SPEAKER_00: welcome to episode 124 of the all in podcast my understanding is there's going to be a bunch of

SPEAKER_01: global fan meetups for episode 125 if you go to twitter and you search for all in fan meetups you

SPEAKER_03: might be able to find the link but just to be clear we're not they're not official all in that's

David Sacks: their fans it's self-organized which is pretty mind-blowing but we can't vouch for any particular

SPEAKER_00: organization right nobody knows what's going to happen at these things you can get robbed

SPEAKER_01: it could be a setup i don't know but i retweeted it anyway because there are 31 cities where you lunatics are getting together to celebrate the world's number one business technology podcast it

SPEAKER_11: is pretty crazy you know what this reminds me of is in the early 90s when rush limbaugh became a phenomenon there used to be these things called rush rooms where like restaurants and bars would literally broadcast rush over their speakers during i don't know like what for the morning through lunch broadcast and people would go to these rush rooms and listen together what was it like sex when

SPEAKER_17: you were about 16 17 years old at the time what was it like when you hosted this it was a phenomenon

SPEAKER_19: but i mean it's kind of crazy we've got like a phenomenon going here where people are

SPEAKER_22: self-organizing you've said phenomenon three times instead of phenomenon he said phenomenon phenomenal

SPEAKER_23: why is sax in a good mood jama what's going on there's a specific secret toe tap that you do under the bathroom stalls when you go to a rush room we're already off the rails i think

SPEAKER_34: you're getting confused about a different event you went to there's a lot of actual news in the world

SPEAKER_00: and generative ai is taking over the dialogue and it's moving at a pace that none of us have ever seen in the technology industry i think we'd all agree the number of companies releasing product and the compounding effect of this technology is phenomenal i think we would all agree a product came out this week called auto gpt and people are losing their mind over it basically what this does is it lets different gpts talk to each other and so you can have agents working in the background and we've talked about this on previous podcasts but they could be talking to each other essentially and then completing tasks without much intervention so if let's say you had a sales team and you said

SPEAKER_08: to the sales team hey look for leads that have these characteristics for our sales software put them into our database find out if they're already in the database alert a sales person to it compose a message based on that person's profile on linkedin or twitter or wherever and then compose an email send it to them if they reply offer them to do a demo and then put that demo on the calendar of the

SPEAKER_00: sales person thus eliminating a bunch of jobs and you could run these what would essentially be cron jobs in the background forever and they can interact with other llms in real time sacks i've just

SPEAKER_08: gave but one example here but when you see this happening give us your perspective on what this tipping

SPEAKER_11: point means let me take a shot at explaining it in a slightly different way not that your explanation was wrong but i just think that maybe explain it in terms of something more tangible sure so i had a friend who's a developer who's been playing with auto gpt by the way so you can see it's on github it's kind of an open source project it was sort of a hobby project it looks like that somebody put up there it's been out for about two weeks it's already got 45 000 stars on github which is a huge number explain what github is for the audience it's just a code repository and you can create you know repos of code for open source projects that's where all the developers check in their code so you know for open source products like this anyone can go see it and play with it

SPEAKER_50: it's like porn hub but for developers it would be more like amateur porn hub because you're contributing your scenes as it were your code yes but yes continue in any event this thing has a ton of

SPEAKER_11: of stars and apparently just last night it got another 10 000 stars overnight this thing is like exploding in terms of popularity but any event what you do is you give it an assignment and what

SPEAKER_18: auto gpt can do that's different is it can string together prompts so if you go to chat gpt you prompt it one at a time and what the human does is you get your answer and then you think of your next prompt and then you kind of go from there and you end up in a long conversation that gets you to where you want to go so the question is what if the ai could basically prompt itself then you've got the basis for autonomy and that's what this project is designed to do so what you'll do is what my friend did is he said okay you're an event planner ai and what i would like you to do is plan a trip for me for a

SPEAKER_11: wine tasting in keelsberg this weekend and i want you to find like the best place i should go and it's got to be kid friendly not everyone's going to drink we're gonna have kids there and i'd like to be able

SPEAKER_18: to have other people there and so i'd like you to plan this for me and so what auto gpt did is it broke that down into a task list and every time it completed a task it would add a new task to the bottom of that list and so the output of this is that it searched a bunch of different wine tasting venues it found a venue that had a bocce ball and lawn area for kids it came up with a schedule it created a budget it created a checklist for an event planner it did all these things my friend says he's actually going to book the venue this weekend and use it so we're going beyond the ability just for a human to just prompt the ai where now the ai can take on complicated tasks and again it can recursively update its task list based on what it learns from its own previous prompt so what you're seeing now is the basis for a personal digital assistant this is really where it's all headed is that you can just tell the ai to do something for you pretty complicated and it will be able to do it it will be able to create its own task list and get the job done and quite complicated jobs so

SPEAKER_00: that's why everyone's losing their shit over this freeberg your thoughts on automating these tasks and having them run and and add tasks to the list this does seem like a sort of seminal moment in time that

SPEAKER_55: this is actually working i think we've been seeing seminal moments over the last couple of weeks and

SPEAKER_56: months kind of continuously every time we chat about stuff or every day there's new releases that are paradigm shifting and kind of reveal new applications and and perhaps concepts structurally that we didn't really have a good grasp of before some demonstration came across chat gpt was kind of the seat of that and then all of this evolution since has really i think changed the landscape for really how we think about our interaction with the digital world and where the digital world can go and how it can interact with the physical world it's it's just really profound one of the interesting aspects that i think i saw with some of the applications of auto gpt were these almost like autonomous characters in in like a game simulation that could interact with each other or these autonomous characters that would speak back and forth to one another where each instance has its own kind of predefined role and then it explores some set of discovery or application or prompt back and forth with the other agent and that the kind of recursive outcomes with this agent to agent interaction model and perhaps multi-agent interaction model again reveals an entirely new paradigm for you know how things can be done simulation wise you know discovery wise engagement wise where one agent you know each agent can be a different character in a room and you can almost see how a team might resolve to create a new product collaboratively by telling each of those agents to have a different character background or different set of data or a different set of experiences or different set of personality traits and the evolution of those that multi-agent system outputs you know something that's very novel that perhaps any of the agents operating independently were not able to kind of reveal themselves so again like another kind of dimension of interaction with these with these models and it again like every week it's a whole nother layer to the onion it's super exciting and compelling and the rate of change and the pace of kind of you know new paths being being defined here really i think makes it difficult to catch up and particularly it highlights why it's going to be so difficult i think for regulators to come in and try and set a set of standards and a set of rules at this stage because we don't even know what we have here yet and it's going to be very hard to kind of put the genie back in the box yeah and you're also

SPEAKER_17: referring i think to the stanford and google paper that was published this week they did a research

SPEAKER_00: paper where they created essentially the sims if you remember that video game put a bunch of what you might consider npcs non-playable characters you know the merchant or the whoever in a um in a video game and they said each of these agents should talk to each other put them in a simulation one of them decided to have a birthday party they decided to invite other people and then they have memories and so then over time they would generate responses like i can't go to your birthday party but happy birthday and then they would follow up with each player and seemingly emergent behaviors came out of this sort of simulation which of course now has everybody thinking well of course we as humans and this is simulation theory are living in a simulation we've all just been put into this is what we're experiencing right now how impressive this technology is or is it oh wow human cognition maybe we thought was incredibly special but we can actually simulate a significant portion of what we do as humans so we're kind of taking the shine off of

SPEAKER_23: consciousness i'm not sure it's that but i would make two comments i think this is a really important

Chamath Palihapitiya: week because it starts to show how fast the recursion is with ai so in other technologies and in other breakthroughs the recursive iterations took years right if you think about how long did we wait for

SPEAKER_68: from iphone 1 to iphone 2 it was a year right we waited two years for the app store everything was

Chamath Palihapitiya: measured in years maybe things when they were really really aggressive and really disruptive were measured in months except now these incredibly innovative breakthroughs are being measured in days and weeks that's incredibly profound and i think it has some really important implications to like the three big actors in this play right so it has i think huge implications to these companies it's not clear to me how you start a company anymore i don't understand why you would have a 40 or 50 person company to try to get to an mvp i think you can do that with three or four people and that has huge implications then to the second actor in this play which are the investors and venture capitalists that typically fund this stuff because all of our capital allocation models were always around writing 10 and 15 and 20 million dollar checks and 100 million dollar checks then 500 million dollar checks into these businesses that absorbed tons of money but the reality is like you know you're looking at things like mid journey and others that can scale to enormous size with very little capital many of which can now be bootstrapped so it takes really really small amounts of money and so i think that's a huge implication so for me personally i am looking at company formation being done in a totally different way and our capital allocation model is totally wrong size look fund four for me was one billion dollars does that make sense nope for the next three or four years no the right number may actually be 50 million dollars invested over the next four years i think the vc job is changing i think company startups are changing i want to remind you guys of one quick thing as a tangent i had this meeting with andre carpathy i talked about this on the pod where i said i challenged him i said listen the real goal should be to go and disrupt existing businesses using these tools cutting out all the sales and marketing right and just delivering something and i use the example of stripe disrupting stripe by going to market with an equivalent product with one-tenth the number of employees at one-tenth the cost what's incredible is that this auto gpt is the answer to that exact problem why because now if you are a young industrious entrepreneur if you look at any bloated organization that's building enterprise class software you can string together a bunch of agents that will auto construct everything you need to build a much much cheaper product that then you can deploy for other agents to consume so you don't even need a sales team anymore this is what i mean by this crazy recursion that's possible yeah so i'm really curious to see how this actually affects like all of this all of these you know it's a singular product companies i mean it's a continuation chamath of

SPEAKER_23: and then the last thing i just want to say is related to my tweet i think this is exactly the moment

SPEAKER_24: where we now have to have a real conversation about regulation and i think it has to happen

SPEAKER_78: otherwise it's going to be a show let's put a pin in that for a second but i want to get sax's

SPEAKER_00: response to some of this so sax we saw this before it used to take two or three million dollars to commercialize a web-based software product app then it went down to 500k then 250. i don't know if you saw this story but if you remember the hit game on your iphone flappy birds flappy birds uh you know was a phenomenon it you know hundreds of millions of people played this game over some period of time somebody made it by talking to chat gpt for and mid journey in an hour so the perfect example and listen it's a game so it's something silly but i was talking to two developers this weekend and one

SPEAKER_08: of them was an okay developer and the other one was an actual 10x developer who's built you know very significant companies and they were coding together last week and because of how fast chat gpt and other services were writing code for them he looked over at her and said you know you're basically a 10x developer now my superpower is gone so where does this lead you to believe company formation is going to go is this going to be you know massively deflationary companies like stripe are going to have a hundred competitors in a very short period of time or are we just going to go down the long tail

SPEAKER_43: of ideas and solve everything with software how is this going to play out in the in the startup space

David Sacks: david sachs well i think it's true that developers and especially junior developers get a lot more leverage on their time and so it is going to be easier for small teams to get to an mvp which is something they always should have done anyway with their seed round you shouldn't have needed you know 50 developers to build your v1 it should be you know that's the founders really so that that i think is already happening and that trend will continue i think we're still a ways away from startups being able to replace entire teams of people i just you know i think right now

SPEAKER_87: we're at the phase of this final ways months years decades well it's in the years i think for sure we

David Sacks: don't know how many years and the reason i say that is it's just very hard to replace you know 100 of what any of these particular job functions do 100 of what a sales rep does 100 of what a marketing rep does or even what a coder does so right now i think we're still at the phase of this where it's a tool that gives a human leverage and i think we're still a ways away from the you know human being completely out of the loop i think right now i see it mostly as a force for good as opposed to something that's creating okay a ton of dislocation friedberg your thoughts if we follow the trend line

SPEAKER_92: you know to make that video game that you shared took probably a few hundred human years then a few dozen human years then you know with other toolkits coming out maybe a few human months and now this person did it in one human day using this tooling so if you think about the implication for that i mentioned this probably last year i really do believe that at some point the whole concept of publishers and publishing maybe goes away where you know much like we saw so much of the content on the internet today being user generated you know most of the content is made by individuals posted on youtube or twitter that's most of what we consume nowadays or instagram or tiktok in terms of video content we could see the same in terms of software itself where you no longer need a software startup or a software company to render or generate a set of tools for a particular user but that the user may be able to define to their agent their ai agent the set of tools that they would individually like to use or to create for them to do something interesting and so the idea of buying or subscribing to software or even buying or subscribing to a video game or to a movie or to some other form of content starts to diminish as the leverage goes up with these tools the accessibility goes up you no longer need a computer engineering degree or computer science degree to be able to harness them or use them and individuals may be able to speak in simple and plain english that they would like a book or a movie that does that looks and feels like the following or a video game that feels like the following and so when i open up my iphone maybe it's not a screen with dozens of video games but it's one interface and the interface says what do you feel like playing today and then i can very clearly and succinctly state what i feel like playing and it can render that game render the code render the engine render the graphics and everything on the fly for me and i can use that and so you know i kind of think about this as being a bit of a leveling up that the idea that all technology again starts central and moves to kind of the edge of the network over time that may be what's going on with computer programming itself now where the toolkit to actually use computers to generate stuff for us is no longer a toolkit that's harnessed and controlled and utilized by a set of centralized publishers but it becomes distributed and used at the edge of the network by users like anyone and then the edge of the network technology can render the software for you and it really creates a profound change in the entire business landscape of software and the internet and i think it's uh you know it's it's really like we're just starting to kind of have our heads unravel around this notion and we're sort of trying to link it to

SPEAKER_94: the old paradigm which is all startups are going to get cheaper smaller teams but it may be that you don't even need startups for a lot of stuff anymore you don't even need teams and you don't even need companies to generate and render software to do stuff for you anymore chamoff when we look at

SPEAKER_00: this it it's kind of a pattern of augmentation as we've been talking about here we're augmenting human intelligence then replacing this replication or this automation i guess might be a nice way to say it so it's augmentation then automation and then perhaps deprecation where do you sit uh on this it seems like sax feels it's going to take years and freeberg thinks hey maybe startups and content are over where do you sit on this augmentation automation deprecation journey we're on i think that humans

Chamath Palihapitiya: have judgment and i think it's going to take decades for agents to replace good judgment i think that's where we have some defensible ground and i'm going to say something controversial i don't think developers anymore have good judgment developers get to the answer or they don't get to the answer and that's what agents have done because the the 10x engineer had better judgment than the 1x engineer but by making everybody a 10x engineer you're taking judgment away you're taking code paths that are now obvious and making it available to everybody it's effectively like what you did in chess an ai created a solver so everybody understood the most efficient path in every single spot to do the most ev positive thing the most expected value positive thing coding is very similar that way you can reduce it and view it very very reductively so there is no differentiation in code and so i think freeberg is right so for example let's say you're going to start a company today why do you even care what database you use why do you even care which cloud you're built on to freeberg's point why do any of these things matter they don't matter they were decisions that used to matter when people had a job to do and you paid them for their judgment oh well we think gcp is better for this specific workload and we think that this database architecture is better for that specific workload and we're going to run this on aws but that on azure and do you think an agent cares if you tell an agent find

SPEAKER_23: me the cheapest way to execute this thing and if it ever gets not you know cheaper to go someplace else do that for me as well and you know etl all the data and put it in the other thing and i don't really

SPEAKER_99: care so you're saying it will it will swap out stripe for ad yen or it doesn't node for amazon web

SPEAKER_23: services it's going to be ruthless it's going to be ruthless and i think that the point of that that

Chamath Palihapitiya: and that's the exact perfect word jason ai is ruthless because it's emotionless it was not taken to a steak dinner it was not brought to a basketball game it was not sold into a ceo it's an agent that looked at a bunch of api endpoints figured out how to write code to it to get done the job at hand that was tasked to it within a budget right the other thing that's important is these agents execute within budgets so another good example was and this is a much simpler one but a guy said i would like seven days worth of meals here are my constraints from a dietary perspective here are also my budgetary constraints and then what this agent did was figured out how

SPEAKER_70: to go and use the instacart plugin at the time and then these other things and execute within the

Chamath Palihapitiya: budget how is that different when you're a person that raises five hundred thousand dollars and says i need a full stack solution that does x y and z for two hundred thousand dollars it's the exact same problem so i think it's just a matter of time until we start to cannibalize these extremely expensive ossified large organizations that have relied on a very complicated go-to-market in sales and marketing motion i don't think you need it anymore in a world of of agents and auto gpts and i think that to me is quite interesting because a it creates an obvious set of public company shorts and then b you actually want to arm the rebels and arming the rebels to use the toby lutke analogy here would mean to seed hundreds of one-person teams hundreds and just say go and build this entire stack all over again using a bunch of agents yeah and i think recursively you'll get to that answer

SPEAKER_00: in in less than a year interestingly when you talk about the emotion of making these decisions if you look at hollywood i just interviewed on my other podcast the founder of you have another podcast i do it's called this week startups thank you 700 episodes you've been honored four times please don't give him an excuse to plug it listen i'm not going to plug this week in startups available on spotify and itunes and youtube.com this weekend runway is the name of this company i interviewed and what's fascinating about this is he told me on everything everywhere all at once the award-winning film they had seven visual effects people on it and they were using his software the late night shows like colbert and stuff like that are using it they are ruthless in terms of creating crazy visual effects

SPEAKER_08: now without and you can do text prompt to get video output and it is quite reasonable what's coming out of it but you can also train it on existing data sets so they're going to be able to take something sacks like the simpsons or south park or star wars or marvel take the entire corpus of the comic books and the movies and the tv shows and then have people type in have iron man do this have luke skywalker do that and it's going to output stuff and i said hey when would this reach the the level that the

SPEAKER_00: mandalorian tv show is and he said within two years now he's talking his own book but it's quite possible

SPEAKER_08: that that all these visual effects people from industrial light magic on down are going to be replaced with directors sacks who are currently using this technology to do what do they call the images like that go with the script storyboards storyboards thank you they're doing storyboards in this right now right the difference between the storyboard sacks and the output is closing in the

SPEAKER_00: next 30 months i would say right i mean maybe you could speak to a little bit about the pace here because that is the perfect ruthless example of ruthless ai i mean you could have the entire team at industrial light magics or pixar be unnecessary this decade well i mean you see a bunch of the pieces already

SPEAKER_106: there so you have stable diffusion you have the ability to type in the image that you want and it

SPEAKER_11: spits out you know a version of it or 10 different versions of it and you can pick which one you want

SPEAKER_18: to go with you have the ability to create characters you have the ability to create voices you have the ability to replicate a celebrity voice the only thing that's not there yet as far as i know is the ability to take static images and string them together into a motion picture but that seems like it's coming really soon so yeah in theory you should be able to train the model where you just give it a screenplay and it outputs essentially an animated movie and then you should be able to fine-tune it by choosing the voices that you want and the characters that you want and you know and that kind of stuff so yeah i think we're close to it now i think that the question though is you know every nine let's call it of reliability is a big advancement so yeah it might be easy to get to 90 percent within two years but it might take another two years to go from 90 to 99 and then it might take another two years to get to 99.9 and so on and so to actually get to the point where you're at this stage where you can

SPEAKER_120: release a theatrical quality movie i'm sure it will take a lot longer than two years well but look

SPEAKER_76: at this sax i'm just going to show you one image this is the input was aerial drone footage of a

SPEAKER_00: mountain range and this is what it came up with now if you were watching tv in the 80s or 90s on a non-hd tv this would look indistinguishable from anything you've seen and so this is at a pace that's kind of crazy there's also opportunity here right friedberg i mean if we were to look at something like the

SPEAKER_08: simpsons which has gone on for 30 years if young people watching the simpsons could create their own scenarios or with auto gpt imagine you told the simpsons stable diffusion instance read what's happening in the news have bart simpson respond to it have the south park characters parody whatever happened in the news today you could have automated real-time episodes of south park

SPEAKER_122: just being published onto some website before you move on did you see the the wonder studio demo we

SPEAKER_11: can pull this one up it's really cool yeah please this is a startup that's using this type of

SPEAKER_18: technology and the way it works is you film a live action scene with a regular actor but then you can just drag and drop an animated character onto it and it then converts that scene into a movie with that

SPEAKER_01: character like planet of the apes or lord of the rings right yeah exactly is he the person who kept

SPEAKER_18: winning all the oscars so there it goes after the robot has replaced the human wow you can imagine like every piece of this just eventually gets swapped out with ai right like you should be able to tell the ai give me a picture of a human leaving a building like a victorian era building in new york and certainly it can give you a static image of that so it's not that far to then give you a video of that right and so yeah i think we're we're pretty close for let's call it hobbyists or amateurs to be able to create pretty nice looking movies using these types of tools but again i think there's a jump to get to the point where you're just all together replacing one of the things i'll say

SPEAKER_92: on this is we still keep trying to relate it back to the way media narrative has been explored and written by humans in the past very kind of linear storytelling you know it's a two-hour movie 30-minute tv segment eight minute youtube clip 30 second instagram clip whatever but one of the enabling capabilities with this set of tools is that these stories the way that they're rendered and the way that they're explored by individuals can be fairly dynamic you could watch a movie with the same story all four of us could watch a movie with the same story but from totally different vantage points and some of us could watch it in an 18-minute version or a two-hour version or a you know three season episode episodic version where the the way that this opens up the potential for creators and also so now i'm kind of saying before i was saying hey individuals can make their own movies and videos that's going to be incredible there's a separate i think creative output here which is the leveling up

SPEAKER_94: that happens with creators that maybe wasn't possible to them before so perhaps a creator writes a short book a short story and then that short story gets rendered into a system that can allow each one of us to explore it and enjoy it in different ways and i as the creator can define those different vantage points i as the creator can say here's a little bit of this personality this character trait and so what i can now do as a creator is stuff that i never imagined i could do before think about old school photographers doing black and white photography with pinhole cameras and then they come across adobe photoshop what they can do with adobe photoshop with stuff that they could never conceptualize of in those old days i think what's going to happen for creators going forward and this is going back to that point that we had last week or two weeks ago about the guy that was like hey i'm out of a job i actually think that the opportunity for creating new stuff in new ways is so profoundly expanding that individuals can now write entire universes that can then be enjoyed by millions of people from completely different lengths and viewpoints and and models they can be interactive they can be static they can be dynamic and that the personalized personalized but the tooling that you as a creator now have you could choose which characters you want to define you could choose which content you want to write you could choose which content you want the ai to fill in for you and say hey create 50 other characters in the village and then when the viewer reads the book or watches the movie let them explore or have a different interaction with a set of of those villagers uh in that village or you could say hey here's the one character everyone has to meet here's what i want them to say and you can define the dialogue and so the way the creators can start to kind of harness their creative chops and create new kinds of modalities for content and for exploration i think is going to be so beautiful and incredible i mean freeberg yeah you can choose the limits of how much you want the individual to enjoy from your content versus how narrowly you want to define it and my guess is that the creators that are going to win are going to be the ones that are going to create more dynamic range in the creative output and then individuals are going to kind of be stuck they're going to be more into that than they will with the static everyone watches the same thing over and over so there will be a whole new world of creators that you know maybe have a different set of tools than just just realizing to build on what

SPEAKER_00: you're saying for your brother which i think is incredibly insightful just think about the controversy around two aspects of a franchise like james bond number one who's your favorite bond we grew up with roger moore we lean towards that then we discover sean connery and then all of a sudden you see you know the latest one he's just extraordinary and daniel craig you're like you know what that's the one that i love most but what if you could take any of the films you'd say let me get you know give me the spy who loved me but put daniel craig in it etc and that would be available to you and then think about the next controversy which is oh my god does daniel does james bond need to be a white guy from the uk of course not you can release it around the world and

SPEAKER_08: each region could get their own celebrity their number one celebrity to play the lead and controversy

SPEAKER_94: over you know the old story the epic of gilgamesh right so like that story was retold in dozens of different languages and it was told through the oral tradition it was like you know spoken by bards around a fire pit and whatnot and all of those stories were told with different characters and different names and different experiences some of them were 10 minutes long some of them were multi-hour sagas explained through the story but ultimately the morality of the story the storyline the intentionality of the original creator of that story yes came through the the bible is another good example of this where much of the underlying morality and ethics in the bible comes through in different stories read by different people in different languages and i think that that may be where we go like my kids want to have a 10-minute bedtime story well let me give him peter pan in 10 minutes i want to do you know a chapter a night for my older daughter for a week long of peter pan now i can do that and so the way that i can kind of consume content becomes different so i guess what i'm saying is there's two aspects to the way that i think the entire content the the realm of content can be rewritten through ai the first is like individual personalized creation of content where i as a user can render content that was of my liking and my interest the second is that i can engage with content that is being created that is so much more multi-dimensional than anything we conceive of today where current centralized content creators now have a whole set of tools now from a business model perspective i don't think that plat publishers are really the play anymore but i do think that platforms are going to be the play and the platform tooling that enables the individuals to do this stuff and the platform tooling that enables the content creators to do this stuff are definitely entirely new industries and models that can

SPEAKER_80: create multi-hundred billion dollar outcomes let me hand this off to sax because there has been the dream for everybody especially in the bay area of a hero coming and saving gotham city and this has

SPEAKER_08: finally been realized david sax i did my own little twitter ai hashtag and i said to twitter ai if only please generate a picture of david sax's batman crouched down on the peak of a bridge the amount of creativity sax that came from this and this is something that you know if we were talking about

SPEAKER_00: just five years ago this would be like a ten thousand dollar image you could create as a birthday

SPEAKER_139: these were not professional quote unquote artists these were individuals individuals that were able

SPEAKER_94: to harness a set of platform tools to generate this incredible new content and i think it speaks to the opportunity ahead and by the way we're in inning one right so sax when you see yourself as batman do

SPEAKER_00: you ever think you should take your enormous wealth and resources and put it towards building a cave

SPEAKER_148: under your mansion that lets you out underneath the golden gate bridge and you could go fight crime

SPEAKER_00: so good so good do you want to go fight this crime in gotham i think san francisco has a lot of gotham-like

SPEAKER_149: qualities i think the villains are more real than the heroes unfortunately we don't have a lot of heroes but yeah we got a lot of jokers yeah a lot of jokers yeah that's a whole separate topic i'm sure

SPEAKER_156: a whole separate topic we'll get to at some point today you guys are talking about all this stupid

SPEAKER_68: bullshit like there are trillions of dollars of software companies that could get disrupted and you're talking about making children's books and fat pictures of sacks it's so dumb no conversation

SPEAKER_77: no nobody cares about entertainment anymore because it's totally confused okay so one of the biggest

David Friedberg: industries where the money is why don't you teach people where there's going to be actual economic

SPEAKER_104: destruction this is going to be amazing economic destruction and opportunity he's got a point you spend all this time on the most stupidest topics listen it's an illustrative example no it's an elitist example that you know it's not it's batman's not nobody nobody cares about movies well let's bring

SPEAKER_170: nobody lording tweet over everybody that's a good point i mean i think i think u.s box office is something like 20 billion a year i remember when like people got to like a hundred billion a year

SPEAKER_149: payment volume and now it's like hundreds of billions so adjun and stripe are going to process

SPEAKER_104: two trillion dollars almost why don't you talk about that disruption you ninny market size of u.s

SPEAKER_17: media and entertainment industry 717 billion okay it's it's not insignificant video games are

SPEAKER_00: nearly half a trillion a year yeah i mean this is not insignificant but let's pull up chamath's tweet of course the dictator wants to dictate here all this incredible innovation is being made and a new hero has been born chamath palihapitiya a tweet that went viral over 1.2 million views already i'll read your tweet for the audience if you invent a novel drug you need the government to vet and approve it fda before you can commercialize it if you invent a new mode of air travel you need the government to vet and approve it faa i'm just going to edit this down a little bit if you create new security you need the government to vet it and approve it sec more generally when you create things with broad societal impact positive and negative the government creates a layer to review and approve it ai will need such an oversight body the fda approval process seems the most credible and adaptable into a framework to understand how a model behaves and it's counterfactual our political leaders need to get in front of this sooner rather than later and create some oversight before the eventual big avoidable mistakes happen and genies are let out of the bottle chamath you really want the government to come in and then when people build these tools they have to submit them to the government to approve them that's what you're saying here and you want that to start now here's

Chamath Palihapitiya: the alternative the alternative is going to be the debacle that we know as section 230 so if you try to write a brittle piece of legislation or try to use old legislation to deal with something new it's not going to do a good job because technology advances way too quickly and so if you look at the section 230 example where have we left ourselves the politicians have a complete inability to pass a new framework to deal with social media to deal with misinformation and so now we're all kind of guessing what a bunch of eight 70 and 80 year old supreme court justices will do in trying to rewrite technology law when they have to opine on section 230. so the point of that tweet was to lay the alternatives there is no world in which this will be unregulated and so i think the question to ask ourselves is do we want a chance for a new body so the fda is a perfect example why even though the fda commissioner is appointed by the president this is a quasi organization it's still arm's length away it has subject matter experts that they hire and they have many pathways to approval some pathways take days some pathways are months and years some pathways are for breakthrough innovations some pathways are for devices so they have a broad spectrum of ways of of arbitrating what can be commercialized and what cannot otherwise my prediction is we will have a very brittle law that will not work it'll be like the commerce department and the ftc trying to gerrymander some old piece of legislation and then what will happen is it'll get escalated to the supreme court and i think they are the last group of people who should be deciding on this incredibly important topic for society so what i have been advocating our leaders and i will continue to do so is don't try to ram this into an existing body it is so important it is worth creating a new organization like the fda and having a framework that allows you to look at a model and look at the counterfactual judge how good how important how disruptive it is and then release it in the wild appropriately otherwise i think you'll have these chaos gpt things scale infinitely because again as friedberg said and as sax said you're talking about one person that can create this chaos multiply that by every person that is an anarchist or every person that just wants to sow seeds of chaos and i think it's going to be all avoidable i think regulating

SPEAKER_92: what software people can write is a near impossible task number one i think you can probably put rules and restrictions around commerce right that that's certainly feasible in terms of how people can monetize but in terms of writing and utilizing software it's going to be as challenged as trying to monitor and demand oversight and regulation around how people write and use tools for uh for genome and biology uh exploration certainly if you want to take a product to market and sell a drug to people that can influence their body you have to go get that approved but in terms of you know doing your work in a lab it's very difficult i think the other challenge here is software can be written anywhere it can be executed anywhere and so if the u.s does try to regulate or does try to put the brakes on the development of tools where the u.s can have kind of a great economic benefit and a great economic interest there will be advances made elsewhere without a doubt and those markets and those those places will benefit in in an extraordinarily out outpaced way as we just mentioned there's such extraordinary kind of economic gain to be realized here that if we're not if the united states is not leading the world we are going to be following we are going to get disrupted we are going to lose an incredible amount of value and talent and so any attempt at regulation or slowing down or telling people that they cannot do things when they can easily hop on a plane and go do it elsewhere i think

SPEAKER_76: is is fraught with peril so you don't agree with regulation sacks are you on board with the chamath plan

SPEAKER_94: or you're on board with the framework i'll say i think i think just like with computer hacking it's illegal to break into someone else's computer it is illegal to steal someone's personal information there are laws that are absolutely simple and obvious and you know no-nonsense laws those

SPEAKER_185: laws it's not illegal to get rid of a hundred thousand jobs by making a piece of software though

SPEAKER_94: that's right and so i think trying to intentionalize how we do things versus

SPEAKER_92: intentionalizing um the things that we want to prohibit happening as an outcome we can certainly try and prohibit the things that we want to happen as an outcome and pass laws and institute governing bodies with authority to oversee those laws with respect to things like stealing data but you can

SPEAKER_17: jump on a plane and go do it in mexico canada or whatever region you get to sacks where do you stand

SPEAKER_94: on this debate yeah i'm saying like there are ways to protect people there's ways to protect society about passing laws that make it illegal to do things as the output as the outcome what law do you pass on

SPEAKER_187: chaos gpt explain chaos gpt give you an example please yeah do you want to talk about it real

SPEAKER_24: quick it's a recursive agent that basically is trying to destroy itself trying to destroy humanity yeah but i guess by first becoming all powerful and destroying humanity and then destroying itself

SPEAKER_191: yeah it's a tongue-in-cheek auto gpt but it's not it's not it's not a tongue-in-cheek auto gpt

SPEAKER_94: the guy the guy that created it you know put it out there and said like he's trying to show everyone to your point what intentionality could arise here which is negative intentionality i think it's very

Chamath Palihapitiya: naive for anybody to think that this is not equivalent to something that could cause harm to you so for example if the prompt is hey here is a security leak that we figured out in windows and so why don't you exploit it so look a hacker now has to be very technical today with with these auto gpts a hacker does not need to be technical at all exploit the zero day exploit in windows hack into this plane and bring it down oh okay the gpt will do it so who's going to tell you that those things are not allowed who's going to actually vet that that wasn't allowed to be released in the wild so for example if you worked with amazon and google and microsoft and said you're going to have to run these things in a sandbox and we're going to have to observe the output before we allow it to run on actual bare metal in the wild again that seems like a reasonable thing and it's super naive for people to think it's a free market so we should just be able to do what we want this will end badly quickly and when the first plane goes down and when the first thing

SPEAKER_23: gets blown up all of you guys will be like oh sorry that's a pretty compelling example here by chamath

SPEAKER_00: somebody puts out into the wild chaos gpt you can go do a google search for it and says hey what are the vulnerabilities to the electrical grid compile those and automate a series of attacks and write some code to probe those until we and success in this mission you get a hundred points and stars every

SPEAKER_74: time you jason do this it's such a it's such a beautiful example but it's even more nefarious

Chamath Palihapitiya: it is hey this is an enemy that's trying to hack our system so you need to hack theirs and bring it down you know like you can easily trick these gpts right yes they have no judgment they have no

SPEAKER_23: judgment and as you said they're ruthless in in getting to the outcome right so why why do we think

SPEAKER_66: all of a sudden this is not going to happen i mean it's literally the science fiction example you say hey

SPEAKER_199: listen make sure no humans get cancer and like okay well the logical way to make sure no humans get

SPEAKER_129: cancer is to kill all the humans but chamath can you just address the point so what do you think you're regulating are you regulating the code that here's what i'm saying to write if you look at the

Chamath Palihapitiya: fda no you're allowed to make any chemical drug you want but if you want to commercialize it you need to run a series of trials with highly qualified measurable data and you submit it to like-minded experts that are trained as you are to evaluate the viability of that and hold on there are pathways that allow you to get that done in days under emergency use and then there are pathways that can take years depending on how gargantuan the task is at hand and all i'm suggesting

SPEAKER_203: is having some amount of oversight is not bad in this specific example i get what you're saying but

SPEAKER_94: i'm asking tactically how what are you overseeing you're overseeing chat gpt you're overseeing the

SPEAKER_203: models you're doing exactly chips okay look i used to run the facebook platform we used to create

Chamath Palihapitiya: sandboxes if you submit code to us you would we would run it in the sandbox we would observe it we would figure out what it was trying to do and we would tell you this is allowed to run in the wild there's a version of that that apple does when you submit an app for review and approval google does it as well in this case all the bare metal providers all the people that provide gpus will be forced by the government in my opinion to implement something and all i'm suggesting is that it should be a new kind of body that essentially observes that has phds that has people who are trained in this stuff to develop the kind of testing and the output that you need to figure out whether it should even be

SPEAKER_207: allowed to run in the wild on bare metal sorry but you're saying that the mod the model sorry i'm just trying to understand shaman's points you're saying that the models need to be reviewed by

SPEAKER_94: this body and those models if they're run on a third-party set of servers if they're running the wild right so if outside your computer on the on the open internet freeberg you cannot run an app on

Chamath Palihapitiya: your computer you know that right it needs to be connected to the internet right like if you wanted to run an auto gpt it actually crawls the internet it actually touches other apis it tries to then basically send a push request sees what it gets back parses the json figures out what it needs to do all of that is allowed because it's hosted by somebody right that code is running not locally

SPEAKER_66: so the host becomes sure if you want to run it locally you can do whatever you want to do but evil

SPEAKER_213: agents are going to do that right so if i'm an evil agent i'm not going to go use aws to run my evil agent

SPEAKER_94: i'm going to set up a bunch of servers and connect to the internet how i could use vpns the internet

SPEAKER_23: is open there's open you're talking about people who are in another rogue country they can do whatever i think that what you're going to see is that if you for example try to vpn and run it out of like

Chamath Palihapitiya: tajikistan back to the united states it's not going to take years for us to figure out that we need to ip block rando coming in push and pull requests from all kinds of ips that we don't trust anymore because we don't now trust the regulatory oversight that they have for code that's running

SPEAKER_199: from those ips that are not us domesticated let me steal man chamath's position for a second jason

SPEAKER_94: hold on i i think the ultimate if what chamath is saying is the point of view of congress and if chamath has this point of view then there will certainly be people in congress that will adopt this point of view the only way to ultimately do that degree of regulation and restriction is going to be to restrict the open internet it is going to be to have monitoring and firewalls and safety protocols across the open internet because you can have a set of models running on any set of servers sitting in any physical location and as long as they can move data packets around they're

SPEAKER_221: going to be able to get up to their nefarious activities uh let me steal man that for you freeberg i think yes you're correct the internet has existed in a very open way but there are

SPEAKER_00: organizations and there are places like the national highway traffic safety administration if i were to steal man chamath's position if you want to manufacture a car and you want to make one in your backyard and put it on your track and on your land up in napa somewhere and you don't want to have brakes on the car and you don't want to have you know a speed limiter or airbags or seat belts and you want to drive on the hood of the car you can do that but once you want it to go on the open road the open internet you need to get you need to submit it for some safety standards like nhtsa like tesla has to or for it has to so sax where do you sit on this or is let's assume that people are going to do very bad things with very powerful models that are becoming available amazon today said they'll be Switzerland they're going to put a bunch of llms and other models available on aws bloomberg's llm

SPEAKER_08: facebook's google bard and of course chance gpt open ai and bing all this stuff's available to have access to that do you need to have some regulation of who has access to those at scale powerful

SPEAKER_00: tools should there be some fda or nhtsa i don't think we know how to regulate it yet i think that's

SPEAKER_11: too early clearly and i think the harms that we're speculating about we're making the ai more

SPEAKER_18: powerful than it is and i believe it will be that powerful but i think that it's premature to be talking about regulating something that doesn't really exist yet take the chaos gpt scenario

SPEAKER_11: the way that would play out would be you've got some future incarnation of auto gpt and somebody says okay auto gpt i want you to be you know wmd ai and figure out how to cause like a mass destruction event you know and then it creates like a planning checklist and that kind of stuff so that's basically the the type of scenario we're we're talking about um we're not anywhere close to that yet i mean the chaos gpt is kind of a joke it doesn't produce it doesn't produce a checklist

SPEAKER_227: i can give an example that would actually be completely plausible one of the first things on

SPEAKER_11: the chaos gpt's checklist was to stay within the boundaries of the law because it didn't want to

SPEAKER_00: get prosecuted got it so the person who did that had some sort of good intent but i can give you an example right now that could be done by chat gpt and auto gpt that could take down large swaths of society and cause massive destruction i'm almost reticent to say it here say it uh well i'll say and then maybe we'll have to delete this but if somebody created this and they said uh figure out a way to compromise as many powerful peoples and as many systems passwords then go in there and delete all

SPEAKER_08: their files and turn off as many systems as you can chat gpt and auto gpt could very easily create phishing accounts create billions of websites to create billions of logins have people log into them get their passwords log into whatever they do and then delete everything in their accounts which would

SPEAKER_122: cause chaos you're right and it could be done today i don't think it can be done today simpler than this how about how about you fish them in just fishing website yeah pieces of it can be created today but you're you're accelerating the progress yeah but you can auto be spearfishing now 30 days

SPEAKER_239: yeah exactly and by the way i'm accelerating it in weeks why don't you just spoof the bank accounts

David Friedberg: and just steal the money like that's even simpler like people will do this stuff because they're trying to do it today holy cow now they just have a more efficient way to solve the problem

SPEAKER_18: think about bank accounts so look so number one this is a tool and if people use a tool in nefarious ways you prosecute them number two the platforms that are commercializing these tools do have trust and safety teams now in the past trust and safety has been a euphemism for censorship which it shouldn't be but you know open ai has a safety team and they try to detect when people are using their tech in a nefarious way and they try to prevent it do you trust that team well no not on censorship but i

SPEAKER_247: think that they're probably a million people are using chat you think they're policing it are you

Chamath Palihapitiya: willing to abdicate your or societal responsibility to to open ai to do the trust and safety what i'm

SPEAKER_18: what i'm saying is i'd like to see how far we get in terms of the system so you're yeah so you're

SPEAKER_250: saying you want to see the mistakes you want to see where the mistakes are and how bad the mistakes are

SPEAKER_18: i'm saying it's still very early to be imposing regulation we don't even know what to regulate so i think we have to keep tracking this to develop some understanding of how it might be misused how the industry is going to develop safety guard rails okay and then you can talk about regulation look you create some new fda right now okay first of all we know what would happen look at the drug process as soon as the fda got involved it slowed down massively now it takes years many years to get a drug approved appropriately so yes but at least with a drug we know what the gold standard is you

SPEAKER_253: run a double blind study to see whether it causes harm or whether it's beneficial we don't know what that standard is for ai yet we have no idea so what's going to happen study in ai what no you have

SPEAKER_255: somebody review the code you have two instances in a sandbox reviews the code to do what no sacks

SPEAKER_257: listen let me finish my point auto gpt it's benign i mean my friend use it to book a wine tasting

SPEAKER_253: so who's going to review that code and then speculate say oh well 99.9 of cases it's perfectly

SPEAKER_18: benevolent and fine and innocuous but i can fantasize about some cases someone might do

SPEAKER_259: how hold on how are you supposed to resolve that very simple there are two types of regulation that

SPEAKER_00: a concur in any industry you can do what the movie industry did which is they self-regulate and they came up with their own rating system or you can do what happens with the fda and what happens with cars which is an external government-based body i think now is the time for self-regulation so that we avoid the massive heavy hand of government having to come in here but these tools can be used today to

SPEAKER_08: create master farm they're moving at a pace we just said in the first half of the show that none of us have ever seen every 48 hours something drops that is mind-blowing that's never happened before and you can take these tools and in the one example that chamath and i came up with the top of our head in 30 seconds you can create phishing sites compromise people's bank accounts take all the money out delete all the files and cause chaos on a scale that has never been possible by a series of russian hackers or chinese hackers working in a boiler room this can scale and that is the fundamental difference

SPEAKER_17: here and i didn't think i would be sitting here steel manning chamat's argument i think humans have

Chamath Palihapitiya: a horrible ability to compound i think people do not understand compound interest and this is a perfect example where when you start to compound technology at the rate of 24 hours or 48 hours which we've never really had to acknowledge most people's brains break and they don't understand what six months from now looks like and six months from now when you're compounding at 48 or 72 hours is like 10 to 12

SPEAKER_66: years in other technology solutions this is compounding this is this is different because

David Sacks: the compounding i agree with that the pace revolution is very fast we are on a bullet train to something and we don't know exactly what it is and that's disconcerting however let me tell you what would

SPEAKER_253: happen if we create a new regulatory body like the fda to regulate this they would have no idea how to arbitrate whether a technology should be approved or not development will basically slow

SPEAKER_264: to a crawl just like drug development there is no double blind standard i agree what self-regulation

SPEAKER_253: can we do what self-regulation can we do there is no double blind standard in ai that everyone can agree on right now to know whether something should be approved and what's going to happen is the thing that's made software development so magical and allowed all this innovation over the last 25 years is permissionless innovation any developer any dropout from a university can go create their own project which turns into a company and that is what has driven all the innovation and progress in our economy over the last 25 years so you're going to replace permissionless innovation with going to washington to go through some approval process and it will be the politically connected it'll be the big donors who get their projects approved and the next mark zuckerberg who's trying to do his little project in a dorm room somewhere will not know how to do that will not know how to compete

SPEAKER_203: in that highly political process i think you're mixing a bunch of things together so first of all

Chamath Palihapitiya: permissionless innovation happens today in biotech as well it's just that it's what jason said when you want to put it on the rails of society and make it available to everybody you you actually have to go and do something substantive in the negotiation of these drug approvals it's not some standardized thing you actually sit with the fda and you have to decide what are our end points what is the mechanism of action and how will we measure the efficacy of this thing the idea that you can't do this today in ai is laughable yes you can and i think that smart people so for example if you pit deep minds team versus open ai's team to both agree that a model is good and correct i bet you they would find a systematic way to test that it's fun i just want to point out okay so basically in order to do what

SPEAKER_253: you're saying okay this entrepreneur who just dropped out of college to do their project they're gonna have to learn how to go sit with regulators have a conversation with them go through some complicated approval process and you're trying to say that that won't turn into a game of political connections of course it will of course it will of course it will which is self-regulation yeah well let's get to that hold on a second and let's look at the drug approval process if you want to create a drug company you need to raise hundreds of millions of dollars it's incredibly expensive it's incredibly capital intensive there is no drug company that is two guys in their garage like many

SPEAKER_264: of the biggest companies like many of the biggest companies in silicon valley started that is because

Chamath Palihapitiya: you're talking about taking a chemical or biological compound and injecting into some hundreds or thousands of people who are both racially gender-based age-based highly stratified all around the world or at a minimum all around the country you're not talking about that here david i think that you could have a much simpler and cheaper way where you have a version of the internet that's running in a huge sandbox someplace that's closed off from the rest of the internet and another version of the internet that's closed off from everything else as well and you can run on a parallel path as it is with this agent and you can easily in my opinion actually figure out whether this agent is good or bad and you can probably do it in weeks so i actually think the approvals are actually not that complicated and the reason to do it here is because i get that it may cause a little bit more friction for some of these mom and pops but if you think about what's the societal and consequences of letting the worst case outcomes happen the agi type outcomes happen i think those are so bad they're worth slowing some folks down and i think like just because you want to you know buy groceries for a hundred dollars you should be able to do it i get it but if people don't realize and connect the dots between that and bringing airplanes down then that's because they don't understand what this

SPEAKER_11: is capable of i'm not saying we're never going to need regulation what i'm saying is it's way too

SPEAKER_18: early we don't even know what we're regulating we don't know what the standard would be and what we will do by racing to create a new fda is destroying american innovation in the sector and other countries

SPEAKER_253: will not slow down they will beat us to the punch here got it i think there's a middle ground here

SPEAKER_00: of self-regulation and thoughtfulness on the part of the people who are providing these tools at scale

SPEAKER_08: to give just but one example here and this tweet is from five minutes ago so to look at the pace of this five minutes ago this tweet came out a developer who's an ai developer says ai agents continue to amaze my gpt4 coding assistant learned how to build apps with authenticated users it can build and design a web app create a back end handle auth logins upload code to github and deploy he literally while we were talking is deploying websites now if this website was a phishing app app or the one that chamath is talking about he could make a gazillion different versions of banking of america wells fargo etc then find everybody on the internet's email then start sending different spoofing emails determine which spoofing emails work iterate on those and create a global financial collapse now this sounds insane but it's happening right now people get hacked every day at one two three percent sacks fraud is occurring right now in the low single digit percentages identity theft is happening in the low single identity percentages this technology is moving so fast that bad actors could 10x that

SPEAKER_17: relatively easy and so if 10 of us want to be hacked and have our credit cards hacked this could create

SPEAKER_269: chaos i think self-regulation is the solution i'm the one who brought up self-regulation what i said

SPEAKER_270: no i brought it up first i brought it up first i get credit no good i'm not it's not about credit i'm

SPEAKER_11: no self-regulation i never got to finish my point about it because you interrupted you talked for eight

SPEAKER_48: minutes so if you have a point to make you should have got in the eight minutes oh my god you guys

SPEAKER_18: kept interrupting me go ahead what i said is that there are trust and safety teams at these big ai companies these big foundation model companies like open ai like i said in the past trust and safety has been a euphemism for censorship and that's why people don't trust it but i think it would be appropriate for these platform companies to apply some guard rails on how their tools can be used and based on everything i know they're doing that so this guy just released websites to the open

SPEAKER_122: web with chat gp4 and he's going to have it do it automated you're basically postulating capabilities that don't yet exist i just tweeted the guy's doing it he's got a video of himself

SPEAKER_170: doing it on the web what do you think freeberg that's a far cry from basically running like some fishing expedition that's going to bring down the entire banking system uh literally a fishing

SPEAKER_48: a fishing site and a site with oauth are the same thing go ahead freeberg i think that that guy

SPEAKER_92: is doing something illegal if he's hacking into computers into people's emails and bank accounts that's illegal you're not allowed to do that and so that action breaks the law that person can be prosecuted for doing that the tooling that one might use to do that can be used in a lot of different ways just like you could use microsoft word to forge letters just like you could use microsoft excel to create fraudulent financial statements i think that the application of a platform technology needs to be distinguished from the technology itself and while we all feel extraordinarily fearful because the unbelievable leverage that these ai tools provide again i'll remind you that this chat gpt4 or this gpt4 model by some estimates is call it a few terabytes you could store it on a hard drive or you could store it on your iphone and you could then go run it on any set of servers that you could go set up physically anywhere so you know it's a little bit naive to say we can go ahead and you know regulate platforms and we can go regulate the tools certainly we should continue to enforce and protect ourselves against nefarious actors using you know new tools in inappropriate and illegal ways you know i also think that there's a moment here that we should all kind of observe just how quickly we want to shut things down when you know they take away what feels like the the control that we all have from one day to the next and you know that the the real side kind of sense of fear that seems to be quite contagious for a large number of people that have significant assets or significant things to lose is that uh you know tooling that's that's you know creating entirely newly disruptive systems and models for business and and economics and opportunity for so many needs to be regulated away to minimize you know what we claim to be some potential downside when we already have laws that protect us uh on the other side so you know i just kind of want to also consider that this set of tools creates extraordinary opportunity we gave one sort of simple example about the opportunity for creators but we talked about how new business models new businesses can be started with one or two people you know entirely new tools can be built with a handful of people entirely new businesses this is an incredible economic opportunity and again if the us tries to regulate it or the us tries to come in and stop the application of models in general or regulate models in general you're certainly going to see those models of continue to evolve and continue to be utilized in very powerful ways that are going to be advantageous to places outside the us there's over 180 countries on earth they're not all going to regulate together it's been hard enough to get any sort of coordination around financial systems to get coordination around climate change to get coordination around anything on a global basis to try and get coordination around the software models that are being developed i think is is pretty

SPEAKER_24: naive you don't want to have a global organization i think you need to have a domestic organization that

Chamath Palihapitiya: protects us and i think europe will have their own they again fda versus emma canada has its own japan has its own china has its own and they they have a lot of overlap and a lot of commonality in in the guardrails they use and i think that's what's going to happen here this will be beneficial only for

David Sacks: political insiders who will basically be able to get their projects and their apps approved with a huge deadweight loss for the system because innovation will completely slow down but let me

SPEAKER_18: build on freeberg's point which is that we have to remember that ai won't just be used by nefarious actors it'll be used by positive actors so there will be new tools that law enforcement will be able to use and if somebody's creating phishing sites at scale they're going to be probably pretty easy for you know law enforcement ais to detect so let's not forget that there'll be co-pilots written for our law enforcement authorities they'll be able to use that to basically detect and fight crime and a really good example of this was in the crypto space we saw this article over the past week that chain analysis has figured out how to basically track you know illicit bitcoin transactions and there's now a huge number of prosecutions that are happening of illegal use of bitcoin and if you go back to when bitcoin first took off there was a lot of conversations around silk road and the only thing that bitcoin was good for was basically illegal transactions blackmailing uh drug trafficking and therefore we had to stop bitcoin remember that was the main argument and the counter argument was that well no bitcoin like any technology can be used for good or bad however there will be technologies that spring up to combat those nefarious or illicit use cases and sure enough you had a company like chain analysis come along and now it's been used by law enforcement to basically crack down on the illicit use of bitcoin and if anything it's cleaned up the bitcoin community tremendously and i think it's dispelled this idea that the only thing you'd use bitcoin for is black market transactions quite the contrary i think you'd be really stupid now to use bitcoin in that way it's actually turned bitcoin it's something of a honeypot now because if you used it for nefarious transactions your transactions recording the blockchain forever just waiting for chain analysis to find it so again using bitcoin to do something illegal would be really stupid i think in a similar way you're going to see self-regulation by these major ai platform companies combined with new tools that are used new ai tools that spring up to help combat the nefarious uses and until we let those forces play out i'm not saying regulate never i'm just saying we need to let those forces play out before we leap to creating some new regulatory body that

SPEAKER_130: doesn't even understand what its mandated mission supposed to be the bitcoin story is hilarious by the

SPEAKER_284: way i haven't read the wall street journal story it's unbelievable pretty epic it took years but

SPEAKER_283: basically this guy was buying blow on silk road and he deposited his bitcoin and then when he withdrew it

SPEAKER_00: he there was a bug that gave him twice as many bitcoin so he kept creating more accounts putting more money into silk road and getting more bitcoin out and then years later the authorities figured this out again

SPEAKER_156: with you know chain analysis type things look at james zong over there look at james zong the accused uh had

SPEAKER_283: a lamborghini a tesla a lake house uh and was living his best life apparently when the feds uh knocked on his door and found the digital keys to his crypto fortune in a popcorn tin in his bathroom and in a safe

Chamath Palihapitiya: in his basement floor so there you have it well the reason the reason i posted this was i was like what if this claim that you can have all these anonymous transactions actually fooled an entire market because it looks like that this anonymity has effectively been reverse engineered and there's no anonymity at all and so what bitcoin is quickly becoming is like the most singular honeypot of transactional information that's complete and available in public and i think what this article talks about is how companies like chain analysis and others have worked now for years almost a decade with law enforcement to be able to map all of it and so now every time money goes from one bitcoin

SPEAKER_203: wallet to another they effectively know the sender and the recipient and i just want to make a one quick

SPEAKER_00: correction here it wasn't actually exactly popcorn it was cheetos spicy flavored popcorn and there's the tin of it where he had a motherboard of a computer that held is there a chance that that this project

Chamath Palihapitiya: was actually introduced by the government i mean there's been reports of tor anonymous

SPEAKER_00: or network that the cia had their hands all over tor tor if you don't know it which is an anonymous like multi-relay peer-to-peer web browsing system and people believe it's a cia honeypot an intentional

SPEAKER_43: trap for criminals to get themselves uh caught up in all right as we wrap here what an amazing

SPEAKER_296: discussion my lord i didn't i never thought i would be i want to say one thing yes we saw that

SPEAKER_129: someone was arrested for the murder of bob lee that's what i was about this morning yeah which

SPEAKER_92: it turns out that the report of the sfpd's arrest is that it's uh someone that he knew that also works in

SPEAKER_01: the tech industry someone possibly right so still breaking news yes possibly but i i want to say

SPEAKER_92: two things one obviously based on this arrest and the storyline it's quite different than what we all assumed it to be which was some sort of homeless robbery type moment that has become all too common place in sf it's a commentary for me on two things one is how quick we all were to kind of judge and assume that you know a homeless robber type person would do this in sf which i think speaks to the condition in sf right now also speaks to our conditioning that that we all kind of lacked or didn't even want to engage in a conversation that maybe this person was murdered by someone that they knew because we wanted to kind of very quickly fill our own narrative about how bad sf is and that's just something that i really felt when i read this this morning i was like man like i didn't even consider the possibility that this guy was murdered by someone that he knew because i am so enthralled right now by this narrative that sf is so bad and it must be another data point that validates my point of view on sf so you know i kind of want to just acknowledge that and acknowledge that we all kind of do that right now but i do think it also does in fact unfortunately speak to how bad things are in sf because we all are we've all have these experiences of feeling like we're in danger and under threat all the time we're walking around in sf uh in so many parts of san francisco i should say where things feel like they've gotten really bad i think both things can be true that we can kind of feel biased and fill our own narrative by kind of latching on to our assumption about what something tells us but but it also tells us quite a lot about what is going on so i just i just wanted to make that point in

SPEAKER_00: fairness and i think it's fine for you to make that point i am extremely vigilant on this program to always say when something is breaking news withhold judgment whether it's the trump case or jesse smollett or anything in between january 6 let's wait until we get all the facts and in fact

SPEAKER_08: quote from sax we don't know exactly what happened yet correct literally sax started with that we do that every time on this program we know when there's breaking news to withhold judgment but you can also know two things can be true a tolerance for ambiguity is necessary but i'm saying i didn't even do that

SPEAKER_234: as soon as i heard this i was like i was like oh that's a fine assumption but david that is a fine

SPEAKER_120: assumption to me that's a fine i think it's a logical assumption listen you made that assumption for your

SPEAKER_18: own protection we got all these reporters who are basically propagandists trying to claim that crime is down in san francisco they're all basically seeking comment from me this morning sending emails they're trying to dunk god on us because we basically talked about the bob lee case in that way listen we said that we didn't know what happened but if we were to bet at least what i said is i bet this case it looks like a lot like the brianna cup for case that was logical that's not conditioning or bias that's logic and you need to look at what else happened that week okay so just the same week that bob lee was killed let me give you three other examples of things that happened in gotham city aka san francisco so number one former fire commissioner don carmignani was beaten within an inch of his life by a group of homeless addicts in the marina and one of them was interviewed in

SPEAKER_253: terms of why it happened and basically don came down from his mother's house and told them to move off his mother's front porch because they were obstructing her ability to get in and out of her apartment they interpreted that as disrespect and they beat him with a tire iron or a metal pipe

SPEAKER_18: and one of the hoodlums who was involved in this apparently admitted this yeah play the video

SPEAKER_308: somebody over the head like that and attack him because he was he was this it was disrespectful we

SPEAKER_311: who was disrespectful there was a big old kind of bald haired old man don don so he was being

SPEAKER_314: disrespectful and then but is that enough to beat him up yeah sometimes oh my lord i mean so this is

SPEAKER_11: case number one and apparently in the reporting on that person who was just interviewed he's been in the marina kind of terrorizing people maybe not physically but verbally so you have you know bands

SPEAKER_18: of homeless people encamped in front of people's houses don carmignani gets beaten within an inch of his life you then had the case of the whole food store on market street shut down in san francisco

SPEAKER_253: and this was not a case of shoplifting like some of the other store closings we've seen they said they were closing the store because they could not protect their employees the bathrooms

SPEAKER_18: were filled with needles and pipes that were drug paraphernalia you had drug acts going in there using it they were engaging in altercations with store employees and whole foods felt like they had

SPEAKER_253: to close the store because again they could not protect their employees third example board of supervisors had to disband their own meeting because their internet connection got vandalized the fiber for the cable connection to provide their internet got vandalized so they had to basically disband their meeting aaron preskin was the one who announced this and you saw in the response to this yeah my retweeting him went viral there were lots of people said yeah i've got a small business

SPEAKER_18: and the fiber the copper wire whatever was vandalized and in a lot of cases i think it's basically

SPEAKER_253: drug addicts stealing whatever they can they steal ten dollars of copper wire sell that to get a hit and it causes forty thousand dollars of property damage here's the insincerity sax literally the

SPEAKER_48: proper response when there's violence in san francisco is hey we need to make this place less

SPEAKER_08: violent is there a chance that it could be people who know each other of course that's inherent in any crime that occurs that there'll be time to investigate it but literally the press is now using this as a moment to say there is no crime in san francisco or that people are reacting and like i just have the new york times email me during the podcast heather knight from the chronicle san

SPEAKER_48: francisco chronicle in light of the bob lee killing appearing to be an interpersonal dispute she still doesn't know right we don't have all the facts with another tech leader do you think the tech community jumped to conclusions why are so many tech leaders painting san francisco as a dystopian hellscape with the reality with the reality is more nuanced i think it's a little typo there well

SPEAKER_08: yeah yes i mean it's like of course the reality is nuanced of course it's a hellscape walk down the

Chamath Palihapitiya: street heather can i give you a theory please i think it was most evident in the way that elon dismantled and manhandled the bbc reporter oh my god that was brutal this is a small microcosm of what i think media is so i used to think that media had an agenda i actually now think that they don't particularly have an agenda other than to be relevant because they see waning relevance and so i think what happens is whenever there are a bunch of articles that tilt the pendulum into a narrative they all of a sudden become very focused on refuting that narrative and even if it means they have to lie they'll do it right so you know i think for months and months i think people have seen that the quality of the discourse on twitter became better and better elon is doing a lot with bots and all of this stuff cleaning it up and this guy had to try to establish the counter narrative and was willing to lie in order to do it then he was dismantled here you guys i don't have a bone to pick so much with san francisco i think i've been relatively silent on this topic but you guys as residents and former residents i think have a vested interest in the quality of that city and you guys have been very vocal but i think that you're not the only ones michelle tandler you know schellenberger there's a bunch of smart thoughtful people who've been beating this drum gary tan and so now i think reporters don't want to write the n plus first article saying that san francisco is a hellscape so they have to take the other side and so now they're going to go and kick up the counter narrative and they'll probably dismantle the truth and kind of redirect it in order to do it so i think that what you're seeing is they'll initially tell a story but well then there's too much of the truth they'll go to the other side because that's the only way to get clicks and be seen so i think that that's what you guys are a

SPEAKER_11: part of right now they are in the business of protecting the narrative but i i do think there's a huge ideological component to the narrative both in the elon case where they're trying to

SPEAKER_18: claim that there was a huge rise in hate speech on twitter the reason they're saying that is because they want twitter to engage in more censorship that's the ideological agenda here the agenda is this radical agenda of decarceration they actually believe that more and more people should be let out of prison and so therefore they have an incentive to deny the existence of crime in san francisco and the rise in crime in san francisco if you poll most people in san francisco large majorities of san francisco believe that crime is on the rise because they can see it they hear it and what i would say is look i think there's a pyramid of activity a pyramid of criminal or antisocial behavior in san francisco that we can all see the base level is you've got a level of chaos on the streets where you have open-air drug markets people doing drugs sometimes you'll see you know a person doing something disgusting you know like people defecating on the streets or even worse then there's like a level up where they're chasing after you or you know harassing you people have experienced that i've experienced that then there's a level up where there's petty crime your car gets broken into or something like that then there's the level where you get mugged and then finally the top of

SPEAKER_253: the pyramid is that there's a murder and it's true that most of the time the issues don't go all the way to the top of the pyramid where someone is murdered okay but that doesn't mean there's not a vast pyramid underneath that of basically quality of life issues and i think this term quality of life was originally used as some sort of way to minimize the behavior that was going on saying that they weren't really crimes we shouldn't worry about them but if anything what we've seen in san francisco is that when you ignore quality of life crimes you will actually see a huge diminishment in what it's like to live in these cities like quality of life is real and that's the issue and i think what they're trying to do now is that say that because bob lee wasn't the case that we thought it was that that whole pyramid doesn't exist that pyramid exists we can all experience oh my god i mean and

SPEAKER_18: that's the insincerity of this it is insincere and the existence of that pyramid that we can see and hear and feel and experience every day is why we're willing to make a bet we called it a bet

SPEAKER_253: that the bob lee case was like the brianna kufford case and in that with a disclaimer with a disclaimer

SPEAKER_00: and we always do a disclaimer here and just to george hammond from the financial times who emailed me here's what he asked me there's a lot of public attention lately on whether san francisco status has one of the top business and technology hubs in the us is at risk in the aftermath of the pandemic duh

SPEAKER_08: obviously it is i wondered if you had a moment to chat about that and whether there is a danger that negative perceptions about the city will damage its reputation for founders and capital allocators in the future so essentially the and it says the obviously a lot of potential for hysteria in this conversation which i'm keen to avoid and it's like hey have you walked down the street and i asked him have you walked down the street in san francisco jason the best response is send him the

Chamath Palihapitiya: thing that sax sent which is the amount of available office space in san francisco people are voting

SPEAKER_72: companies companies are voting with their feet so it's already if the quality of life wasn't so

SPEAKER_11: poor they'd stay this is the essence of gaslighting is what they do is the people who've actually created the situation san francisco with their policies their policies of defunding the police

SPEAKER_253: making it harder for the police to do their job decriminalizing theft under 950 allowing open air drug markets the people who have now created that matrix of policies have created the situation what they then turn around and do is say no the people who are creating the problem are the ones who are observing this that's all we're doing is observing and complaining about it and what they try to do is say well no you're you're running down san francisco we're not the ones creating the problem we're observing it and just this week another data point is that the mayor's office said they were short more than 500 police officers in san francisco yeah nobody who's going to become a police officer here are you crazy well and there was another article just this week about how there's a lot of speculation rumors are swirling of an unofficial strike an informal strike by police officers who are normally on the force who are tired of risking life and limb and then you know they basically risk getting at a physical altercation with a homeless person they bring them in and then they're just released again so there's a lot of quiet quitting that's going on in the job it's like this learned helplessness because why take a risk and then the police commission doesn't have your back it seems like the only time you have prosecutorial zeal by a lot of these prosecutors is when they can go after a cop not one of these repeat offenders you just saw that by the way in la oh look motherboard and new

SPEAKER_66: york times just emailed and dm'd me and then and then did you guys say that instead of solving these

SPEAKER_72: issues the board of supervisors was dealing with a wild parrot what was it

SPEAKER_342: the meeting that was disbanded they had or yeah they had scheduled a meeting

SPEAKER_92: to vote on whether the wild parrots are the official animal of the city of san francisco so that was the uh the scheduled meeting that got uh disbanded also can i may i just clarify what

SPEAKER_00: chamath's talking about with the elon interview a bbc reporter interviewed elon and said there is much more race and hate and hate speech in the feeds on twitter and he said can you give me an example and he said well i don't have an example but people are saying this is it which people are saying it and the bbc reporter said well just different groups of people are saying it and you know i've certainly seen he said okay you saw it and for you he goes no i stopped looking at for you he said so give me one example of hate speech that you've seen in your feed now we without speaking about any inside information which i do not have much of they've been pretty deliberate of removing

SPEAKER_08: hate speech from places like for you and you know it's a very complicated issue when you have an open platform but the the people may say a word but it doesn't reach a lot of people so if you were to say something really nasty it doesn't take a genius to block that and not have it reach a bunch of people this reporter kept insisting to elon that this was on the rise with no factual basis for it that other people said it and then he said but i don't look at the feed he said so you're telling me that there's more hate speech that you've seen but you just admitted to me that you haven't looked at the for you feed in three months and it was just like this completely weird thing

SPEAKER_345: i just had mother calling a lie he caught him in a lie he caught him in a lie and and this is the

SPEAKER_112: thing if you're a journalist just cut it down the middle come prepared with facts listen and stop

SPEAKER_129: taking a position either way i want to connect one dot please which is that he filled in his own

SPEAKER_92: narrative even though the data wasn't necessarily there in the same way that you know we kind of filled in our narrative about san francisco with the bob lee you know murder being another example

SPEAKER_352: no we put a disclaimer on it we said we didn't hold on a second we said we knew we didn't know and

SPEAKER_257: furthermore we're taking great pains this week to correct the record and explain what we now know

SPEAKER_234: yeah we're being honest he was so hard to be intellectually honest this is just intellectual

SPEAKER_18: honesty honestly you're you're you're going soft here freeberg you're getting gas lit by all these

SPEAKER_358: people i'm not getting gas up anyone i think the guy the guy totally the guy totally had zero data by the way when you're a journalist you're supposed to report on data and evidence so he certainly

SPEAKER_352: you know i think completely completely with don carmignani it's the same story yeah this is that

SPEAKER_363: don don happened to survive guys i love i love you but i gotta go goodbye here's what maxwell from

SPEAKER_00: motherboard have fun there's been a lot of discussion about the future of san francisco and the death has quickly become politicized has that caused any division or disagreement from what you've seen or

SPEAKER_337: has that not been the case the press is gleeful right now they're gleeful like oh my god

SPEAKER_00: they're just you know what just like the right was gleeful with jesse smollett having gotten himself beaten up or you know setting up his own all right everybody for the sultan of science currently conducting experiments on a beach to see uh exactly how burned he can get with his spf 200 under an umbrella wearing a sun shirt and pants freeberg freeberg on the beach wears the same outfit

SPEAKER_20: astronauts wear when they do spacewalks hey stable diffusion make me an image of david freeberg wearing

SPEAKER_374: a full body baiting suit covered in spf 200 under three umbrellas on a sunny beach thank you

SPEAKER_43: oh my god for the dictator chamath palihapitiya creating regulations

SPEAKER_17: and the regular oh the regulator you can call me the regular the regulator oh see you tonight when we'll eat our orchalons what's left of them the final four or five orchalons in existence don't be late

SPEAKER_203: otherwise i'm putting you on the b list today if you're late i will be there i'll be there i

SPEAKER_379: promise i promise i promise i can't wait to be there and the rain man himself namaste didn't even

SPEAKER_384: get to putting ron oh we'll talk about ron versus nikki next week i think you should ask uh auto gpt how

SPEAKER_18: you can eat more endangered animals yes whip up a plan for you yes and then have it go kill those

SPEAKER_81: animals in the real world put something on the dark web to go kill the remaining rhinos and bring them to chamat's house for poker night i don't think rhinos would taste good wasn't that the plava movie

SPEAKER_18: it was a oh did you guys see is cocaine bear out yet no it was a matthew broderick marlon brando movie right where they're doing the takeoff on the godfather was the freshman yeah yeah yeah yeah yeah it's like a conspiracy to eat uh endangered animals he has a freshman the project came out in 1990 yeah marlon brando did it with um matthew broderick and like bruno kirby they actually they that was the whole

SPEAKER_170: thing bruno kirby that's a deep they were actually uh they were eating endangered animals what do you

SPEAKER_00: what do you think heat 2 is that going to be good sacks i know heat's one of your favorite films me

SPEAKER_178: too it's awesome is there a sequel coming they're going to do heat and the novel's already come out

SPEAKER_18: adam drive it's all the novel yeah heat's amazing heat is one of those movies where when it comes on you just can't stop watching it let's do a heat 2 screener best bank robbery slash shootout in movie

SPEAKER_401: history you know that is literally the best heist film ever like it's up there with like the joker

SPEAKER_76: with reservoir dogs the the joker in that batman movie where he robs the bank like i mean what i love

SPEAKER_402: you guys all right i love you besties and four blah blah blah blah blah this is gonna be all in podcast

SPEAKER_81: 124 if you want to go to the fan meetups and hang out with other

SPEAKER_34: bye bye