SPEAKER_00: There is a PR group for Meta that says, how can we turn the narrative on data centers around? Because we need to build more data centers. We need to catch up here. When you're behind, you go open. When you're ahead, you go closed. I'm in your corner, and we're going to be the

SPEAKER_01: company that gives you an agent, a tutor, free design tools, and makes your life better. The only thing we ask is that you let us build some data centers. This is the best version of Zuckerberg I've seen in his career. He is thinking about the ramifications of what he builds for the first time in the history of the

SPEAKER_04: company. All right, everybody. Welcome back to This Week in Startups. It's our news program today.

SPEAKER_06: We got a lot of news, Lon. We do. Including Mark Zuckerberg's essay. This thing is long. I went

SPEAKER_10: on a ruck this morning, and I listened to it. 6,500 words. 6,500 words. He writes nine more. He's got a

SPEAKER_00: book. A book is typically 60,000 words. If he does nine more essays, you could have Zuckerberg's essays. He's getting pretty active on X, which he never did. His handle is FinkD, if you don't know that, at F-I-N-K-D, which was his online handle when he was in college.

SPEAKER_14: Yes, he has not ever changed his handle online. The essay is titled,

SPEAKER_15: The Future is for Everyone, The Path to a Positive AI Future. Here is arguments in a nutshell. Basically, superintelligence's biggest risk is centralization, not the tech itself. He expresses three core principles, individual empowerment. AI's main purpose is invention, not automation. And there should be a balance of power and governing access to information and what we're doing with all of this intelligence. He also says, here's what Meta's building to sort of be part of this AI future. That includes a personal AI agent for everyone, powerful coding video design, and more tools for everyone, ways to launch businesses without teams or funding, a pH-level tutor or coach for any subject, contributions to science, and so forth. He also discusses some of the risks, job loss, data center pushback, cybersecurity and bioweapons, the U.S. not keeping pace with China, and he makes a few policy commitments, Jason. Meta will continue releasing open source models. They today dropped the open weight model Muse Glimmer, and they're making plans for an open weight version of Muse Spark 1.2. He also proposes independent boards to review model safety criteria, and he calls for closer cooperation between labs and the government that doesn't slow down the release of new models. So that's kind of a quick overview. So what do you think? I mean, I think most people, is this PR? Is this advertising for the next wave of

SPEAKER_17: meta AI? Or do you take this as a sincere thing that Zuck is worried about the future and wanted to be part

SPEAKER_00: of the conversation? There's a lot going on here. I think he's learned a lot being a technologist who moved fast and broke things and got himself into hot water. And one of the things he learned is he's historically a terrible communicator. He's unlikable because he's rich. He maybe, you know, I don't want to diagnose anybody, but maybe doesn't make eye contact or doesn't speak in a way that is engaging

SPEAKER_01: to people. And so I think he understands those faults. And then also, I think because he was such a young founder, he was getting spun by different people telling him how to run his business and how to communicate. So you take those two combinations together, not being a great natural communicator, but great at building a business, obviously. And then people spinning you around that I think he's finally saying, I'm going to control the message here. I'm going to state my actual beliefs in a way like Elon does and let the chips fall where they may. I'm going to go direct, right? And so now we're seeing him get vocal and go direct because he just paid this huge fine, right? And the entirety of the second movie that's coming out about him, you put all that together as just a little

SPEAKER_21: prologue to this. I think he now wants to communicate directly as a man, as a founder, you know, founder authority, I'm going to control the message. I'm going to actually think from first principles, what I believe, and I'm going to state it. And I'm going to be more thoughtful and preempt things that typically I would just build products, not explain myself. And then when they break things, I'll just pretend that didn't happen and not say anything and then get pulled in front

SPEAKER_01: of Congress, right? In corporate communications, I think he's made a lot of mistakes over the years. I think he would agree with that too. So here we have a manifesto of AI and he touches everything. And I thought it was actually very well written and very thoughtful, but he covers everything. This is not one position. This is literally like a dozen. So you have to break down each one. So I think one place, uh, to start here is he's for open models and he's not for regulating open models. Uh, he believes that the best way to deal with these frontier models with dangerous things is not to lock them up or regulate them. It's to give everybody access to them. Sounds familiar. It's literally the manifesto of open AI. Open AI's manifesto was this technology is too powerful for one person to control it. So he's taking that position. That's also extremely convenient, isn't

SPEAKER_21: it? Since he's behind when you're behind, you go open when you're ahead, you go closed. Yeah.

SPEAKER_01: The Facebook network, Instagram, those are black boxes. You can't index them. There's no API for them. There's no grabbing the social graph and doing interesting things with it. As the developer, they dabbled in that for a couple of years and shut it all down. So when you're ahead and you've got the franchise, you lock it down. iPhone as an example, when you're behind Android, as an example, you open

SPEAKER_26: up. Okay. So he's for opening and that's a really good strategic move for him. So then he talks about

SPEAKER_01: the dangers and there's a part where he talks about, uh, chemicals and that kind of stuff. And I think I

SPEAKER_28: screenshotted it, or you can just do a quick control find when he talks about materials. And there's a section where he talks about materials and the dangers of them. So essentially he says, listen,

SPEAKER_01: trying to regulate the models is not going to be as effectively as trying to limit access to chemicals and precursors. So we should do that. In other words, how, how you make a fertilizer bomb, God forbid, like Oklahoma city, we are going to have a hard time making an open source model, not be able to do that. We'll have an easier time going after the actual sale of fertilizer. He doesn't, I think say it that crisply, but let's hear it. Yeah. He says, uh, lab should

SPEAKER_17: continue working to reduce biological and chemical risks in our models. Uh, first we should focus on limiting the physical production and distribution of harmful materials. I expect it will be easier to

SPEAKER_15: regulate and control physical components than the spread of knowledge. So this is an important area

SPEAKER_04: of policy focus. So this is really important. This is the first time I've heard this idea.

SPEAKER_01: I think it'd be the first time you've heard it. We are bringing up the dangers of AI. Yes. What does Dario say when he talks about the dangers of AI? Oh my God, this stuff is really dangerous. We had to stop it. We can't release it. He's getting involved in drama with the, uh, administration. What does Zuck say? He actually thought this through.

SPEAKER_21: You're, you're not going to stop information. Information wants to be free and AI makes it impossible to hold back this information. You're not going to stop access to open source models

SPEAKER_01: coming out of China or other countries or America or people making their own now cats out of the bag. You could make your own model. So if we are concerned about biological weapons, the materials and the

SPEAKER_00: tools to make those, he didn't mention tools, but I'll add that are where we should try to limit things if we are actually concerned about that. And that's actually a really good policy statement

SPEAKER_15: that I haven't heard from another person. I feel like, I feel like we already do. I mean, unless people are building bombs or whatever out of everyday common household items, we do try to already make, like you, I, I couldn't go buy like a bunch of different hazardous chemicals today, at least not without some sort of a license or a permit.

David Friedberg: You would be surprised. You can buy a lot of the precursors. No founder I've ever met started a

SPEAKER_00: company because they love doing paperwork. No, you don't want to spend hours filling out payroll and setting up an HR department. And I know you don't have a passion for making your taxes more complicated. Do you? You want to fix problems. You want to create products in the world. All this paperwork, it is a huge distraction. You can move all that off your plate with a trusted partner. Every. Every is the all-in-one platform for incorporation, banking, payroll, benefits, and taxes. Basically your entire back office. They're going to keep up with all the bookkeeping and paperwork so you can stay laser focused on product market fit, scaling your company, hiring great team members, all that stuff you love doing. And if you're just getting started, they'll handle your Delaware C Corp and getting yourself a registered agent,

SPEAKER_48: all with no legal fees and no delays. And Every's worked with over a thousand startups already. That's the kind of know-how and experience you can rely on. So head over to every.io and stop wasting time on the stuff that isn't growing your company. That's E-V-E-R-Y.io.

SPEAKER_00: Just like the precursors to making methamphetamine made famous on Breaking Bad.

SPEAKER_49: Right. Well, that's because that's my point. Like that's Sudafed. Like you can distill, like that's what they're doing on Breaking Bad. Like you could go buy a bunch of Sudafed.

SPEAKER_51: That's what we can't seem to sort of limit. So I'm wondering. We can actually, we, we can do a much better job limiting the precursors.

SPEAKER_01: Okay. That's absolutely the case. And so if we do think that this is going to get out of hand, it's an inconvenience. It's bad for those businesses. If you put up friction and you require people to show their driver's license and you limit the number they can order, or they got to fill out a form and coming back 48 hours later, that'll decrease the sales of precursors, whether it's for drugs, bombs, weapons, et cetera. But it is a much better solution. And by the way, fertilizer went through the same exact hand wringing before Oklahoma City, the bombing that occurred there, which was a giant fertilizer bomb, a UPS kind of style truck. You could just buy fertilizer. And then after that, they started tagging fertilizer. They started monitoring the people purchasing. They put all these things in. So this is

SPEAKER_21: something I'll give him credit for. He's not just saying this stuff is terrible. He's saying

SPEAKER_01: there's easy solutions to this. Then he makes another point about cyber. And if you look at his cyber section and hacking, it's basically like, you know what? AI applied to hacking. And you can pull up the quote there from it is we're going to be living

SPEAKER_00: very quickly in a world where the code is made rock solid by AI. So this is a transient issue. In other words, he believes the ability to hack systems is going to go down greatly because of

SPEAKER_01: these tools. Therefore, the two things that people are very concerned about hacking and cyber hacking combined with biological weapons. He's just saying he's taking them head on, whether you agree with his position or not, you might disagree with it. My point is he's giving thoughtful feedback on very granular issues and saying, I don't think you need to worry about it. And this is what I think the right approach should be. This is a very different approach than he's taken. And he's doing this ahead of time. So I don't know if you have that quote.

SPEAKER_15: I do. Over time, I expect that widely deployed AI models with strong cybersecurity capabilities

SPEAKER_17: will lead to systems that are more secure, not less. This will be definitively true once super intelligence enables most of the world's code to be verifiably secure. The long term answer isn't to withhold capabilities, but to establish a balance of power where super intelligence is broadly

SPEAKER_55: distributed. My point here is now Zuckerberg is anticipating problems, taking those problems,

SPEAKER_01: thinking from first principles about possible solutions. This would have been amazing before he launched Instagram, made it super addicting and caused young girls on the platform to experience body dysphoria and self-harm and anorexia and any number of diseases. And if he had a thoughtful approach to, hey, age gating and what age people should have, this is the big paradigm shift I see in Zuckerberg. Just by one example, he's now anticipating problems and taking a leadership position. I'm

SPEAKER_00: saying here's how the world should work. Does that make sense, Lon? It does. Yeah. Probably the best insight he had in this whole thing was about AI and jobs. He admits, hey, there could be job loss. This is something to worry about. But if we withhold the technology and we don't make it available to

SPEAKER_01: everybody, that's worse than giving it to everybody for free, for eternity, unlimited, et cetera, giving access to it because he believes the job displacement will occur. But if people are learning these tools and sharpening their blade and learning how to apply them, they'll stay ahead of the job loss. Right. Which is exactly what Jensen said in a quip that became very famous. You're not going to be

SPEAKER_00: replaced by AI. You're going to be replaced by somebody using AI. Let's read how he phrases it.

SPEAKER_15: I think it was very well written. Here's the Zuck quote. Recent statistics suggest it may be more

SPEAKER_17: likely that individuals' capability growth could match or outpace automation, in which case people

SPEAKER_15: will gain the ability to do many new things before their current jobs change. Right. So if you think

SPEAKER_00: about that, just in our firm, we've been deploying AI. I've been talking about, hey, who are the AI natives inside of our venture firm? Some people are taking to it like fish to water. Other people are like, you know, not don't want to dip their toe. Some people are up to their ankles. Some people are wading in. Right. And the quicker you adopt it, the more valuable you become, which then the organization finds more opportunities and it grows. So that rang true to me. And I thought it was a really good framing for the job loss argument and job displacement. Yes, jobs will go away, but can you

SPEAKER_01: stay ahead of that? He also telegraphed new products coming, which I thought was really interesting. Now, he doesn't have a problem launching a lot of products and he's had a ton of failed products. People forget Poke. That was his Snapchat clone, 2020, 2012. Slingshot was another disappearing message, 2014. Livestage, this is a video app aimed at teens to, you know, go after Snapchat. And Bolt, that was a Snapchat style messaging app that they tested in some like foreign markets. Those were four different ways he tried to attack Snapchat. Then he just put all Snapchat's features into Instagram. Right. He also did Facebook Home, if you remember that. Sure. You remember

SPEAKER_21: he had also the metaverse frame for photos. There's that whole metaverse. Metaverse. Yeah. Then there was Facebook gifting. Right. There was Facebook credits for virtual games. It was a long line of things, but he mentions here what they're building. Yes. And we should go through each one of those.

SPEAKER_17: The first one, a personal AI agent for everyone. I have a little quote here. Everyone will have an exceptionally capable personal agent that understands you, your goals, and everything you care about. Your agent will work 24-7 on your behalf to improve your relationships, health, career, finances, home management, hobbies, and more. It's going to free up the time is what he's saying.

SPEAKER_66: I predict Facebook is going to launch an open claw, Hermes agent, clawed co-work competitor.

SPEAKER_00: It's going to be, you know, Facebook, you know, assistant or Instagram assistant, whatever he brands it as. One of those brands would probably be smarter. And what it's going to do is study your social media activity. If it sees that you are booking tickets or you're liking content about a certain movie in IMAX that everybody's going to see right now, the Odyssey, it's going to say, would you like me to find you tickets to the Odyssey in IMAX? And I can go do that for you. And then

SPEAKER_01: it's going to go do it for you. It's going to say, hey, your birthday's coming up. Last year, you did a birthday party. Do you want me to book a reservation for you? So it has all of that context on your life. They are in a really, really great position to take the skunk works, patchwork of personal agents that we're all building in the technology community and give those to your auntie. You know, your aunt who was never on MySpace or Friendster or, you know, other wonky social networks, but they were on Facebook and they got addicted to it because it was so simple. They could do that for your auntie, for your cousin who's addicted to Instagram or whatever it is. So that's one product that I think could be very successful then.

SPEAKER_15: I mean, I'm sort of very divided here because on one hand, it does sound very useful, like

SPEAKER_17: an agent that's built into so many of the apps you've already got running on your phone, that's intelligent about all that, that you don't need to connect to any of them. I think people could get a lot of use of that, but there's so much resistance among the consumer

SPEAKER_15: app audience for AI. I feel like you've got, that's a big thing to overcome. He's going to

SPEAKER_17: have to really sell people on the utility here so that they're not like, oh, more slop, get it off of my phone.

SPEAKER_28: So he doesn't have to introduce it as AI at all. It can just organically exist in your feed. And I

SPEAKER_00: think that's what will make this so compelling. You won't have to say, I want to install AI. It will just very subtly start prompting you. Hey, I see you have 17 restaurants that you've bookmarked here. Would you like me to, I put them into a list for you of restaurants in Japan. Yes.

SPEAKER_01: As an example, I do use a lot of bookmarks in Instagram. So when I go to Japan or I go to Paris, I have already bookmarked a bunch of restaurants, a bunch of shopping, a bunch of

SPEAKER_00: hotels, whatever it is, it could very easily close that gap for me and do intelligent agent like things without me asking. In fact, travel and food and fashion are things that it's already knows a lot about you. So it could just start saying, Hey, uh, I'm, uh, your Instagram agent wanted to let you know that I've kept a catalog of all of the, uh, men's clothing that you've liked lawn. Here they are. And, uh, I monitored the prices on them and where you can get them.

SPEAKER_01: And here are places that make a similar item.

SPEAKER_15: No, I think that's a good, I think that's very astute. I think that if you, and I think that's actually what a lot of these companies should have been doing all along with these AI is you don't need to brand everything AI. You just make it really useful. And then people

SPEAKER_17: will start using it regardless of how they feel about the technology. I think that makes

SPEAKER_00: a lot of sense. Founders using AI to be more efficient are pulling away from everyone else in the pack. If you apply AI in your company, you're going to go faster and you're going to beat your competitors. So if you're wondering how to keep up with your admin and number crunching tasks without hiring a huge team, you need NetSuite next. You already know NetSuite. They're

SPEAKER_48: your single source of truth, combining financials, inventory, HR, CRM, and every other system in your company. And they're already trusted by more than 43,000 companies. NetSuite next is the same amazing platform with AI running alongside everything. It's your guide on the side. Just type your question in plain language into ask Oracle, and you'll get a real answer pulled from your company's live data. Plus they're flagging potential problems before you even think to ask about them. Now for the first time ever, you can try NetSuite next for free. If your revenues are at least in the seven figures, go to netsuite.ai slash twist. It's built for every industry, ready for every boardroom, netsuite.ai slash twist.

SPEAKER_49: He's also building what he calls powerful coding video and design tools for everyone. So not,

SPEAKER_17: not keeping these gated, you know, like these cursors just for coders or Higgs fields,

SPEAKER_15: just for the industry. He wants to open that kind of stuff up so everybody can have access. That's the next one. Waste.

SPEAKER_00: Okay. So my next prediction is Instagram will launch a video editor, similar, an AI-based video

SPEAKER_26: editor, similar to the way they added filters and, you know, swiping through filters. That was

SPEAKER_00: something you did in Photoshop before I subtracted here. That's going to be a really interesting design feature that we can use. Um, and there's no reason that can't be like CapCut. And I think

SPEAKER_80: I was going to say CapCut's the model. CapCut's the model. We're already three quarters of the way

SPEAKER_28: there with CapCut, I think. Based on what you've queued up there, I'm convinced they will just have

SPEAKER_00: their own CapCut competitor. They can build software really quick. AI-based software that can make images and video. Sounds exactly like CapCut. I think they do have some tools built into these things, but I would look for another standalone item like that. Coding. I don't think they, the world needs them to do coding. I don't understand the opportunity there. So I'll say coding. I don't

David Friedberg: think he's going to do anything.

SPEAKER_15: I mean, we already have Codex, Cloud Cowork, or excuse me, ChatGPT work and Cloud Cowork. And to me, those are already the, like, Hey, you're not really a coder, but here's like a coding style or lovable. I mean, I feel like that already exists in the, in the world.

SPEAKER_85: Exists. Yeah. I don't think they're going to compete there. All right.

David Friedberg: What's the, uh, ways to launch businesses without teams or funding.

SPEAKER_01: Okay. This is very interesting. Zuckerberg is kind of teeing off of WhatsApp. So this is WhatsApp has business accounts. Those business accounts allow you to communicate with customers and then to use the ad networks to find customers. If you go overseas, WhatsApp is how all transactions occur. When I go to Europe, when I go to Asia, if you're talking to your driver or you're talking to your cab company, if you're talking to your hotel, if you're talking to a tourist, uh, guide, uh, you're taking a guided tour somewhere, or you're talking to a restaurant, it all winds

SPEAKER_15: up on WhatsApp and you build a relationship there. I never had to have WhatsApp my, all my time in the U S I never signed up the moment, the day I got to Japan, I had to join because

Chamath Palihapitiya: everybody, everything in Japan is happening on WhatsApp. I was amazed. Same in Europe.

SPEAKER_00: So if you go to Europe, it's the same exact thing. Every single person, uh, is using that. So if you were starting a tour guide business, if you had a tour guide business, as an example, or you're a driver and you provide livery services, either of those, you build a landing page, you have a Google local, and then you use WhatsApp for your operating system. Why not make it so WhatsApp has in their WhatsApp business, the ability to make a small business page to handle customer support and do all that with AI. In other words, just take WhatsApp and build adjacencies to it.

SPEAKER_01: And what you're seeing here from when I explain all of the interesting things that he telegraphs in this manifesto, each of their key properties, he's building something aligned right next to it. That builds an adjacency. One of the things we learned about AI tools and software is the pace of software so fast now that building an adjacent feature is faster than ever. Instead of it being a three to six month sprint to build, let's say a homepage builder, right? Like a, you know, Wix business homepage builder or HubSpot to manage your CRM. There's no reason that suck can't build, you know, an 80% version of that into WhatsApp in three to six months. So that's what he's doing. It's always the adjacencies, adjacencies, adjacencies. And I think it's pretty clear

SPEAKER_92: that WhatsApp is the home for the one he just mentioned there.

SPEAKER_17: Yeah, for sure. So other, other things he says he's building a PhD level tutor or coach that will

SPEAKER_15: help you out in any subject. He wants to make some contributions to science, sort of like deep mind, like he wants to, and then free or low cost access for everyone is, is the big.

SPEAKER_94: Yeah. Now this is the big win. Yeah. The big one is at the end there. If your margins,

SPEAKER_01: my opportunity, he's already got the second largest ad network in the world behind Google.

SPEAKER_00: It already prints money for him. Every time you use Facebook to do a search, it's learning about you just like Google. So every time you engage with Google, it knows more about you. We can target an ad better because they're using this AI to target ads to you. If they just get you to use their service, they will learn 10 times more about you.

SPEAKER_83: And if they learn even 50% more about you, their ad network is going to get dramatically more valuable

SPEAKER_00: in the world to marketers. So an ad version of Facebook GPT, Instagram GPT, and WhatsApp GPT, they should literally just put GPT at the end if they wouldn't get, if it wouldn't get a letter. But they could just put Facebook AI, Instagram AI, WhatsApp AI, and allow you to do searches there.

SPEAKER_01: And when you do Instagram now, it does default when you do a search there to a little AI clip at the top, just like the shortcuts there. So they're already doing this and they don't even have to

SPEAKER_00: present an ad in that answer. And Meta's always wanted to build a search engine. I think a Facebook search engine would be a killer idea. They should buy Perplexity or they should just build their own search engine. And when you do a search, it could just be like a Google search. They just have to come up with a good name for it or just buy DuckDuckGo and make it part of the brand family. This would be a huge innovation for them. All of this backs into the final argument and what this really is about and the timing of this. And that's what one has to wonder. Why now? Why did Zuckerberg write this now?

SPEAKER_27: If you're a cynic or you're just speculating, you'd say, well, more CEOs are getting active, communicating directly. Right. Jensen just joined Twitter. We just had that big open letter that

SPEAKER_51: Jensen did about the power of open source. Exactly. Yeah. So if you believe in the go direct

SPEAKER_33: moment, you had Palo Alto Network's CEO and the CEO of NVIDIA just joined Twitter and start writing

SPEAKER_00: manifestos and, you know, daily, weekly updates. And it's gone over really well. So Zuckerberg could

SPEAKER_28: just be following them. That would be a very basic interpretation of what's happening here.

SPEAKER_15: Well, there's just, there's this big conversation going on with tech leadership and government and

SPEAKER_109: maybe he just feels like he wants to be part of it. It would be the theory. I don't believe

SPEAKER_26: that that's actually what's going on here. Right. I think there's something very pragmatic going on here, which is data centers. Correct. Yeah. And data centers are really unpopular. And so if you look at

SPEAKER_00: this manifesto, everything about it is abundance. This is Zuckerberg's abundance. Yes. I am on your side. I'm going to empower you. I'm going to make it free manifesto. If you were to sum up all of the points in this memo, it's that your life is going to be better from AI. I'm in your corner and we're going to be the company that gives you an agent, a tutor, a free design tools and makes your life better. And we're going to even teach you how to make a small business. The only thing we ask

SPEAKER_115: in return is that you let us build some data centers. The team is pumped because you're about

SPEAKER_117: to close a massive deal, but then the client's lawyers get involved. What happens if you get hacked? How are we going to protect your data? There's no need to panic. This is why you brought in YSecurity. YSecurity is staffed with over 40 experienced engineers who have actually worked security for world-class companies like Apple, Uber, Microsoft, Robinhood, Brex, and so many others. But the best part is you don't even need to hire YSecurity. Your company can rent YSecurity's elite team by the hour. That means no massive salaries to pay, no costly consultants, just real experts embedded in your company, helping you out with your SOC 2, ISO 4200, or any security or compliance challenge you're facing. You can even set a monthly cap so you know exactly how much you're spending. And your first six hours are completely free. Head to YSecurity.io slash twist and book your free six-hour strategy call. That's YSecurity.io slash TWIST. At the same time this was happening,

SPEAKER_01: this morning, I was listening to Morning Joe. In the morning, I will switch back and forth while I'm

SPEAKER_83: having my coffee, CNBC, CNN, Fox, MSN, MSNOW, whatever it's called now. And I'll just zip through

SPEAKER_01: a couple of these things just to see what they're talking about. Because there's a really cool feature

SPEAKER_00: on YouTube, the quad, where it gives you all four and you do-do-do. So I see this piece on Morning Joe

SPEAKER_01: about how great Zuckerberg's data center in Utah has been. Play this clip.

SPEAKER_122: Kind of engagement. Where as different data center proposals sail through with hardly any controversy at all. No controversy, Lon. There's no controversy here. What's inside here, Lon? Inside this shipping

SPEAKER_125: container is an educator's dream. A hydroponic farm tended by high school students who sell their

SPEAKER_129: products at a farmer's market. Oh, it's for the children. It's salad for children. And they're learning entrepreneurship. How did that happen in Utah? It's good lettuce. It's not bitter. No. The

SPEAKER_125: lettuce is not bitter. Courtney Johnson is the former principal of Cedar Valley High School in the city of Cedar Valley Mountain, about 50 miles south of Salt Lake City. A hydroponic farm funded by Meta, the parent hydroponic farm, Instagram, and one of the country's biggest AI hyperscalers. Back in 2018, when the company announced plans to build this $2 billion data center on the edge of town,

SPEAKER_136: Johnson says she went to work. I started messaging Mark Zuckerberg right then. I'm like,

SPEAKER_139: we're a new high school. We're not opened yet, but I want to work with you because I'm all about community partnerships. Right? Interesting. Yeah. So yeah, they gave me the money and here we have it.

SPEAKER_17: And it's awesome. This is exactly what Cuban was saying. Remember that Mark Cuban quote where he was

SPEAKER_144: like, just buy the communities off. Just. Corporate largesse that didn't end there in this old rodeo town. Here we go. So they got a quarter million dollars for the farm.

SPEAKER_146: Ninth fastest growing city in the nation. Jared Gray is a literal cowboy and also the mayor.

SPEAKER_01: So anyway, I think you get the idea. The mayor's stumping for it. This, and this was a data center built in 2018 in Utah, the same place where Kevin O'Leary is doing his data center. So MSNOW,

David Friedberg: which this felt like a commercial for Meta for me, like with the background music and everything.

SPEAKER_42: Yeah. I mean, you know, they're like, these are, these are big corporations behind MSNOW. They're not

SPEAKER_01: against data centers. So it probably is kind of. I mean, I don't know who owns MSNOW now, but I'm not sure who the corporate interest here is, but it did seem to me. They split off, right? It's Versant

SPEAKER_17: Media Group. That's the company that split off from NBC last year to run all of their cable networks.

SPEAKER_155: So it's not part of NBC anymore. It's no longer Comcast. It was Comcast. Now they're their own

SPEAKER_79: company called Versant Media. And they own CNBC. So not to be like crazy conspiracy dearest here,

SPEAKER_01: but now you've got mainstream media saying, Hey, you got it all wrong on data centers. The same day, his manifesto drops. This is a full on full court press. Let us build data centers. We need to build data centers. It's going to be great for your community. You're going to get hydroponic farms.

SPEAKER_00: We're going to put in a new stadium. They even have in this little love letter to Meta that they started a soda pop store at the high school where you have these like Italian delicious sodas from the pumps. And I was like, okay, we know what's going on here. There's so, this is a absolutely

SPEAKER_01: constructed and I hate to do the media deconstruction here. There is a PR group for Meta that says,

SPEAKER_00: how do we, how can we turn the narrative on data centers around? Cause we need to build more data centers. We need to catch up here. How can we do that? Let's talk about, Hey, you're not going to

SPEAKER_01: lose your job. Check. We're going to give you a bunch of free software. Check. The world's going to be safer. You're not going to have terrorist attacks. You're going to have your own tutor for your child, your small business. We're going to give you software for that. And if you just learn

SPEAKER_00: how to use these tools, we're going to make them free for you for life. We're the group that's going to make super intelligence available for all people for free. All we ask is that you let us just build

SPEAKER_15: some data centers. Yeah. It's a direct response to the big criticism, which is always like, well, these data centers are coming in. They're sucking up all the water. They're using up all the power. And then what do we get out of it? They don't, they don't create that many jobs. It's funneling all this money to, you know, the billionaire class, the Epstein class. Like, I feel like that's the narrative. So this is trying to cut directly at the heart of that. Like, no, actually here are all

Chamath Palihapitiya: the things that you're going to get out of this data center being in your neighborhood. You're

SPEAKER_00: going to get a free tutor now. And I got to say it, whatever PR firm, marketing comms firm, they gave $10 million to run this campaign and playbook, they should have given them 20 million.

SPEAKER_162: It's a good idea. Because it's working. This was done so well that MSNOW hit his manifesto. It

SPEAKER_00: makes you feel great about AI again. Whereas Dario and Sam Altman saying, we got to come up with UBI and like, this is, half of all jobs are going away. That narrative scared everybody to death. And of course you don't want data centers. The data centers are going to wind up in hacking and nuclear bombs and dirty bombs and bio weapons. My eye photo is going to get hacked. My, my eye messages are going to get hacked. My computer is going to be hacked and

SPEAKER_128: we're going to have dirty water and my electrical bills going up F this. Yeah. Now we're just

SPEAKER_166: going to turn the whole narrative around well done to the PR marketing team at Meta. And I think actually it's a well-written manifesto. It was not written by AI. It was definitely not written by AI.

SPEAKER_15: I don't think it was written by Mark Zuckerberg. I think it was written by some professionals who came in and, and, and polished this because I agree with you. It's very compelling and it's well-written.

SPEAKER_01: I feel it's his ideas though. He may have had somebody co-write it with him, but I think to my point earlier, I think he's taking control of the message. I think he actually believes what he's saying here. Interesting. So I think there's definitely ways to read it as, as cynical, but

David Friedberg: yeah, it definitely is. What's the most cynical take you'll take it? Cause I just gave, I think it's actually how he feels. I think it's actually the direction he's going in. It's good for his business. And I think the most cynical thing I can say is he wants to install data centers and he just wants to explain to people what they're going to get out of it. And it felt pretty

SPEAKER_15: even keeled. Yeah. I think that's the most cynical take is that this is really like a large scale advertisement for like Meta's agents. Like, Hey, we're building all this stuff that you're going to love and it's going to help you. And it's going to be built into the apps that you already have. And he's presenting it as I'm doing a public good. It's a public service intelligence for everyone, but he's really just promoting the, the, the new agent coming

SPEAKER_17: to your phone via Meta. I feel like that's the most cynical take. I don't know.

SPEAKER_28: But I mean, if that's the most cynical take and they're dropping open source models today, they dropped Muse glimmer. Yes. And Muse spark 1.2. Yeah. It's coming. And, and he's going to do an open weight version of Muse spark 1.2. Um, you know, the fact that he's releasing

SPEAKER_00: open source is proof in the pudding, you know? So I, I look at like, I'm looking at it, trying to be cynical and I don't find myself getting too cynical. I kind of believe him. And I think this is

SPEAKER_01: the best version of Zuckerberg. I'll say very clearly, this is the best version of Zuckerberg I've seen in his career. Now, like my view on his career is irrelevant, but I have seen it from the beginning. And I think this is the most thoughtful approach I've seen him ever take. And he is thinking

SPEAKER_00: about the ramifications of what he builds for the first time in the history of the company. I think

SPEAKER_01: they did not. And they said they didn't move fast, break things. All we have to do is grow the stock price. All we have to do is grow the user base. Don't worry if we break things now, this seems like,

SPEAKER_21: Hey, here are the things that can break. And then here are the things that could break in your favor as a consumer. Yeah. We're going to work on not breaking things and we're going to break the arc of history and this technology to you. It is a masterclass. Let me just say this to Zuckerberg.

SPEAKER_166: This is a masterclass of a manifesto. I give him 10 of 10, no notes. Yeah, it is. It takes a techno

SPEAKER_181: optimist sort of view, which I don't think you, you, you couldn't really say a lot of meta releases in

SPEAKER_17: the past felt that way. It usually feels like I'm going to get you super addicted to this feed. That's going to make you feel fat and ugly. Like that's what the Instagram sort of pitch is in a weird way. Like doom, you're going to doom scroll this all day and you won't be able to quit. Whereas this, I think at least we're starting from a more utopian vision of this is going to empower

SPEAKER_15: everyday people. Yes. Yeah. I don't think anybody feels particularly empowered by Instagram. Maybe, maybe influencers, but other than them though, X has discontinued their revenue sharing program. Uh, the everything apps rev share program as it existed before will be retired on September 7th. They're already done accepting new, uh, signups in its place. They are introducing the original content rewards program. New payouts will be based on qualified impressions generated by your original content. Now this includes posts, blog posts, videos, streams, and so forth, but it applies only to, and I'm quoting content. You have personally created written film designed or produced that reflects your own voice perspective and expertise. Love it. So the, the clear thing they're cutting down on repose aggregation, people clipping a second off somebody else's content, and then posting a one or two word response. They're going to start cutting that or cutting revenue, going to that, de-emphasizing that in favor of all original content posts to be eligible for the original content rewards. You must subscribe to X. You've got to be at least 18. You have to have at least 500 verified followers, and you have to get 500,000 verified home timeline impressions. That doesn't include replies, just people going to your actual profile over the last 90 days. Now the old revenue sharing number required five million home timeline impressions. So this cuts that down, but I did notice there are a lot of people like me who were eligible, got grandfathered in under the old X where it was easier to get to 500,000 timeline impressions, and now they're not going to be eligible. I'm not eligible for the new rewards program. I was eligible for the old one. So we're, we're sort of changing up the dynamic of the people who are going to be eligible for payouts. It's going to be mostly like bigger accounts. So I guess the big question would be, how do you think this is going to reshape X content? And what are the kinds of things on X you'd like to see less of in your timeline that you're

SPEAKER_187: hoping this cuts down on? This is absolutely fantastic because I was never a fan of like Mario and Kane Koa and all these folks who were just stealing other people's content. A lot of them

SPEAKER_26: were offshore, stealing other people's content. And it just was a disaster. They were making large amounts of money off of other people's content. And I know the former head of product who just

SPEAKER_187: retired, Nikita Beer, he was calling people out on this. And to change the actual incentive is a great

SPEAKER_01: idea. We want original content there. Now I think they just wanted any content when Elon took it over

SPEAKER_21: and it was like, Hey, we're going to revenue share. It did get people excited. And those people then went and got too excited to the point at which episode of all in drops episode of Joe Rogan drops. They

SPEAKER_01: would just camp on the feed, make 20 clips, present them and get these massive amounts. And I'm assuming

SPEAKER_21: they would earn, you know, tens of thousands of dollars in revenue per month. Now that was good for the platform in one way, because that content found its way onto X in video, although it was coming in either a quasi fair use, but generally illegal way. These were not the owners of the content. Clipping is kind of allowed for commentary, but systematic clipping is not. Right. And so what this

SPEAKER_00: does is this very thoughtfully gets rid of the systematic clippers and just says, Hey,

SPEAKER_26: you can clip stuff. You can, you want to clip, you know, something from Joe Rogan or Tim Dillon, go, go at it. Yeah. But you're not going to be making money off of it. Right. You can't monetize it.

SPEAKER_15: It's going to cut down on the repetitiveness in the feed. Like when a piece of video would really blow up, I actually referenced it in the last, that meme about the casino butter. I don't know if you've seen it. The woman is making the table side steak on a stone. Anyway, when a clip would go viral like that one, you'd see it over and over and over and over again, because everybody was trying to clip it,

SPEAKER_17: get people to reshare it on their feed and then earn the payout. So if this cuts down on just that alone, it's going to make my feed a lot better, I think. And you have to get to your homepage,

SPEAKER_42: like your profile page. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. In 90 days. So within the, when you sign up,

SPEAKER_15: they look at the last 90 days. And if you got half a million original impressions to your timeline, your homepage, you're eligible. Somebody clicked on at Jason. Exactly. And if you didn't, you're not eligible. So I, I got through somehow in the old X because I just had enough followers or

SPEAKER_17: whatever. So I was eligible for the old version of rev share, but now under the new version, I don't get enough, uh, impressions on my profile, which is okay. I'm not on X to make money. So it's

SPEAKER_15: fine. No, I didn't need payouts. I appreciate the money. Um, so for me, it's not going to make a big impact, but I do think it's going to reshuffle a lot of the kinds of accounts that you're seeing as much in your for you. Cause it realigns the incentives. I like it. Um, I think it's great. Uh,

SPEAKER_199: I don't know if I'll qualify it. Um, you will, I have you for sure. I don't know. I don't know

SPEAKER_166: about how many people visit my homepage or not. What I do know is this has been a crazy amount of

SPEAKER_21: money, um, that I never anticipated. I think, let me see here. Can you see my screen? Wow. That's

SPEAKER_15: crazy. That, that, that is crazy amount of that's over, but it's very variable. That's over 150 K so

SPEAKER_204: far in revenue share on X, but this, yeah, the last two cycles, I guess they do it in two weeks cycles were 8,000. Then the two before that were 2000, the two before that were six and five.

SPEAKER_17: Mine's very variable. I mean, it's very variable. Some months I'll get nothing and some months I'll get $500. So it is very variable if I think for everybody, but here's the other thing. I think

SPEAKER_15: you do want to avoid a situation where it's impossible to climb into those ranks. And we're, I think you don't want to centralize too much of the visibility on just like very large accounts that have millions of people looking at them. You want their, you want, you want people to be upwardly mobile on, on X. I think that's the idea. Like you want, if I come on there and I make five great posts, I should be able to like build a following. Like that's what the magic of it was. You had a lot of like Shaq joins and a million people follow him overnight because he's Shaq. But then there was also like all like tree bro. You remember that guy? Like, like wince, like all these random accounts where they're just, they're really good at posting. And so they got

David Friedberg: famous for being good at posting. I don't, you don't want to lose those people.

SPEAKER_28: Uh, I think this will incentivize the right kind of people. This is a more YouTube creator program,

SPEAKER_187: like a program. So I mean, go for it. It's a bit, the last one was too much of these, um, you know, breaking nine, one, one wall street apes. I'm looking at it and wokeness. It was very gameable designer who is good, I guess. Disclosed TV.

SPEAKER_15: Well, it pays off those people that influencers who have like a narrative, like every day I'm going to talk about like end wokeness is a great example of like every day, I'm going to post this kind of stuff. All of it individually is going to be the kinds of videos

SPEAKER_17: that get a lot of attention. But in the, in the aggregate, it's like, I'm telling a story and I

SPEAKER_214: could just hit that beat five times a day. Yeah. I, you know, I am very tired of King Koa,

SPEAKER_215: Mario, Vise guard, breaking nine, one, one wall street apes. I'm looking at all these people in my feed

SPEAKER_216: who are just, uh, it's just, yeah, it's, it's not for me. And I like this change. And I like the idea

SPEAKER_01: that the people who actually make the original content will make the money and then hopefully they put it back into it. So whether it's Nick Shirley or like, there's a guy I gave a hundred

SPEAKER_21: bucks to today with X money, this guy, JJ, who just reports on crime, uh, in San Francisco. And I always thought this guy served a big purpose because the mayors are like, oh my God, you don't retweet them. Like I had one of the mayors of one of these cities literally reach out to me and say, you're not helping by retweeting this guy. And I'm like, uh, bro, I don't live there anymore. Number one, number two, um, that's your problem that you can't get the Honduran

SPEAKER_219: fentanyl dealers off the streets who've been there for 20 years selling fentanyl.

SPEAKER_73: Is this the one you said today where it's the guy selling steaks? It looks like it's steaks and sneakers they're selling. I didn't see any fencing.

SPEAKER_01: Okay. Yes. And that's the, when I saw that, I gave this guy a hundred bucks. This is JJ Smith.

SPEAKER_00: And so what, what's happening here? You're like, Hey, they're selling steaks. They're selling deodorant. They've got all these things. What they're doing is they're going to small businesses and even larger businesses. And these addicts go, and there's also gangs that do this. They just steal a bunch of stuff. They go to market street, they lay it out and they say, make me an offer for four bucks, five bucks, six bucks, whatever it is. But it is institutionalized and tech workers, rich people think they're helping them by buying this stuff. Cause they think, oh, these are like entrepreneurs. No, they're, they're literally gangs that have coordinated this. How did the gangs work? They did an incredible expose on this because the feds long before Trump came in and broke this down, there were a group of, um, gangs. They would go

SPEAKER_21: to people who were addicted to fentanyl. They'd say, here's what we're looking for. They show them

SPEAKER_00: the pictures. We need razors. We need deodorant. We need this, the stuff that's, you can easily resell.

SPEAKER_01: They'd say, go bring it to us. $1, $2, $3, whatever you grab and run out of there with,

SPEAKER_26: we'll give you one, two, $3. They go, they grab a bunch of stuff. They leave, uh, they get cash.

SPEAKER_00: They would take that stuff, not sell it there. They would take it to warehouses in Oakland. Then they would drive trucks down to LA, San Diego, Laguna, Riverside, Inland Empire, all those places. And then they would resell it to bodegas there, like small mom and pop shops. And they'd say, Hey, instead of buying stuff, we can get it to you for $2 for a deodorant. You sell it for four. Hey, we all win. The way they beat, the way they caught them was all of these companies started

SPEAKER_26: finding their deodorant that was labeled for San Francisco with the serial numbers in San Diego.

SPEAKER_01: Oh, no, wait a second. They figured it all out. Wait a second. So anyway, I like this idea of also donating money to people. So I've been doing this thing on my, um, X money is out. Did you get X money?

SPEAKER_17: I did. Well, I had to, because somebody gave me a $4 and 20 cents. And so I had to sign up

SPEAKER_15: in order to, it was, it was, it was, but also X gives you like 15 bucks. They seed the pot a little

SPEAKER_14: bit so that you want to sign up to get your money. Here's my, uh, so yes, here's my account.

SPEAKER_01: I am on X. Everybody's sending me 69 cents, 420, et cetera. I guess the green is when they give it to me. And then as you can see, the black here is me giving it to other people. So I've been trying to give this money away as fast as possible to people. And then people keep this lunatic sent me $420. And I was like, don't do that. Um, but then I just gave it away to other people.

SPEAKER_21: So now I'm running a multi-level marketing scam on my X account where people sent me 69 and I sent them

SPEAKER_219: for 20. Um, but yeah, pretty funny. Yeah. Um, good stuff happening. All right. I mean,

SPEAKER_17: my only thought on that is like, that's been a part of big cities since I started living in them. Like people on the street, like it used to be bootleg movies in LA where people would go record

SPEAKER_15: the screen and then put it on a disc and then sell you the new movie on the street. That was also the mob, by the way, that was like either. Yeah. They would, when I lived in Brooklyn,

SPEAKER_33: it was the, the actual mob. I think it went to other criminal enterprises. They do it. Then they find

SPEAKER_200: fences to go sell it on the street. Yeah. I'm sure it was organized crime in, in, in some way,

Chamath Palihapitiya: shape or form of course. Oh, well, they basically took the DVDs and said, sell these and even back in Goodfellas days, they're selling the bootleg cigarettes out the back of the truck. Anyway,

SPEAKER_17: let's move, let's move off a truck. Yeah. Uh, we got to talk about the clarity act. It's facing

SPEAKER_15: another big setback Senate Republicans. This is of course the crypto regulation, uh, legislation that we've been working on for forever. Senate Republicans did not take up the bill before leaving for their August recess. That means it's not going to get debated until September at the earliest, which is going to put the debate about it right ahead of November midterms. And there is a sense among Republicans for whatever reason we can discuss way, maybe why we think this, they don't want to dig into this right before everybody goes to the polls in November to vote. Here's North Carolina Republican Senator Tom Tillis. I do think the odds drop precipitously of this getting passed. He means we leave for a month. We come back. We've got an election ahead of us. I think it gets difficult to get it done. So the bill, just to go over a quick overview, backed by the majority of the crypto industry, Coinbase was sort of not sure they were in there back in. Now they're supporting it. It provides a legal framework and jurisdictional certainty for crypto companies. Basically decentralized digital communities go to the CFTC and fundraising and investment contracts go to the SEC. And it resolves some basic things about, you know, like, can a digital asset, can digital asset service providers offer interest or yields or rewards for your stable coin balance? And those kinds of debates would get discussed. The one real sticking point back and forth that they're still arguing, Dems want to include an ethics provision addressing government officials with ties to the crypto industry. You can sort of imagine why Republicans are not as enthusiastic about doing that. So, I mean, in your... Melania coin?

SPEAKER_232: Yeah. Yeah. I think, I think that... How's your Melania coin holding up?

SPEAKER_15: That's obviously what Dems want to do is they want to use this as an opportunity to point out Trump and all of his various connections and how much money he's been making from all of these crypto projects and Republicans feel like, especially ahead of the midterms, that's not maybe the conversation they want to be having. So what do you think looking at the facts of the ground? I mean, is, is this legislation probably dead and, and what impact would that have? I mean,

SPEAKER_172: this was kind of a signature Trump effort. You know, we're going to, we're going to pass all

SPEAKER_33: these crypto regulations. I think it's going to pass right after the elections, probably,

SPEAKER_187: if this is getting blocked, because there's so many donors in the crypto space. So, you know, there's money in politics. I hate to let people know, but there's gambling at this establishment.

SPEAKER_238: What's that line from Casa Blanca? I'm shocked that there's gambling in this. I'm shocked to find that there is gambling in this establishment. Yeah. And they're like, sir, your winnings. Thank you. He puts it in his pocket. You know, they're just, they,

SPEAKER_26: all of our government officials have been bought and paid for for years over this legislation.

SPEAKER_01: One of the big donors to both Republicans and Democrats has been the crypto industry. They have used their influence and their balance sheets to buy this legislation and buy it, they shall.

SPEAKER_166: They will get it right after the midterms. It's probably just a bump in the road. The thing I care

SPEAKER_00: about is how does this work in terms of raising money? Now, the SEC is going to keep jurisdiction over fundraising. Yeah. Over the fundraising, like initial token fundraising investment contracts, while the CFTC is going to take over once the network is mature and decentralized enough to trade as a digital commodity. I don't understand that part of this. And, you know, how does it work for a

SPEAKER_28: startup? So if I start a company and I say, I'm going to sell a thousand membership NFTs to it for a hundred dollars each, and then you're going to get, you're each going to get 1% of the revenue for the first year or whatever, you know, like, what am I allowed to do here? And there's going

SPEAKER_01: to be some new offering exemption and it's going to have a dollar cap. So it's going to cap sales at 75

SPEAKER_00: million over a 12 month period and require issuers to file an offering statement. And then some other update to it was let issuers raise the greater of 50 million dollars a year for four years or 10% of

SPEAKER_28: outstanding ancillary assets capped at 200 million aggregate with tailored disclosures and full

SPEAKER_26: registration. So you're going to have to register with the SEC. Anyway, this seems like chaos. And I am very interested in the impact it will have on startups. Like what will startups be able to do in terms of fundraising? Because we did have a number of our startups decide I'm going to do an ICO. And we were like, uh, is that legal? And they're like, we don't know. Yeah. And, but we're going to do it in Panama with a foundation and it's a million dollars to set up the legal entity. And we're raising 10

SPEAKER_28: million. And I'm like, I've never heard of, uh, starting an LLC or a C corporation costing a million dollars. And I've never heard of domiciling it in Panama with a hidden board of directors,

SPEAKER_26: because the board of directors doesn't have security concerns. Like when I heard this pitch,

SPEAKER_00: I was like, you know what? I can't be on the board of this company. I need you to buy me.

SPEAKER_01: I literally told the founder, like, once you go to Panama and start an organization with an anonymous board of directors in an organization that I'm an investor in time for

SPEAKER_21: me to go, I am not go. I got three daughters. I got a family. Like I can't go to jail. I can't, I can't go to like, it's not worth it. It's not worth it. What are we doing here? Like, why are we? And I asked the woman who was the attorney pitching us on

SPEAKER_01: this foundation. Like, why does it cost a million dollars when you could go on to like, you know, any website if, you know, and sign up to get your incorporation for under a thousand dollars. And she's like, oh, well, it's very complicated and not many people have done it. And I'm like,

SPEAKER_166: got it. Yeah. There you go.

SPEAKER_254: Why haven't a lot of people done this? Hmm. Hmm. Yeah.

SPEAKER_01: Because it's illegal or sketchy and it was just pure sketch. Um, but that's something I would like to have somebody, uh, who's in this explained to us. So if we can put that on our Jake producer, Jacob bar list of potential topics in a future episode, if there's an attorney

SPEAKER_21: who understands how this will affect fundraising for startups, I'd love to hear it.

SPEAKER_17: Claude gave me a little bit of a tip. If you're day one of your crypto startup, you're presumably

SPEAKER_15: under the sec. So if you're launching a token where your team still controls upgrades, treasury, a large chunk of the supply, you're an investment contract asset issuer, all of the usual securities and fundraising rules of the sec apply. So that's okay. So no change. Yeah. So no change there. Uh, I, we could certainly go deeper with more of an expert than me, but what if I,

SPEAKER_79: we launched a token, you know, your startup launches a token, right? So after it raises,

SPEAKER_17: it's $50,000 startup fee. Secondary trading changes the picture fast. Once your token is resold by someone other than you or your agent, it stops counting as a security for that transaction. So exchange listings and liquidity events matter a lot more to your regulatory posture.

SPEAKER_28: So if I get listed on Coinbase or Kraken and somebody else is selling it, then I'm out of the woods.

SPEAKER_04: Correct. But that requires those people to be the gatekeepers then. Um, uh, yeah. Okay.

SPEAKER_15: Claude even says real uncertainty remains. It's still requires like, I don't want to touch this.

SPEAKER_267: Sorry, bro. My name is Claude. Leave me off the pod.

SPEAKER_271: Talk to, talk to the Panama legal lady. She'll help you out. She'll set you up good.

SPEAKER_181: Yeah. Even Claude, I've never seen that before. Even Claude is like, listen, don't, don't, I don't know. I don't want to deal with this. Yeah. Uh, Claude went like this. Yeah.

SPEAKER_275: It's true. So good job, Claude. Thanks. You did that meme.

SPEAKER_172: Yeah. That's the hands up tilt your head right now. I don't know what that meme is called,

SPEAKER_00: but I can picture the guy doing it. It's the guy who is the black guy who does like his own talk show where he rates people. They come in and they like, he's sitting in a king chair.

SPEAKER_79: Wait, is it, is it Drewski? Is that the guy in that meme? I think it's Drewski. Yes. That's the guy. I think it's a Drewski, like.

SPEAKER_15: You're right. No, you're right. It is. I never, I did not make that formal connection, but you're right. It is Drewski in that meme now that I'm looking at it. What's that meme called?

SPEAKER_282: Let me, let me look up the Drewski, Drewski shrug meme. I mean, it could be just the Drewski shrug.

SPEAKER_15: Uh, let's see. Drew. Yeah. Drewski shrug. I don't know. Or the Drewski hands up meme seems to be what people are.

Chamath Palihapitiya: Here it is. There it is. That's it. That's it. And you see that. Yeah. That was just what Claude did. Claude's like, you're on your own.

SPEAKER_285: Yeah. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know.

SPEAKER_287: You're on your own. You want to do it on your show? I don't know.

SPEAKER_288: Yeah. I'll figure it out for you. Yeah. I'm good.

SPEAKER_172: All right. Sorry. Sorry, Claude. I didn't mean to stump you on that call. We're calling Claude out. You want to do one more story? We got some time.

SPEAKER_15: Yeah. Keep going. Uh, so according to the New York Times, AI agents are helping college students cheat on mass. A new report released on Monday claims that AI is routinely undermining online education. Professors are unable to counter AI-enabled cheating. This is mainly happening, Jason, on courses that they call asynchronous. That means students aren't interacting in real time with their professors or their classmates. Even over video or Zoom, they're watching pre-recorded lectures. Apparently with modern AI agents being so advanced now, students can literally give them instructions like log in, complete all of my coursework, and the agents will watch the videos, take their tests for them, write their papers for them, even chat with the classmates and fake it about their reading assignments. And several professors interviewed for the article described totally not knowing what's going on with their students and believing that they're spending a lot of time interacting with bots. Here's a community college teacher named Katherine Kaisar. It's just so obvious those of us who have been teaching for a long time and are editors and writers can usually recognize the cheaply written AI stuff within 30 seconds is what she had to say. What is the answer? I'm trying to take the Zuckerberg approach here. Is the answer to this just not have these kinds of asynchronous classes anymore because it's too easy to cheat?

SPEAKER_90: Yes, that is the answer. There was a professor and Paul Graham retweeted this distribution.

SPEAKER_26: I remember this, yes. And I think we talked about it, so we'll find that real quick here. Yes, we did.

SPEAKER_00: And it was very clear to him that people had cheated with AI, so he did the final in person.

SPEAKER_26: When he decided to do this, and it might have been Princeton students or whatever, but everybody's cheating. It was Brown University. I found the tweet.

SPEAKER_295: Okay, so here we go. You look at this. There's a couple of things that happened. I was talking to

SPEAKER_28: my nephews, and they were telling me about college and cheating and everything. They said during COVID,

SPEAKER_26: people made lectures. And one of my nephews was taking a course, and he's like, I dropped the course,

SPEAKER_00: Uncle J. Cal, because the teacher didn't even teach. He just said, watch the video. And then we asked questions, they sink. And I was like, wait, what are you talking about? It's like, oh, well, they made their entire lectures and recorded them during COVID. And now you're just taking like, and I'm like, what? You're just basically going to YouTube and taking a course. I was like, exactly. I'm like, well, why are you paying for that? And they're like, I dropped it because you have a moral obligation to at least teach the class. I mean, my Lord,

SPEAKER_61: this is just so unethical. And if you look at this.

SPEAKER_15: So this distribution you're looking at that, the one side is showing them taking the test using AI,

SPEAKER_17: and then he had them come in. So the midterm they took using AI, asynchronous at home. And then the final, they had to come in and sit in front of him and actually take it in person. And so you're looking at when these huge gaps are appearing, where somebody clearly did incredibly well with the AI version of the midterm. And then they did very poorly with the in-person exam. The indication is they were cheating using AI. And you can see how few of these students have numbers that are close together. Like their at-home performance matched their performance in the classroom. Presumably,

SPEAKER_28: so for those of you watching, the number on the right is the midterm, which was done asynchronously,

SPEAKER_26: as you said. And if you go to the top, you'll see there's the person, student number one, got a 95.5 at home and a 95 in person. In other words, half a point difference. And then it just starts expanding and expanding until you get to student number 22, who got a 59 at home and a 55 there.

SPEAKER_01: In other words, they are not the brightest kid in the class, but they didn't cheat. They're doing their own work. Yeah. Yeah. And that's the one you want to hire right there. That's, that's the person. That's the person who could become Captain America. Remember Captain America? There's a great scene. I just rewatched Captain America, or at least the first, the first one,

SPEAKER_21: the first Avenger. Yeah. And the first one, the guy who's choosing who's going to get the serum. Yes. He takes a grenade during training camp. He clicks it. He throws it on the ground, says grenade. Everybody runs except Captain America.

SPEAKER_01: Four dives on top in America. Steve Rogers. Yeah. Steve Rogers, who is all of like 90 pounds

SPEAKER_21: at this point jumps on the ground, grabs the grenade and then makes another pump to like

SPEAKER_310: hold it in tight. And it's a fake grenade. It's the greatest scene ever. Yes.

SPEAKER_282: Stanley Tucci, Stanley Tucci, Dr. Abraham Erskine. He's the, he's the researcher.

SPEAKER_21: It's the other guy from the fugitive here. Tommy Lee Jones. Yeah. Tommy Lee Jones is the one who comes up with the test. Tommy Lee Jones. He says grenade. And here they are. They all dive. And one guy, Steve Rogers, that's my guy. And then he does a second pump. Get away. Yeah. Just to close, just to make sure there's no shrapnel on anybody else. And then everybody realizes, oh, there's one person true of heart. And that's why he can pick up Thor's hammer. That's right. That's like he's deserving

SPEAKER_15: of the Captain America serum instead of all the already powerful, strong soldier guys. Exactly.

SPEAKER_04: But remember, they said, Thor said, nobody can pick up this except you're pure of heart. Thor's

SPEAKER_317: hammer. You have to be worthy. You have to be worthy of the old year. Yeah.

SPEAKER_26: Yeah. And so he's worthy of it. That's that 59. That's that one student there. The bottom three,

SPEAKER_320: by the way, who got zero on the final, they dropped the class. They didn't even drive. As soon as they realized they were going to get to use their AI, they were like, I got a hundred.

SPEAKER_323: I'm done. And a zero. Yeah. They were, they were out. Yeah.

SPEAKER_00: Those are the people who you expel. Those people, you, those people could work in, um, business development maybe. Yeah. There's something they could do. There's, there's a job for them. I don't know what it is, but

SPEAKER_15: yeah. Yeah. Yeah. I, I mean, I, I do, you know, we've had a lot of people who make AI tutoring and education apps and, and there's always all this sincerity. Like there are definite ways to use this to learn and expand your horizons. I've learned a lot from interacting with, uh, AI bots, but it is,

SPEAKER_17: you do have to bring that desire to learn to it. You, you can use it very lazily. Just give me the answer. You have to like, bring that with you that I have desire to iterate and keep using this until

SPEAKER_187: I actually learn the material yourself. Uh, the only thing you really need to know is that, um,

SPEAKER_33: um, you're only cheating yourself and everybody's cheating in school and the blue books have to come

SPEAKER_00: out. Everything needs to be in person, pop quizzes, reading books in person. I literally went through

SPEAKER_33: this with my daughters this summer. They had to read a book and I said, here's how we're going to do it. I bought like two copies of the book. I said, these are workbooks. They only cost like four or five bucks. I lied to them. Uh, and I said, it's okay to, cause they ethically didn't want to write up the

SPEAKER_00: books, but these were like paperbacks. And I was like, girls, these are paperback workbooks. You circle any word you don't know. And I want you to underline the most important sentence on every

SPEAKER_26: page in your estimation. And at the end of the chapter, I want you to write a summary on the, in the book of it. And now we read the book now retention's gone over and we call this, um,

SPEAKER_28: uh, hand thinking or hand speed. I would talk about it on a previous episode.

SPEAKER_10: So mind, hand, mind, hand, mind that you're, you, you borrowed it from Ursula K. Le Guin.

SPEAKER_28: Yeah. So hand mine is your mind is going only as fast as your mind, which is why when I'm sitting

SPEAKER_26: here on the podcast, this book is here because I like to slowly write one word. Like I wrote one word, Jason bot while we were talking. And I said, you know, we should have a bot

SPEAKER_28: on Twitter that goes through the show in real time. Like we're having our real time commenter and just Jason bot says what we're talking about. We're post quotes in real time. So if you weren't watching

SPEAKER_166: the show, you could just hear quotes from there. Um, and I, I won't forget it. So there you have it,

SPEAKER_92: folks. Anything else on the docket we should do lightning round?

SPEAKER_17: Uh, yeah, well I do, I want to mention, uh, we'll do one more story, but before we get to that, one thing I do want to talk about just so we can clip it and share it with everybody. We are hiring for the podcast. We have many open positions. There's three that I want to talk about for our purposes on this show. One, we are looking for a new podcast and video editor. You can go to, you can go to, uh, careers.launch.co by the way, and look up all of these. That's where you can find all of our, uh, job postings, but this one, you can also just email editor at launch or killer editor at launch.co and apply to this directly. If you don't want to mess around with the website. Uh,

SPEAKER_15: so this is, these are people who are going to help us make, not just the podcast itself, but make all kinds of great content for all kinds of platforms based on the stuff that we're making for this show, clip it and put it in tick tock, Instagram, LinkedIn. We want to be where everybody is. So that's the podcast and video editor. We are also looking for both a senior podcast producer. This is somebody with three to five years established experience, making great

SPEAKER_17: high level podcasts like this one. Uh, and then we also want to, uh, a more junior podcast producer. Maybe you're not as experienced, but you're a great writer, a great researcher, and you're very enthusiastic about AI tech startups. Uh, you want to learn this world hands-on. I mean, you want to set up amazing interviews like we had today with const, uh, from bit tensor. Uh,

SPEAKER_15: you're, you're a more junior level person. That's okay. Uh, we want to work with you, but you want to learn, but you want to learn that energy. That's yes. A passion for what we're doing and a, uh, an interest. I mean, I think when we've interviewed for this position before,

SPEAKER_17: I tend to get a lot of people who are experienced veterans at podcasting, but there may be not as

SPEAKER_15: passionate about what we talk about the tech, the AI computers, startups, being, you know, being a founder, uh, you know, and if you're, if you're not interested somewhat in that stuff, this job might be a little bit of a drag. We're looking for people who are really, they want to learn everything there

SPEAKER_17: is to know about starting a company, AI being in tech that that's who we're really seeking.

SPEAKER_00: I mean, if we were forced to start a podcast about like poetry, like maybe we wouldn't wake up. Maybe we would, I don't know, but you, we, we ideally want somebody with a passion for the subject material and who love the, the technical aspects of the job. This way you're in your sweet spot and you

SPEAKER_10: enjoy it. Exactly. So, uh, for the producer jobs, you can, you can write us at great producer or just

SPEAKER_15: producer at launch.co or go to careers.launch.co and find all of the job postings. We'd love to hear

SPEAKER_06: from you. I like when people just email us and just say like, Hey, here's what I've done. Here's a link to our LinkedIn and get going from there. I did. I wrote a tweet and I wrote, uh, please send

SPEAKER_17: us a resume and a cover letter and people made fun of me. Cause that's not what you do anymore.

SPEAKER_172: Okay. Boomer. Exactly. Like, okay. Boomer cover letter. It did sound a little antiquated. So I've,

SPEAKER_187: I've updated. Yeah. It's a bit antiquated, but you know, listen, it is what it is. Um, we need more people because AI is replacing everybody's jobs. Uh, but our business keeps

SPEAKER_166: growing and we need more people, too many sponsors. We sold out the entire year again. We've got this week in AI. We've got, we've got plans to do more and we're looking for more people. So help us out.

SPEAKER_172: AI still can't do all of my job a little bit, not all of it though. All right. One more, one more thing I wanted to talk about before we let everybody go. The second it can.

SPEAKER_350: Please, please. I'm begging you. Let's do my job. I get some sleep. I go back to Italy.

SPEAKER_15: I'm exhausted. Uh, so the last thing, uh, Spotify, do you hear about this? They're testing a skip

SPEAKER_17: button for their previous subscriber, their premium subscribers. Jason, the button will

SPEAKER_15: controversy allow premium users to skip through sections of their favorite podcasts, including the ads, the publisher sold ads, but Spotify is exempting their own ads. So you can't use it to skip through an ad that Spotify sold, but you could use it to skip through like all of the ads that we're putting on our podcast that we're not selling through Spotify because we have our old ad team. So Spotify saying, this is just an expansion of the 15 second skip ahead button, which already exists and which people can already use to bypass their ads. And they argue that, Hey, if you make podcasts, this is good news for you because listeners are going to be more engaged with podcast content and their studies show that this keeps people listening to podcasts for a longer time. Still a lot of blowback out there. Tommy Vitor of Crooked Media said, very cool of Spotify to try

SPEAKER_17: and destroy the podcast industry. What a great partner. Yeah. They're going to back down on this one.

SPEAKER_33: I'm going to text somebody I know over there who may or may not be in charge.

SPEAKER_26: Um, yeah, this is just dumb. It's dumb. Um, there's already fast forward 10 seconds, right? Like

SPEAKER_181: this in every podcast, you could hit the button and it'll jump 15 seconds. People are already using

SPEAKER_00: that to skip the ads. Yeah. And you know what? I listened to the ads in these podcasts because

SPEAKER_166: the amount of time it takes to take my phone out and hit skip. I'm just like, okay. You know,

SPEAKER_26: like I must've listened to the ads. Um, and you're listening on one and a half speed anyway,

SPEAKER_00: just enjoy the ads folks. And it pays for it and keeps it free. But for the platforms, like this is a big way to build up resentment and these platforms need to respect the podcasting

SPEAKER_01: standards. And this is one of the things I've been telling them over and over again, stop breaking the standards, work with the standards, work with Adam Curry, work on podcasting 2.0. There's two features in podcasting 2.0 that Spotify. Absolutely. And Apple must respect and use one is a donate button.

SPEAKER_21: The donate button should be set in the RSS feed and it should take you directly to whatever the preferred donation is. So if I want to use PayPal, you want to use Stripe, somebody else wants to use Patreon, just let them have their goddamn button. Okay. And then number two, when we go live, let us drop a live into our RSS feed. You will get that and ping it and then send an alert on our behalf. YouTube does that. Now, if Spotify doesn't want to keep losing to YouTube, which is where people are starting to watch pockets and where podcasts are spending more time, don't do things like this. Spotify should be in the corner of podcasters and for open standards because YouTube is a black box. YouTube doesn't do any of the standards. They don't use RSS feeds, all that kind of stuff. And you know, where are we going to spend our time is what they need to ask themselves. Because the difference between using Spotify and YouTube and putting it in your pocket and listening to the

SPEAKER_17: background, is there a difference? It's getting pretty negligible. I mean, I think my biggest concern with the whole podcasting ecosystem is that it feels like increasingly we're centralizing it in just a few platforms. Podcasting used to be like, you could get a show wherever you wanted. It was going out on this feed. You could pick it up from an independent service. You could listen on Himalaya. You could listen on iTunes. You could listen to Spotify, wherever. And now it feels like

SPEAKER_15: YouTube, Spotify, and maybe Netflix. If you get big enough, Netflix will pick it up. And that's it. Like we're sort of cutting down on all these other places and Apple and Apple podcasts. But it feels like it used to be this like huge landscape of different varieties and where you could get your

SPEAKER_17: podcasts. And I don't know why we'd get rid of that. Like Spotify is not threatened by small, independent platforms. What do they care? I'm just writing a tweet now. Why doesn't

SPEAKER_28: X support RSS feed slash podcast? Yeah. For years, that was just the standard podcast. I should be able to have a tab on my profile page with my latest podcast.

SPEAKER_72: Yeah. That used to be how that was the whole point. This would be insanely effective. You're broadcasting two people's iPods. That was the whole idea. Yes. It's just so annoying when people try to break

SPEAKER_166: standards. And I told this to Spotify when I met with them during South by and I was like, just please stop breaking the standards and please support the new standards. Like

SPEAKER_01: the reason Spotify has so much extra traffic is because of the podcasting standard. Why would you want to break that? You're just working against yourself. And it really pisses off people like me who have a number of podcasts and like, it really makes me feel bad about my relationship with Spotify. And a lot of podcasters don't like Spotify a lot because they don't give us the controls we want and then they don't support standards and they need to listen more. Spotify needs to listen to

SPEAKER_21: podcasters more. And Apple is kind of like not as engaged as they once were. They kind of went dark

SPEAKER_01: for a little bit, but they're getting back. They're realizing podcasting is a good business for them. And they're starting to, I think they got some new leadership over there. They're starting to pick up the phone and call people again. They're starting to feature podcasts and they're realizing this is a good way to keep people on their iPhones. And so, you know, take, take from that what you will Spotify, YouTube, Apple, you got to kind of, you know, be in our, be in the podcasters corner.

SPEAKER_15: Don't do things against podcasts. Yeah. A little behind the scenes. It's also Spotify makes it very difficult to do your distribution unless you use their tool. We're going through this behind the

SPEAKER_17: scenes right now where we tried to switch our distribution. And many of you in the audience

Chamath Palihapitiya: wrote to us and said, it broke things all over Spotify. It's like, eh, you could just make that

SPEAKER_15: easier. Well, that was because of video, right? Yes. It was because of video. Well, it's, it's also reporting like they want, they, if you don't use their own distribution platform, it's much harder to get your analytics. And it's like, well, just, just let us have our analytics. That's how we sell our ads.

SPEAKER_345: Spotify. Yeah. That's another important note for them. Like guys, gals, fellas, ladies,

SPEAKER_01: just don't be heavy handed. And sometimes it's not even heavy handed. They're just like, oh, we'll get to it. No, make it a priority to support open standards. Yeah. Make it a priority to support

SPEAKER_00: the ecosystem that you've gained so much from. Nobody has gained more from podcasting than

SPEAKER_15: Spotify. Exactly. It's like they, their business is just like this app, you know, like there is no Spotify without people making amazing things to listen to in Spotify. I appreciate Spotify is out

Chamath Palihapitiya: there, but I don't feel appreciated by Spotify. Sometimes if Dylan comes out with like a new single or something, I'll send it to my brother, the Spotify link, but that's. No,

SPEAKER_01: no, I'm saying like, I don't share our podcast. No, because we don't feel love from Spotify. I tend to share the YouTube or Apple or the Apple. Yeah. I would like to be more, I would have a

SPEAKER_166: better feeling about Spotify. Yeah. I don't, I don't want to just get to invited to Spotify parties.

SPEAKER_375: That's nice. But I am not like Spotify parties. Nice. Limited appeal. Yeah. Yeah.

SPEAKER_115: Just support standards, please. Yeah. Make it a priority. That's all. Make it a priority. All right. We'll see you all next time. Bye. Bye. Bye.