commodity trading accounts or commodity exchanges often there's a freezing of the assets and then a liquidation of the assets where the freezing of the assets sets the price or the value at the moment of what you're supposed to hold in that account in your currency of your account right and so the the bankruptcy judge and the trustee are treating this like a liquidation process using a local currency that was set at the time whereas many folks don't consider that the intention of the account that the account was meant to hold assets that it's really a portfolio of assets that shouldn't be liquidated SPEAKER_138: to try and generate local currency because that's kind of the whole point of many of these crypto SPEAKER_35: currencies themselves it was a custodial account basically right a custodial account of assets versus a trading account of which is meant to ultimately be converted back into a local currency which is typical and i think that's what makes this such a challenging process yeah just liquidate SPEAKER_38: everything pool of money arrives distribute the money but based on the way bankruptcy works is that SPEAKER_94: there's a pecking order that essentially you you have all the assets of the company the job of the David Sacks: trustee is to liquidate them they have a fiduciary duty to get the highest price they can for those assets we have no reason to believe that they haven't they seem to have waited a decent enough amount of time to get to benefit from this crypto recovery and then what happens is again there's like SPEAKER_94: a pecking order for the distribution of the proceeds and you're going to have debt holders they're going to be senior to the equity holders the depositors are going to be high up there as well government agencies that are owed fines are going to be high up there there's gonna be a very specific David Sacks: pecking order in which the equity holders are last if we want to go into conspiracy corner and put our SPEAKER_00: tinfoil hats on you mentioned the irs the cftc right these government agencies are owned like over 20 billion dollars if all this crypto profits and they're higher in the stack they would be going SPEAKER_151: directly to the government and the government is handling the process here so it doesn't look right David Sacks: but i don't i don't think i don't think it's that's driving it i think that i think bankruptcy rules are very specific and they're completely designed around again assessing what the value of each claimant is at the time of bankruptcy and then creating a pecking order for distribution so i don't think there's any foul play here i think that this is just the way that the cookie crumbles but i think that it's simply wrong or misleading to say that the depositors were made whole and i think the reason we thought that is because of these statements that were promulgated through the media including the judge to give people that impression and i think it really just underscores that the media always has an agenda and you got to be so careful about imbibing their SPEAKER_101: narratives because without knowing exactly what their agenda is you can imbibe their bias yeah my SPEAKER_156: understanding bankruptcy is like they the they can get a little bit creative and the bankruptcy judges SPEAKER_65: can be a little creative and trying to holistically think about what's the best thing for the business SPEAKER_11: and all the stakeholder shareholders but anyway we'll keep monitoring it and like we've said before anytime we make a mistake we're going to talk about it right up front anytime there's an omission or breaking news happens we're going to fill you in and uh that leads us to our second topic some more news broke about truth social we had a nice spicy discussion about it last week since that time SPEAKER_53: shares of tmtg or a dollar sign djt have dropped 30 percent and uh the numbers for their revenue also confirmed it came out pretty ugly 4 million in revenue 58 million losses floats only 30 million shares but there are some follow-up stories here we'll get into trump is suing the two co-founders to reduce SPEAKER_118: their combined 8.6 state to zero his argument is co-founders set the company up and properly mishandled the launch of true social so they should forfeit their stock these are both co-founders SPEAKER_53: previously on the apprentice trump owns 60 percent and he stands for receiving earn out of 36 million additional shares in the coming week uh worth almost 2 billion so huge windfall for president trump coming in addition to that it's actually you're going to love this russia russia russia the guardian is SPEAKER_00: reporting tmtg raised eight million dollars in emergency funding that might have possibly come from a russian linked entity the spac uh while it was on hold was running out of cash russia linked entity uh you read this all about this in the guardian they tried to raise some money they wound up raising eight million across two convertible notes from a bank called paxium located in the caribbean owned by a russian who is reportedly the nephew of alexander smirnov who used to work in putin's SPEAKER_86: executive office until 2017. is this a joke no i i mean i i wish it was a joke because i know i'm gonna get barbecued for like by the by the trump supporters in the comments but it is crazy that the SPEAKER_162: russians are what is the russians name alexander smirnov isn't that the name of a vodka it kind of is SPEAKER_125: s-m-i-r-n-o-v smirnov maybe smirnov from doesn't even drink i mean maybe yeah i don't know if putin SPEAKER_04: drinks or not anyway putin doesn't drink either trump doesn't drink that's true yeah if neither does push oh really is that true yeah so anyway important caveats to all this stuff uh SPEAKER_11: interesting story though there's no indication that trump or trump media had any idea about the nature of these loans because uh they were opaque and uh trump media says it's propaganda and false narrative SPEAKER_53: your thoughts on the trump's back sacks and in russia i know it's your favorite topic well we're SPEAKER_171: it's going to be a really long seven months if we're going to bring up every one of these evidence-free stories of some sort of russia connection to trump i mean yeah this article SPEAKER_170: doesn't even make sense like you said here's the giveaway in the middle of the article they say the David Sacks: guardian does quote there is no indication that trump or trump media had any idea about the nature of the loans beyond that they were opaque nor has the company or its executives been accused of wrong doing so then what are we talking about here just there's some guy with a russian sounding last name i mean literally that's the story it doesn't even make sense i don't understand how you can get a loan SPEAKER_96: and not know who your counterparty is so this whole thing just seems like it's part of the milieu of let's create any connections we can between trump and russia and the giveaway on this David Sacks: was actually a new york times story that just came out in the past week it was called russia amps up online campaign against ukraine before u.s elections now the interesting thing about this story is that it was reporting allegations by clint watts who has apparently been hired by microsoft to run something SPEAKER_96: called the threat analysis center and his job basically is to find russian interference in the election now here's what i found interesting about this is that clint watts that name rang a bell for me David Sacks: and it's because clint watts was involved in the twitter files so back in january of last year matt taibbi broke this story in the twitter files that clint watts was running the hamilton 68 dashboard he was basically behind that project he's a former fbi agent what was hamilton 68 hamilton 68 claimed that it SPEAKER_96: was tracking 500 russian accounts on social media who were engaged in manipulation of online discourse well as it turns out executives inside of twitter knew who these accounts were and they were just american accounts some canadian accounts and in the words of twitter executives the whole hamilton 68 David Sacks: dashboard was that was their word and nevertheless this hamilton 68 project that clint watts ran put out story after story for years about how the russians were meddling in american political debates and SPEAKER_96: these stories the hamilton 68 claims became the basis for thousands literally thousands of mainstream media stories claiming that russia was interfering in american politics it all turned out to be a total hoax a total fraud now the amazing thing to me is you would think after an expose like this that it would at least be mentioned in the new york times that the person they're quoting as saying that the russians are meddling in our elections has a previous history of setting up russia hoaxes and they don't even mention that despite the taibbi's story moreover it's amazing to me that this watts guy not only landed on his feet he got a cushy job at microsoft running their threats analysis center so that he could put out more of this threat analysis on how the russians were meddling i can't imagine a less qualified person to be describing russia threats than somebody who was caught red-handed manufacturing bogus threats for years freeberg yourself in any event jason i would just say that you know going back to the sbf the story the takeaway there is be careful what you're imbibing from the mainstream media because there's always an agenda and until this story about true social from the guardian has a little bit more detail to it that makes sense to me i'm just going to put it in the category of more of the same SPEAKER_53: yeah and you know as i've said on this program before russia's explicit strategies just put their fingerprints on everything and cause chaos like they did with the internet research agency and all SPEAKER_65: the trolling they were doing the last couple of elections freeberg your thoughts on this SPEAKER_132: you concerned about the interference in the election i'm not gonna know my thoughts on this yeah this is this is nothing i feel like i should be thoughtful about okay sounds good all right and then wrapping up SPEAKER_11: i had mentioned the last episode about the insider trading charges in the company that was the spac SPEAKER_53: before they purchased true social and the three two of the three men have been charged with insider trading just pleaded guilty so michael and gerald schwachmann made 23 million in illicit profits SPEAKER_65: trading shares of dwac before the merger was announced they each pled guilty to one count of securities SPEAKER_53: fraud we faced three to five years neither was involved with truth this is the spac that came before truth David Sacks: and there it is folks so there's your update what's the relevance of this to being a top issue on the all-in pod i just think this is gonna be a really long seven i think it's gonna be a really long SPEAKER_170: seven months for us till the election if we're gonna bring up every mainstream media story that SPEAKER_182: seeks to create a connection between this is an sec filing yeah instead this one has nothing to do SPEAKER_94: with russia this is the insider trading one but you just said it has no connection to true social so why SPEAKER_65: are we even talking no no it's these are the people who traded the stock before truth social merged SPEAKER_53: with it this is the spac that food social and they traded when they found out that trump was going to be the spac that was merged with so i'm just following closing the loop on that breaking news google is reportedly considering making an offer to hire acquire hubspot creating a 34 billion dollar market cap this just came out reported by reuters who cited anonymous sources shares up seven SPEAKER_188: percent on the news if you don't know hubspot it's awesome tool we use it uh crm that blends marketing SPEAKER_40: sales customer service all that kind of good stuff and so here's their quarterly revenue since ipo SPEAKER_65: they've been public for 10 years as you pointed out in the group chat friedberg and this has been SPEAKER_53: slow and steady revenue power of sas i guess and a great product i'm not a shareholder here's the quarterly revenue growth on a year-over-year basis the stock chart yada yada chamath i guess this is SPEAKER_11: something we've been talking about here which is m a and m a being pushed into the cold plunge SPEAKER_65: and being frozen and now we see something like this what is what do you take from this if it's in SPEAKER_45: fact a true report i mean i think it's a bit of an odd acquisition and the reason is that it's become pretty clear for all of big tech that any acquisition that they do is going to be highly scrutinized and so just from an ev expected value perspective if you're going to try to acquire something and spend the next year beating your head against regulators why not do it for something that's really valuable and i would not characterize hubspot as strategically valuable for google i think SPEAKER_46: it's an important ecosystem player and it's probably better off as an independent company so if i were google i'd be trying to buy something much more useful like perplexity or something SPEAKER_35: freeberg your thoughts on this first of all it's super impressive hubspot's been public they went public at about a billion dollar market cap 10 years ago and today they're trading at 34 billion so SPEAKER_36: organic lead developed this business and they provide marketing automation software so basically SPEAKER_138: things like crm tools email marketing tools so when you use advertising tools and you generate leads those leads come in what do you do with them so let's say you're running a website that sells bicycles SPEAKER_36: people want information on bicycles what do you do with those people after they get information on your website and how do you track them down and how do you sell them a bicycle if you're a big enterprise software company and you start to get companies reaching out to you through your website how do you then convert them so you use crm tools customer relationship management tools sales force is a obviously a behemoth in this space but hubspot has this integrated marketing automation and crm platform SPEAKER_138: for taking leads and then converting those leads and selling products to them so the sales team and the marketing team uses hubspot software to operate and do their work and do it better when i worked at google in 2005 the main thing i worked on is how do we do a better job taking our advertisers and giving them more tools that they can then convert the leads that they're getting into customers and so one of SPEAKER_35: the first things i worked on in 2004 and then we closed the deal in 2005 was acquiring urchin which became google analytics so that companies could better track how folks were converting on their website after they spend marketing dollars on google how do you see where those people go on your website and what they're actually doing on the website and ultimately make your website better so you can sell them more products and more software and one of the the things i worked on was crm so i had this conversation with the executive team with larry and sergey and others at that time and we talked about what should we buy a crm company and we actually had a conversation they did with mark benioff at the time and we talked about is there a way to buy salesforce and salesforce went public shortly before google and it was more richly valued than i think the appetite was at the time to make this leap to buying a crm company we actually spent quite a bit of time meeting with and i personally spent time meeting with netsuite which ultimately got rolled in i think it was larry ellison was the primary owner of netsuite we looked at a few other crm companies and this was always meant to be the next solution that you plug into the advertising platform at google you get all these leads from advertising and how do you convert those leads and make them customers and many of the other things we looked at were things like checkout software and software that would let you run a website to sell your products to customers on the website and so which became shopify in a way which became shopify and we had looked very deeply at doing this at google is actually building a product called google checkout it wasn't very successful but it was to do exactly this which is to build a basically a shopify type competitor and so this has always been the natural SPEAKER_138: fit for google's business google made a quarter trillion dollars last year in advertising revenue and then they didn't make much revenue after the advertising generated leads because google doesn't have a great commerce business and they don't have any of these other enterprise tools SPEAKER_35: so this is a very natural fit into google's advertising business and taking all of the leads from advertising and better converting them and giving your sales team the tools they need to convert those leads into customers so it makes great strategic sense it's been a concept that's been around for 20 years at google certainly they're going to face regulatory scrutiny but it doesn't have the same sort of overlap with the ad network businesses because they're not very heavily in the ad network business at hubspot but it's a really good kind of enterprise software plugin some would say acquisitions are one of SPEAKER_45: three types they are defensive they are offensive or they are about reinforcing the status quo if you had to bucket hubspot into one of those three things is this an offensive m a is it a defensive m a or is this SPEAKER_35: status quo i think it gives advertisers more tools that can integrate with adwords which is how advertisers spend ad dollars is through adwords platform and so as a result it locks the advertisers onto google's ad platform keeps them more engaged and so i think that the benefit to chamath's point is that they're SPEAKER_138: going to both protect ad revenue at google by locking in people on the on the crm side and the marginal SPEAKER_35: impact they'll get from selling crm services not that impactful to the business i mean if you could spend SPEAKER_45: let's say with the premium 50 billion dollars on hubspot or five billion dollars on perplexity today SPEAKER_198: which one would you buy i think you've got to buy hubspot you're protecting to your point you're SPEAKER_138: protecting a quarter trillion dollar ad business hubspot makes two billion in revenue so it's one percent of the size of google's ad business and it helps you lock in some percentage of that 250 billion so that's an important strategic acquisition i think for google so you'd rather buy something in marketing SPEAKER_35: automation versus ai i think they should spend the money in ai but i think you have to buy something to it's a good question to further the revenue mode yeah what does google accomplish here that they can SPEAKER_94: do with an integration a partnership you mean well i mean they could just build on hubspot's platform just create a connector between google ads and i think that exists already exactly so what's the point SPEAKER_45: what do you really understand what i think what freeberg is saying in nicer language is they're going to make it a roach motel lock in you get in and you can't get out i mean it gives you the full SPEAKER_111: life cycle of the advertiser sack so i mean you understand the funnel right you get the actual SPEAKER_45: profile of the customer yeah the problem with the roach motel m a strategy is that people sniff that out pretty quickly and then they start to carve out these very discrete parts of the product that they want you to divest in order to get the whole thing done that's the thing that surprisingly i think the regulators have gotten smart about and i suspect it's not that the regulators themselves know these discrete ideas but that the answers are fed to them by competitors who want to just slow these processes down and make these things convoluted and complicated oh they snitch they send the snitch in i think it's very smart for a competitor to actually call a regulator and give them a road map of how to make the deal happen but in a very convoluted complicated way you remember i suspect that's what happened in microsoft activision microsoft brilliantly fought it off right and so they were able to get the whole thing done completely on their terms but in many other cases you get these discrete things where it's like okay divest this sell that keep this and it's like why are we doing this but i just think the roach motel strategy is harder to get done these days because folks will know how to make it super convoluted i SPEAKER_138: will tell you what when a big company like this makes a big acquisition offer like this as much as i know google's business i think it's a generalization that can be drawn here it's usually a negative signal about organic growth meaning if i'm a google shareholder i should look at this and i should say why do you need to make this acquisition why is there an indication in this bid that there is some advertising revenue leakage going on and then i should go spend time trying SPEAKER_226: to understand that i think there's a really important question there yeah but this is why SPEAKER_45: i'm asking you like obviously they're not going to do this because things are going perfectly in that space and so if you're losing share you're not going to be losing it to bing you're losing it to some form of ai which is why again it's a bit of a head scratcher spend a lot less money and just buy everything in the space or spend 50 billion and buy everything possible in the space SPEAKER_53: to give you just a little context here this is going to be by far their largest acquisition if it's true if it gets closed this is all speculation right now looking back monorola mobility was bought for 12.5 billion there were patents there was the hardware business which they spun out you can look up the deal details there but there's a long tail of uh companies they've bought nest labs fit bit and youtube uh 3 billion 2 billion 1.6 billion if you remember uh they bought a uh mandiant i've never even heard of the cyber security company 5.4 billion they bought nest for three billion double click three billion that was a long time ago so probably triple that value in Chamath Palihapitiya: today's dollars by the way remember fitbit fitbit took uh 18 or 24 months to close it took a while yeah deep deeply scrutinized if you think a wearable on your wrist is going to get scrutinized when SPEAKER_45: bought by google imagine what happens when a 50 billion dollar marketing automation company gets bought by SPEAKER_171: google yeah it's really interesting look i i don't think this acquisition makes any sense i'm kind of in jamas camp this is this would be a very odd acquisition i'm not even sure the story is true SPEAKER_94: there's been no confirmation of an actual bid made this was basically an anonymous source saying that google had hired investment bankers to you know maybe kick the tires well typically SPEAKER_238: these bankers float these problems like this because they want to pump the deal but yeah SPEAKER_94: imagine what the fees would be on 50 billion dollar acquisition but they want to shake some other SPEAKER_177: buyers loose yeah when they have these auctions well look it's gonna be very hard for any big tech SPEAKER_94: company to do a 50 billion dollar acquisition of anything just that given that lean economy ftc are David Sacks: opposed to bigness in and of itself but i think from a strategic point of view i agree this this deal would be odd i don't really see the connection to the google ads business hubspot is used by companies to manage their pipelines it's a competitor to salesforce i see it all the time i see startups using it all the time as the alternative to salesforce because it's sort of easier to use more user friendly and the main thing it does is you have your pipeline in there you bring in the leads at the top of the funnel and then you work them down to close deals where do those leads come from sex i understand SPEAKER_138: that they can come from google adwords but most of them come from from ad spend that's the connection and it's always been this idea that those two should be integrated okay but but the point is that David Sacks: if you think about your top of funnel if you're one of the customers of hubspot using this google adwords is just one of a number of channels yes that's right so you could be getting your leads SPEAKER_101: through inbound you could be getting your leads through that's right events you could be getting your leads through i mean there's so many different sources so it just doesn't make it doesn't make sense to me that somehow google would need to acquire a company to manage not their advertisers SPEAKER_96: but the people their advertisers are trying to reach as one of a dozen different potential marketing channels it just doesn't really make sense i mean the the acquisitions where google's been really David Sacks: successful have been broad horizontal platform plays like android this is as vertical as it gets this is SPEAKER_96: crm software this is basically google getting into a vertical app for sales and marketing teams yeah if you think about the business that this is most like it would be g suite and because it's an enterprise play and that's the most neglected part of google's business i think you're both missing a SPEAKER_00: key piece to this i think this is about the data you look at these these are the leads and the great contacts in the database of the customer which google doesn't have access to and they can close the loop and they can make targeting of ads and get people deeper and they can fight for a larger percentage so to your point sacks yes you've got 20 different inbound feeds coming in for leads if google knows the leads that are already in there they can then retarget them across their entire ad network which is the largest in the world that's the value if i know your 10 000 best customers and then i know when they're on google searching and i know that when they're in a chrome browser i know when they're on SPEAKER_11: an android phone if they happen to use that man i can just start getting more of your ad dollars into it that's what's actually happening here it's they don't want a sas business they want the data they want to retarget folks and then they want to make close more sales and be more efficient than tick tock SPEAKER_94: and facebook meta it's about you think they'd be allowed to use their customers data to somehow SPEAKER_11: target their ad product absolutely 100 if you if i'm opting into it and i say hey you have 10 000 people in your database you want to go find them we have you have 8 000 of them connected that came in through google search what about the other 12 000 you want to try to find them in the google ad network we can put that together for you that's actually if somebody's going to snitch on this deal SPEAKER_257: it's about the data i'll tell you back in just improving conversion rates drives more ad revenue SPEAKER_35: bingo and the key measurement we had the year after we bought urchin and launched google analytics was we looked at how much an advertiser spent on google's adwords network before and after they SPEAKER_138: installed google analytics and that year it was a ton of money at the time we saw an incremental roughly 500 million dollars in revenue in ad spend with folks who installed google analytics from before SPEAKER_35: versus after because they then started to change their websites and tweak their sales flow or their marketing flow on their website to better convert customers so they could spend more on the network because higher conversion rates means you can spend a higher cpm on advertising so the deeper you go SPEAKER_138: from an integration perspective in closing sales the better you actually can get and the more money you can spend on marketing on the front end and so that benefits the growth in the network and to build on SPEAKER_40: your point freeberg this is why amazon and uber and instacart have become such major major players in SPEAKER_11: advertising they have the data on sales information they sell cover drop off and they sell conversions at the point sacks of the shopping cart about to be clicked on and amazon's been taking some of that in instacart but intercepting some of those ads yeah i'll speculate on this for a second i think that SPEAKER_35: if i'm sitting inside of google i see the capability of our ai tools our generative ai tools in being able to improve marketing and sales um processes and i'm saying how do we leverage that well SPEAKER_138: guess what we don't actually have access to our advertisers sales and marketing automation workflow because we don't have a crm tool so then the natural strategic thing is how do we get a crm tool okay well we can't buy salesforce well we could buy hubspot that makes sense number two plus then we could we could apply our generative ai capabilities to improve conversion efficiency at hubspot and probably grow revenue there as well so it could be a fairly quickly a creative deal and there's the SPEAKER_45: benefit to the ad network i think the roach motel idea is probably the best strategy here yeah you're right i just think i would if i were them with 50 billion dollars they're like 30 billion by the way SPEAKER_76: 35 they got to pay 50 more 25 more it's already floated up so you got to imagine it's probably a 40 SPEAKER_252: billion dollar deal yeah okay 40 yeah okay so they save 10 billion i think the synergies here are SPEAKER_45: negligible if it took google almost two years to get a an accelerometer on a wrist to prove from antitrust this is going to take three years sax yeah so why bother so like do something much more SPEAKER_270: disruptive i have an answer to that but i want to hear sax's first good well i just looked up how David Sacks: many customers hubspot has hubspot has 205 000 customers as of the end of 2023 now you look up SPEAKER_94: google adwords it has 1.2 million businesses okay and i'm sure that's not 100 overlapping every one of them should be using hubspot that's hugely creative i agree yeah i don't think that google has the leverage to drive all of its adword customers into using all of them if it gets five percent of them it makes this deal make sense interesting that part is kind of interesting if they can SPEAKER_275: actually drive their ad customers what they did with with double click double click was actually SPEAKER_138: advertising no but they had other other places that they could take their adwords advertisers to spend that the double click network had access to anyway i i hear you yeah and there was another set of advertising management tools that double click had that that's an enterprise software tool that they were able to sell into their advertisers that they didn't have themselves let me ask you a SPEAKER_11: markets question here if we wind up with a republican conservative gop presidency and administration for the next four years which seems like a possibility here a strong possibility what does that do for m a markets do you think they might be opening up here and the reason SPEAKER_00: google's even considering this is because they anticipate this deal might fall into a new SPEAKER_11: administration that is going to fire lina khan possibly probably i think the democrats and the SPEAKER_116: republicans are really well aligned here they don't like deals and i don't think you're going to see SPEAKER_45: a big sea change they hate big tech for different reasons but they equally want to slow them down if you look at the non-big-tech m a deals they're going to get slowed down for different reasons so for example like the big u.s steel merger with nippon steel that was announced biden has one set of issues but i suspect you know if donald trump were to get elected his issues will be more about further hollowing out middle america and so that deal will probably get stopped Chamath Palihapitiya: for different reasons but so i think that they're both actually roughly aligned and not allowing a lot of this big m a to happen but for different reasons for SPEAKER_45: different reasons but the outcome is the same so this is why i would just kind of think like if you're going to do a deal you got to do something that's like small enough where it'll pass muster you know it to be really valuable and the regulators will be like ah whatever just let it happen SPEAKER_65: sex what do you think you think a trump administration would become more frisky allow more m a they seem to be actually cozying up to tech in a major way well i agree with jama that there's a lot of anger on SPEAKER_171: the republican side towards big tech because of censorship and bias and google is as guilty of that as any of these big tech companies so i don't expect a republican administration to have SPEAKER_94: google in its good graces that being said i do think republicans have a more traditional definition of antitrust than lena khan does and i think that a republican antitrust enforcer would probably be guided by market share considerations first and foremost and so in this case since google does not have a crm play then based on a traditional definition of antitrust they would be able to make this acquisition whereas i think again lena khan is just opposed to bigness and doesn't want big tech companies getting any bigger so there's no guarantee that republicans would allow it i would say that if SPEAKER_142: you got the right ftc commissioner or right doj i'd say there's a possibility of it being more likely SPEAKER_53: to go through to remind everybody lena khan's interpretation of antitrust is future competition and trying to protect future competition the traditional one is consumer based hey are consumers benefiting or not and so that's actually that's one of the top three yes i want to share market share is SPEAKER_11: really the traditional test yeah market share and then the impact that has on consumer choice and David Sacks: price yeah can i just go back on to the synergy point i just want to like please i just want to brainstorm about this for a second let's say you're one of google's 1.2 million businesses that are using adwords there's a high chance you're also using facebook there's a high chance you're also doing other kinds of advertising you might be doing physical world advertising you might be doing events there might be a dozen different channels through which you get leads now all of a sudden google sends you an email saying hey we acquired hubspot you know why don't you click here to use us for crm SPEAKER_94: is that really going to drive a change in behavior from that small business beyond what they would already do today it doesn't seem that synergistic to some percent of them SPEAKER_138: not all maybe five percent again that five percent is 50 000 that's an email campaign SPEAKER_150: i mean i just don't see the leverage basically yeah i don't know if i agree SPEAKER_290: but i mean that's why we're here if google did a deep product integration where the leads that you David Sacks: acquired through google adwords magically appeared in hubspot and that's where you went to go SPEAKER_65: work them then yes maybe maybe there'd be synergy just looking at this on the numbers SPEAKER_11: since we like to do back in the envelope here 250 billion ad revenue 1.2 million in advertisers it's almost exactly like 200 000 per advertiser obviously there's some big ones obviously there's a long tail man if you can get some number of those to spend 10 20 30 percent more it could be quite SPEAKER_65: accretive to the bottom line it would pay for the acquisition over a short period of time and we'll see it's interesting discussion for sure all right if you missed it john stewart did SPEAKER_00: a segment on ai on the daily show he came back he's doing i think mondays every week and it went viral SPEAKER_53: and it was about how ai is going to change our jobs faster than any previous labor revolution so it seems like the public is starting to get an idea uh about ai wiping out large swaths of jobs and it's starting to hit the mainstream ceos like brian chesky from airbnb and aaron levy from box i had them on this week in startups less in the last year they said they anticipate 30 to 50 percent productivity gains for a lot of the jobs in their companies developers customer support all that stuff SPEAKER_65: and we covered cloners ai customer support agent doing the job of 700 full-time employees and driving a 40 million dollar increase in profits this year yada yada yada we've we've talked about this over SPEAKER_11: and over again but it seems to be tipping over into public consciousness we chamath have talked about whether humans will find more work to do or if this is going to truly displace people i think we all SPEAKER_65: kind of feel like at least to the best of my memory we all feel like new jobs will be created but it is entering the public's consciousness what impact is that going to have if the public starts thinking SPEAKER_45: ai is going to take their job chamath i mean i think that social media will make this perception more widespread than it's been at other moments of revolution and innovation but we've gone through this before i'd like to summarize my thoughts in three charts okay and i call this this time it's not different so chart number one for those watching on youtube is a look at the components of us gdp this is from the bureau of economic analysis now this goes from 1929 up to 2011 so it doesn't go all the way back to the 1800s and we're missing the last decade but the point is the following if you can see the chart if you can't see it i'll describe it to you which is that gdp the components of gdp are surprisingly resilient and roughly the same over long stretches of time which is that even though gdp goes up consumer consumption is always around 70 percent net exports are a few percent plus or minus gross domestic investment is around the 20 level and then government consumption is around the 20 percent level and that's what adds up to gdp so that's an important thing to note why because in the absence of something very acute like world war ii these things don't change over long periods of time okay so if that is true what happens when you have any kind of a revolution so let's look at the industrial revolution so the shift from farms to factories and what you saw was Chamath Palihapitiya: exactly what people should be worried about with respect to ai which is in specific job classes things just fall to zero so unemployment basically went to zero and the income associated with those jobs also went to zero so this is what people are worried about but if you remember the last chart the point is somehow we found a way to find growth and this is what's demonstrated on this final chart which SPEAKER_45: is when you look at u.s productivity and worker compensation this is going from world war ii to Chamath Palihapitiya: today you find that every time we find a new way of innovating compensation tends to track it so if you take these three things together number one which is the components of gdp rarely change number two is that yes there are certain categories of jobs that always get disrupted away but the third is the most important which is that as productivity goes up which is what ai should give us just as we've seen in the past compensation also goes up which means new job classes will be created so i think the macro picture SPEAKER_45: if you look back hundreds of years is that this is like many other moments in time it feels more personal right now because we're all living it right none few of us lived the agrarian to industrial revolution yeah we missed it and few of us lived the technological revolution right we kind of came in at the but i suspect that this time is not different freeberg your thoughts on this i think you've SPEAKER_11: said something similar on past episodes but it is kind of tipping and into public consciousness and it's also affecting white-collar jobs this time not just people in fields picking berries and so those people may be a little more vocal and we've seen massive layoffs in tech massive layoffs in media and those jobs don't seem to be coming back people seem to be get taking the gains and just having people on the team be 30 percent more efficient as brian told me on my other pod so what SPEAKER_04: do you think freeberg is this time different or is it the same so here's this article from june SPEAKER_35: 2nd 1983 in the new york times all about how computers are eliminating jobs in industries that were effectively offline knowledge work industries at the time creating SPEAKER_36: creating engineering designs creating architectural drawings i think this article spoke to the fact that these jobs were going to be eliminated and as we all know those jobs actually got enhanced by computers productivity went up and new sub industries emerged and in fact the overall industries actually grew in some cases when we were fearful of them being replaced due to the automation enabled by software so i think that in this particular sense we can talk about the industrial revolution enabling through manufacturing systems and centralized production a replacement of manual labor with machines what we're talking about now is a replacement of knowledge work that has been aided by computers with machines so the machines no longer even need the human but the reality is that these systems are actually going to give humans 10 to 100 x leverage so when you think about that one person could spend three weeks making an architectural drawing today what if that one person could make an architectural SPEAKER_35: drawing every six hours so the question then is do we stop making architectural drawings and we fire a bunch of architects or does the cost of making an architectural drawing drop by 90 and it enables us to do more detailed higher resolution architectural drawings across more places more frequently and the industry actually booms and what we've seen historically is that when productivity goes up costs go down the actual volume balloons and the economy grows so it's a it's an example where i think in this particular case we will see these tools creating more leverage for knowledge work instead of just simply replacing knowledge work and that humans will start to shift to a higher order of work and we'll see the economy grow and productivity go up as a result so so i think that's my kind of key read on on on the story but it's very hard to connect the dots for people without having all of these historical cases and i think one of the ways to think about doing this usefully is you go back to the software revolution and all the stuff that we were doing with pencils and papers before computers we actually didn't lose all those jobs the people could now do a hundred times or a thousand or a million times as much work and new industries emerged and productivity went up and the economy grew and so we just have to have this this realization as this starts to take hold that the industries will change and that these systems will actually provide leverage not replacement yeah it's SPEAKER_65: such a good point and i think what you teach your kids is like really important at this moment in time like having a job that is replaced by ai or that could be greatly replaced by ai might be a mistake and if you think about being a conductor freeberg or a maestro a conductor of an orchestra i think SPEAKER_00: that's the job of the future is can you work with these agents forget about co-pilots because that's phase one of all this but agents are phase two where you have an agent who's writing copy who's the hubspot example you get before you know a designer who's in the cloud who's an agent an ai agent making you artwork and then you stitch all these things together i've been loading chat gpt with my kids constantly asking history questions and whatever questions they want i've been teaching them how SPEAKER_138: to use chat gpt that's great yeah i mean i think it's like a like there's this whole transition of humans doing manual labor to doing knowledge work where you're using software to create digital output to now having more folks spend more of their time being conceptualists or creators where you can kind of SPEAKER_35: be an architect or a creator of something and the system just generates it you know you state your intended objective and the system solves for it yes as opposed to hey i got to go build the excel spreadsheet and check the formula in every cell and do all the manual what if i just say hey here's what i SPEAKER_138: want the model to do please generate it for me and you get the result it enables you to do 100 times SPEAKER_188: more that's why i use the analogy conductor or august for leader sacks what do you think this is uh SPEAKER_65: you're you're you're on the populist side you really have your finger on what americans think SPEAKER_11: and that's a compliment it's a literal compliment but i do think you're i think you've become a pop especially as the longer i've known you we've known you for over 20 years you've become more populist so what's the word on the street here amongst you know gen pop and now you think they're taking this news when they see somebody like john stewart they respect when you see somebody like jonathan john stewart you know doing this that's like gonna hit a large swath of these you know you know elites that we've talked about before on the show who are losing their jobs or maybe their salaries SPEAKER_171: are getting capped well first of all jason to quote senator grakus from gladiator i may not be a man SPEAKER_318: of the people but i do try to be a man for the people yes exactly so uh oh my god did you see the ai SPEAKER_125: did you see the ai from some y combinator company where they like made a little video of us and like SPEAKER_00: we're talking about somebody's nuts and then they were like you said oh i'm gonna ask my butler to ask my assistant to ask my house manager to then ask my chauffeur to pick those up it's like it's a David Sacks: pretty great clip yeah it looks funny look to me frank no one cares what john stewart thinks he's never been less relevant and less funny um this is a story that the media has been hyping up for months now covet's over so they need something else to scare us with and what they really should be talking is that we've got two wars that risks spiraling out of control and debt they don't want to go there they don't want to go there or or the national debt exactly right they don't want to go there either because neither of those issues reflect well on the current administration and power so they're going to scare us with this now look in the short to medium term ai leads to productivity gains in the long term it may lead to job losses but as you guys pointed out hopefully by then we'll have lots of other jobs created by the productivity boom that we're going to get and this has been the case throughout history with regard to technology improvements and if we don't have these productivity improvements what's going to drive the growth in gdp what's going to allow us to pay off this enormous national debt that seems to be yep you know so large that we it's underpayable we need the productivity gains that ai is going to unlock without them we're definitely toast so look i i SPEAKER_94: don't place a lot of stock in this john stewart story it's just one of many that the media is is SPEAKER_120: creating to try and scare us about ai and that's actually a great guest john stewart would be a great SPEAKER_45: guest along with lena khan put those on the list have you seen this um clip where yon lakoon basically says our best llm is 50 times smaller than what a four-year-old has processed since they've been SPEAKER_337: before your old is awake has been awake a total of 16 000 hours and you say okay 16 000 hours multiply this by 3600 seconds per hour and then figure out like what's the um bandwidth of the optical nerve going to the cortex it's about 20 megabytes so you have one million nerve fibers per uh per per eye and it's about 10 bytes per second right give or take um so multiply that's 10 to the 15 bytes by the time you're four 50 times more than whatever llm like the biggest element in the world have been trained on okay so what that tells you is that in the space of a few months the baby has seen more information SPEAKER_45: than the biggest llms that we have the point is that and this is one of the foremost experts in ai and really one of the fathers of modern ai what he's basically saying is it's still more artificial than intelligent and everybody needs to take a deep breath and understand that there's just going to be a lot more work before you get to this omnipresent agent that just replaces and destroys SPEAKER_120: everything and thinks on its own yeah i'm willing to bet on all of us versus a bunch of four-year-olds and i just want to say kumbaya to davos as well with a clip from davos thanks for letting us use that SPEAKER_53: yeah it's interesting sacks like um the number of jobs that will be replaced or augmented and then SPEAKER_65: the creation of jobs and then you start thinking about well how many jobs exist in the real world i saw waymo is doing uber eats deliveries and you just think wow more people are going to be able to SPEAKER_11: afford uber eats which is kind of expensive to use so consumption is going to go up and then you think SPEAKER_53: about the optimus and then what's the other robot company that's making a general human robot figure SPEAKER_00: figure and man those are starting to get really interesting and i think that's going to be the SPEAKER_53: unlock so maybe you could speak a little bit to sax what do you think happens when we start getting humanoid robots in the mix and do you have any investments in that space i don't because i don't SPEAKER_171: i don't do that kind of hardware r d i mean look i think you're right that ai does lead to robotics because one of the hard things about robotics is just having the the robot not just move but SPEAKER_94: understand what's happening in the world around it and then make the right decisions about how to react to that and so llms do start creating a path for the robot to be able to make intelligent decisions David Sacks: without having to be programmed with a bunch of if then statements right and i mean self-driving kind of does this too i mean self-driving is sort of the early it's kind of like the early prototype SPEAKER_94: for these kinds of robots and that's why it's not a surprise that tesla is developing optimus is because you think about what self-driving is it's it's a device a car with a whole bunch of cameras on it David Sacks: it takes in all that visual information and then it makes decisions about how to move and how to react and then it's it's trained based on mirroring human decisions all those human decisions that tesla's been able to gather through the combination of self-driving with humans intervening allows it to train SPEAKER_101: the the self-driving i guess brain you could say well and it's also sax moving at two or three miles SPEAKER_00: per hour so it can take its time and if you haven't seen this figure this combines the language model with what you're discussing sax so the language models when you show them a picture and you say hey and this is from figure and there's a this is a their robot and it says hey give me something David Sacks: have you guys seen this before i've heard some of the founders these robotics companies talk about why they create robots in a humanoid shape and it's not just because they're trying to create a replacement for humans or something like that it's also because now they can point cameras at the way that humans move yes and so they can actually train these robots on how humans move and react to things so you're able to kind of create a large data set kind of like with self-driving so that the robots are able to learn how to how to move and i've seen a different video where uh optimist the tesla SPEAKER_11: robot is folding shirts yeah pretty impressive yeah what's what's really interesting about this freeberg is SPEAKER_00: when i spoke to the the people who are making these evolution has made humans to operate in the world most efficiently over whatever number of years and creatures before us so in fact the world is SPEAKER_65: optimized for the human body type and so maybe you could talk a little bit about what you think is going to happen with these robots friedberg in the in the short and medium term when will we have one of these robots in our houses what will the price point be in five to ten years and what will they SPEAKER_354: be doing in five to ten years i don't know we should explore we should explore that question at the all-in SPEAKER_04: summit 2024. okay shout out to elon elon can you bring optimus to the event please jason i don't think SPEAKER_94: it's a five-year time frame i think it's longer than that that's just my guess and one of the reasons is if you look at the use of robots in call it industrial production today they don't want humans David Sacks: getting too close to them they're actually kind of dangerous because you have these arms flying around they move quickly they're very heavy you get banged on the head by one of them it's going to take you out so the idea of having a robot in your house that's capable of freely moving you have to make that so safe to a point that they just haven't gotten to yet with robots so there's just going to be like a lot of fine-tuning work that happens before this is a domestic product i think in SPEAKER_96: the near term it's all about industrial applications or maybe even military applications SPEAKER_65: well it's and if you've ever been to the the gigafactories i was doing a little tour of one SPEAKER_11: of them once and somebody grabbed me because i almost wandered into one of those areas and they have tape on the floor then they have a wall etc but if you even get within a certain closeness with this tape on the floor it shuts the whole thing down because they're afraid somebody's going to get crushed behind one of these arms chamatha i'll give it to you when will we have SPEAKER_00: one of these robots in our homes for the price of a prius now by the way prius is a car that costs SPEAKER_65: about 50 000 that common folk drive so 50 000 robot in our houses i think it'll be less than that i SPEAKER_45: think it's going to be in the next two or three years you'll have a domestic help robot that you can SPEAKER_64: probably pay a thousand bucks a month for okay which would be two to three like a hundred thousand dollar car payment that would be the equivalent of a car payment on a hundred thousand dollar car so okay you say under five you say three what do you think freeberg same bet thousand dollar a month robot hundred thousand dollar sticker price when we have that in our homes no no i think it's a SPEAKER_11: thousand a month thousand a month which would be the equivalent over whatever number of months and SPEAKER_36: what is it it does it's general purpose does different stuff general person's robot thousand dollars SPEAKER_111: a month 50 payments i think it washes the dishes i think it will do the laundry take out the trash there'll be like a whole set of house household tasks that it will do walk the dog no no not SPEAKER_186: responsible for a live creature what do you say freeberg a thousand dollar a month at home robot does your SPEAKER_367: dishes there's a great bet for us give us the over under how many years i'm not sure i think SPEAKER_36: the soldier of science come on man give us a year well i i don't think it necessarily follows this general purpose model i think that there are likely going to be more narrow application ranges and they're not going to necessarily be humanoid in form factor um i don't know if you guys have seen uh gecko robotics have you guys seen this company are you guys investors in this nope SPEAKER_35: pretty impressive like suite of um autonomous products that do specific things in industrial settings so they have like robots that climb on the outside of buildings and look for cracks using special scanning equipment but they're very autonomous in how they operate and what they can do and they've got a whole class of robots that can then be each one of those robots can do many SPEAKER_36: different tasks for many different applications and so the form factors they've got kind of a set of form factors meaning a set of robots that look differently and have different capabilities of them like little spider legs or arms or or whatever and then they can be applied to go do something SPEAKER_35: autonomously and then they just run and they do it if you pull that up you'll see it climbing walls riding along types yeah they're purpose built well they're not purpose that's what's interesting they're SPEAKER_36: they're sort of a narrow range of applications but they're not specific to do only one thing and so they can work in different environments and do different things and so you'll kind of pick from their suite of robots which ones you want to use to do different different tasks and then they go and do it it's really interesting they're mostly using them for industrial monitoring applications right now like looking on bridges for breaks and yeah cleaning cleaning windows here cleaning windows all that kind of SPEAKER_138: stuff oh cleaning windows that's a good one yeah so they've got like a really cool suite and i think SPEAKER_36: that's what we're likely to see in domestic settings as well all right so you might i'm just i'm just not sure by the way i will say the success of gecko indicates that there's far more money to be made in industrial applications than there is in consumer applications today i disagree so these yeah i think SPEAKER_11: every human is going to have one of these and i think every household in america every middle class household in america will have one of these thousand dollar a month robots in seven years David Friedberg: i'll give it seven you you say to do everything i say to do domestic chores taking out the trash SPEAKER_138: folding laundry domestic tasks i just think it's hard to justify that because you're only spending so many hours a week doing that sort of stuff is it really worth a thousand bucks a month whereas in the SPEAKER_316: industrial setting it makes a lot more sense think about those dangerous tasks like climbing on a bridge looking at the seams and climbing on a building cleaning the windows those tasks take SPEAKER_36: years to do sometimes many many years of high-risk human labor whereas taking out the trash and folding laundry might be a little bit more hard to justify the spend all right it's more breaking SPEAKER_10: news here during the program we'll get our war correspondent our geopolitical expert david sacks SPEAKER_170: what are you seeing on the wires well there's a nato meeting going on right now and blinken did a press conference where he says that ukraine will be joining nato that's the big news going viral right SPEAKER_395: now ukraine will become a member of nato our purpose at the summit is to help build a bridge to that membership uh and uh to create a clear pathway for uh for ukraine uh moving forward so of course we SPEAKER_397: believe that ukraine deserves to be a member of nato and that this should happen sooner rather sooner SPEAKER_62: sooner rather than later chamoff any thoughts on this flip that just broke during the program SPEAKER_45: well we just i think nato just added sweden right and it was done in pretty record time from application to admission so i would like to know whether is this just rhetoric to just keep everybody at bay and placate the ukrainians or is this real the problem that this creates is that if it is real and they're admitted then nato has to defend ukraine which means that then america and all the other nato allies would have to fight which means that we're in a war america should SPEAKER_120: not be in a war just uh give you the exact facts you are correct sweden finland applied to join SPEAKER_65: in may 2022 following russia's invasion of ukraine and they had been neutral as you know for many decades finland has a massive land border with russia and they joined in april of 2023 after applying SPEAKER_53: in may of 22 so just a year later and sweden became a member in march of 2024 just two years later SPEAKER_177: at first membership was held up by both turkey and hungary sacks you're our resident expert on SPEAKER_367: ukraine and all things geopolitical your thoughts on the one hand what lincoln is saying is more of the SPEAKER_170: same here because it's been the administration's policy to seek to bring uh ukraine into nato SPEAKER_94: since they took office they've reiterated that over and over again and it's one of the major reasons for this war is that the russians said over and over again this was a red line for them that's why there's a war in ukraine the idea that you're going to be able to bring ukraine into David Sacks: nato however when the war is going so badly is now entering the territory of being delusional i mean this is like a delusional comment and if you just want to understand how badly things are going look at yesterday's politico which was called ukraine is at great risk of its front lines collapsing the source for this article was high-ranking ukrainian officials close to zeluzhny who's the former commander and chief some people have speculated that zeluzhny himself might be the source but at a minimum it's high-ranking ukrainian officers who reported to zeluzhny and what they say in this article is that the prognosis in ukraine is grim they say that the sad truth is that even if the funding bill is approved by the u.s congress a massive resupply may not be enough to prevent a major battlefield upset they say that there is a great risk of the front lines collapsing wherever russian generals decide to focus their offensive which people expect in the next few months and there's nothing that can help ukraine now because there are no serious technologies able to compensate ukraine for the large mass of troops russia is likely to hurl at us this is a quote from one of the ukrainian officials we don't have those technologies and the west doesn't have them as well in sufficient numbers so what they're saying is that even if the funding bill goes through the 61 billion SPEAKER_96: it's not going to be enough to save ukraine and at the very moment that that is now being finally honestly reported by western media it's something i've been saying now for months finally the truth is coming out you have blinken doubling and tripling down on these comments that nevertheless ukraine will be joining nato and chamath is right under article 5 an attack on one is an attack on all therefore if ukraine becomes part of nato an attack on ukraine by russia which is currently ongoing will be considered an attack on the united states then you have to add to the mix the fact that macron and other european leaders have actually been advocating for nato descending round troops and he said this over and over again he's doubled down on this multiple times so you have a dynamic now where this isn't just hot rhetoric by blinken this really has the risk of tipping over into policy i would say in a biden second term where biden agrees to do what our european allies are already calling for which is send in nato troops to ukraine to save ukraine from what politico calls an imminent collapse i think this is a very dangerous situation i mean we're really talking about here is world war three so if you want to have a serious chance of war three in the next four years then i would say go ahead and vote for biden in november i mean this is just very clear to me i'm personally not willing to accept that risk i'm not willing to accept a ten percent or one percent risk of that chance but i think blinken putting it on the table here i think people should be deeply concerned about this and there should be a lot of follow-up questions for blinken and the administration about this SPEAKER_401: freeberg should the free country of ukraine be able to join nato on some timeline or should they SPEAKER_36: be banned from ever joining i think the statements are correct that ukraine joining nato escalates conflict and we will find ourselves in a de facto global conflict world war now the question is is that the cycle the natural cycle i will once again nick pull it up please reference ray dalio his SPEAKER_35: typical big cycle behind empires rise and decline as he spoke at length with us in person about at the all-in summit last year he points out that the era of prosperity that over the last 500 years we've SPEAKER_36: seen six major empires go through is followed by a debt bubble which drives a wealth gap which ultimately leads to economic challenges which means printing more money which is the cycle we are going through right now with a as you guys know two to three trillion dollar annual deficit and explosion in SPEAKER_35: federal debt levels and that ultimately leads inevitably to external conflict to war now the particular motivations in every case in all six times this has happened in the last 500 years look different when you read the history books about what were the circumstances that drove us to external conflict that drove that nation to war but the truth is every single one of them was preceded by a debt bubble income inequality wealth gap and the printing of money and there's a relationship between those economic factors and a desire for conflict and i think that is what we are seeing play out over the past couple of years starting with our motivated interest in supporting ukraine against the russia conflict and now escalating it towards inviting ukraine to join nato to escalate the conflict itself now i think there's a notion that having a war is stimulating having a war is unifying this would be having a wag the door wag the dog theory i i don't think it's a wag the dog theory as much as it is what do you do when the economic condition of the nation is such that the federal government has to print money to support the economy and or to bridge the wealth gap and when under those circumstances in order to unify the country in order to motivate a system of unification amongst a fracturing society or fracturing economic strata you feel like you have to have an external enemy and that the notion of war itself is economically stimulating i think that those are the motivating factors that we've seen play out six times in the last 500 years and we may be unfortunately seeing play out here again as we talked to graham allison ray dalio about last year we said what can we do to avoid this that there have been times historically where these things have been avoided but if we're not being cognizant of what's going on here and motivating a different tact and a different path whether it's through our electoral cycle or through being loud and vocal in whatever media channels we each have access to to make folks more aware of this i think you know we will find ourselves walking SPEAKER_36: down this path of looking for global conflict and finding it you look like you wanted to chime in SPEAKER_45: there yeah of the three presidential candidates to be very clear one is supportive then of some kind of confrontation because by proxy they're supportive of admitting ukraine into nato which would create a SPEAKER_65: war and two are pretty clearly anti-war and just for people who know the uh boom bust cycle behind empire's rise and declines you can see that if you're on the youtube video but the sixth of eight moments is revolutions and wars as freeberg's pointing out there are two more that come after that SPEAKER_00: debt and political restructuring and then the new world order emerges and so the question here i guess becomes can diplomacy win the day and then is blinken's point that they eventually can become a SPEAKER_53: member or that they're imminently going to become a member and it's breaking news so we don't know SPEAKER_138: if he's speaking about well clearly let's just be really clear on this the words he used were very SPEAKER_36: carefully chosen and that means that there was a media and press strategy conversation that was had by him and his staff which obviously found its way into the white house administration and that there was a executive conversation about this for sure this is the positioning we need to now be clearly stating SPEAKER_35: which means that this is now policy he did not slip up on those words this was not some SPEAKER_138: off-the-cuff comment this was clearly a media trained statement which means that it is it is administration it was delivered during the press conference exactly at the next white house press conference you will hear the question asked by reporters is this the white house position and they SPEAKER_11: will say yes it is yeah and just to be clear that that video had a couple of edits in it and we don't have the full press conference here the quote from the hill is ukraine will become a member of nato period our purpose at the summit is to help build a bridge to that membership which then seems like this would this if you're building a bridge that takes time so maybe they mean over time the fullness of time and to be able to do this in the next year would be if it was on the timeline of finland would be insane i cannot disagree it would be insane but they're not ruling it out and i think you have to David Sacks: look at the context of what's happening he's making these remarks as all the news from the battlefield is terrible ukraine is losing and it's at risk of collapsing and european leaders like macron are therefore calling for direct nato intervention in the war so for lincoln to be making this sort of SPEAKER_96: statement is really adding fuel to the fire and let's see if he walks it back let's see if he clarifies it i predict that he won't because this is i predict a clarification for sure because this SPEAKER_04: does not feel like it'd be good for voting because the war is incredibly unpopular it'll make the Chamath Palihapitiya: election pretty simple every other issue all the social issues that we fight about will fall away the debt will fall away the border will fall away if this is true if it's true does america David Sacks: want to go to war well chamath i think i think we're already at that point even if there is some sort of clarification and the reason i say that is because biden clearly is very committed to this ukraine policy it didn't just start when he became president it started when he became vice president and was managing the ukraine portfolio for obama this is why hunter biden got that job in ukraine because biden was running the show there and they have been very committed to this idea of bringing ukraine into nato for decades i mean he supported when he was a senator so this is not like freeberg said this is not like just some randomly chosen words out of the blue blinken measures his words carefully he knows SPEAKER_96: what he's saying and this is something that biden clearly is passionate about and what you have to believe is that in a biden's second term he's going to manage this whole situation so perfectly that this war is not going to escalate any further and i just i have no confidence in that remember if you want to use a historical analogy go back to woodrow wilson in 1916. he was elected on literally the catchphrase he kept us out of war less than one year later we were in world war one world war one yeah so this idea of well biden wouldn't possibly get us into a war i mean history shows otherwise history shows that presidents once they win reelection are more likely to get us into war rather than less because they don't have to fear voters so then the question is well what is in joe biden's heart what's he passionate about he is clearly passionate about this cause about bringing ukraine into nato and certainly not having ukraine collapse or lose this war whereas trump and bobby kennedy have both said that they will end this war they will seek a peace deal if elected SPEAKER_371: i think that's enough right there yeah i mean and obviously lincoln and biden are looking for peace as well they just don't want to lose the war no they're not looking for peace i just i think they SPEAKER_65: are definitely for peace you can disagree but they definitely want peace why did they reject the deal at istanbul at the beginning of this war yeah because they uh i think don't want russia to determine who gets to be in nato and they want free countries to decide is that what you're in a war for SPEAKER_00: i mean that that is i guess the existential question here is at what point do we want to let free democracies determine their future and protect them from invading countries that is like actually the core of this is do you believe in democracy do you believe free countries should have SPEAKER_11: the autonomy to pick their future and is that worth fighting for that is the question the world SPEAKER_45: faces right now i think that framing i think that framing is not totally accurate i think of course those things are good and right things i think the thing is on the balance of issues there are seasons when certain priorities need to be shaped by a country and right now we're in a season where there's tremendous domestic instability in our country and and our country you're saying in our country yeah and our balance sheet is breaking so i think the question isn't that is democracy important of course it's important it's how relatively important is it abroad relative to these domestic SPEAKER_00: issues here yeah but i i know right hold on let me just finish is it worth fighting for is the issue and is it worth fighting for when you don't have the resources to do it now if we were sitting here SPEAKER_11: and a country next to ukraine was invaded say finland or say france or another country in europe was invaded we would absolutely go to bat for them but for ukraine we won't go to bat for them they're not SPEAKER_53: part of part of nato and you know this is when you say go to bat are you saying are you saying send SPEAKER_430: american soldiers because that's what we're talking about if france or finland was in would you be SPEAKER_118: opposed to france if russia invaded france would you defend france would you be in favor of the of course David Sacks: that's our article five guarantee under nato this is why i don't want to extend an article SPEAKER_96: five guarantee to ukraine because it will put us directly in conflict with russia and i'm not SPEAKER_65: interested in being in war three right and then so finland and sweden come up and i guess the argument would be would you be in favor of sending troops to defend finland and sweden the latest members of nato and would you be in favor of that now we're committed and when you were in favor of them joining nato i guess is the next question should we discuss it on the pod i explained that it was SPEAKER_411: creating a liability not an asset but what's done is done should free countries be able to join SPEAKER_96: nato i guess is at the end of the question actually let me make two points on that the first one is David Sacks: countries don't have a right to join nato any more than i have a right to join augusta country club just because i'm a golf player doesn't mean i get to join augusta okay it's up to the current membership of augusta or nato decide whether they're going to admit a country based on what is in their interest SPEAKER_96: it has never been in our interest to make ukraine security dependent of the united states sorry this is the reality the second thing i want to point out is that what was russia demanding they were demanding ukrainian neutrality they were not basically looking to conquer ukraine they wanted them to be neutral so ukraine did not have to give up its freedom okay they just had to agree to be neutral that was the key issue that's what makes it very different than some other historical analogies SPEAKER_290: and that was not acceptable to us at the very beginning of the war blinken said that we would insist on an open door policy we would yeah clearly the right move here would have been to kick SPEAKER_53: the can down the road and just tell putin we'll take it off we'll take nato off the table for 10 years or 20 years and then we could have outlasted putin you and i agreed on that you and i agreed on that SPEAKER_96: before the war started and then the minute the war started everyone forgot that that was the key SPEAKER_42: casus belli of this war just more diplomacy it's better can i just say one thing that SPEAKER_45: go ahead sax you would be the perfect member of augusta were it not for one small issue SPEAKER_442: be careful john bob rhymes with schnoosh oh augusta oh my gosh that was my favorite from who is the SPEAKER_83: lunatic deranged guy from new york was in congress and they expelled him after six months george santos SPEAKER_446: santos were like are you jewish he's like i'm jew ish ish ish like a little pause in the middle SPEAKER_11: all right listen another amazing episode episode 173 congratulations to our ceo john hell he's with SPEAKER_367: us now who i will make christ uh and uh nice call back please do us a favor do us a favor 486 000 people following the youtube channel get in there and be part of the q a when we hit 500 000 and your best chance of being part of the 1 million subscriber party which i think chamath's gonna oversee it'll be at the win in las vegas there oh okay there it is we have a location and then the all in some make an announcement next week go to youtube type in all in and subscribe for the rain SPEAKER_10: man david sacks yeah chamath palihapitiya the german dictator and your sultan of science who loved dune 2. he loved it he saw it twice overrated that good i'm going to see it twice i'm going to go see it SPEAKER_453: again go see it in imax oh my god the comment boards got so angry furious furious at overrated SPEAKER_94: i mean this set them off like nothing has ever set them off i don't know try making a comment about SPEAKER_12: trump join my world you can't attack tim timothy chalamet i know god oh my god man they were SPEAKER_459: really timothy rushing to his defense i mean he does look like he drinks a lot of soy i'll be honest i think that guy's only i don't think that guy's ever had whole milk no i think skinny i think skinny SPEAKER_12: people like that when you're super skinny like that you travel in packs to protect each other as a group SPEAKER_05: oh like so like you can get in a group like hyenas or something and then just protect each other SPEAKER_56: yeah it's like oh my god we got to stick up for each other because if we don't you know hey are you standing sideways or are you like like a pod there's like they're like a pod SPEAKER_466: a pod of soy boys like the roman turtle protection thing that they were doing yeah yeah shields up as SPEAKER_138: one as one soy boys you know is now up to 630 million in the box office pretty pretty good run huh SPEAKER_469: you know they're gonna do dn3 now oh it's definitely happening he's just gonna be SPEAKER_451: negotiating a big price tag big deal yeah big deal all right everybody you know what to do and we'll we'll see you next time on love you boys the world's greatest podcast the all in pockets tell your SPEAKER_482: friends