David Friedberg: is anybody else seeing a half a second lag with jaykel like a second last test test one two one

SPEAKER_01: two from like the way his mouth moves well that always happens oh god here it comes

SPEAKER_08: his mouth never stops moving relax sacks relax sacks are we going we're recording are you ready

SPEAKER_16: to go don't lose this don't lose this a plus material all right let's go this is chappelle

SPEAKER_26: at the punchline let's go let's go i'm ready to go all right everybody welcome to episode

SPEAKER_32: 111 of the world's greatest podcasts according to slate the podcast that shall not be mentioned by

SPEAKER_35: the press apparently no what do you mean they just did a profile on us well they did this is the

SPEAKER_32: conundrum it's so much of a phenomenon that we're the number one business and the number one tech

SPEAKER_39: podcast in the world hands down that the press has a hard time giving us any oxygen because they want

SPEAKER_40: to hate us they want to cover it you're saying they take the ideas but not the they don't want to cite it they don't want to cite it they don't want to cite it but anyway shout out to slate yeah

SPEAKER_45: what i thought was interesting was the guy pointed out that we don't want to subject ourselves to independent journalists asking us independent questions therefore we go direct and that that's

SPEAKER_47: kind of the the thing nowadays when everyone says they want to go direct it's because they don't want to

SPEAKER_50: be subject to independent journalists one might ask themselves why subjects don't want to go direct

SPEAKER_32: yeah exactly you mean don't want to go to journalists yeah because it there's a there's a specific reason why principles the subject of stories do not want to have the press interpret what they're saying is

SPEAKER_44: because they don't feel they're getting a fair shake they feel like the challenge the challenge is

SPEAKER_55: that then we avoid independent scrutiny of our points of view and our decisions

SPEAKER_57: no we don't they're constantly writing hit pieces about us the the question is when we want to present

SPEAKER_58: our side of it do we need to go through their filter or not why would you go through their filter when it's always going to be a hit piece right well they have a class hatred of basically of technology entrepreneurs and investors you're right jacow they don't hate you because you genuflect to their political biases you see if if you do if you do what spf did which is basically agree with all of their biases then yes they'll treat you better that's the deal that's how it works and when you

SPEAKER_73: say they you're referring to specific large media outlets right sex he's not referring to fox

SPEAKER_79: okay you can name one i'll trade you i'll tell you what i'll trade you fox for msnbc and cnn and the new york times the washington post and the atlantic magazine and on and on and on you get a lot of mileage out of being able to name fox the fact of the matter is megan cali that's a podcaster she's independent now that's true you can name one i mean literally one outlet that is not part of this you know mainstream media and they all think the same way there are very small differences in the

SPEAKER_32: way they think it's true clicks it's all about clicks uh at this point and it's all about not just

SPEAKER_81: about clicks and advocacy it's that combination what you're calling advocacy is bias and activism

SPEAKER_92: it's activism it's that's what i'm talking about activism journalism yes i think draymond also

SPEAKER_45: highlights a really important point which is you know he started his podcast it's become one of the most popular forms of sports media and he can speak directly without the filtering and you know classification that's done by the you know journalist and it seems to be a really powerful trend the audience really wants to hear direct and they want to hear unfiltered raw points of view and there and maybe there's still a role for i think the journalism separate from that which is to then

SPEAKER_95: scrutinize and analyze and question and it's not journalism it's just activism they're just activists

SPEAKER_81: there are also journalists out there sex right so actually well it depends what the topic is and what

SPEAKER_57: the outlet is but fair but i i actually i would argue that most of these journalists are doing what they're doing for the same reason that we're doing what we're doing which is they want to have some kind of influence because they don't get paid very much right but the way they have influence is to

SPEAKER_74: push a specific political agenda i mean they're activists they're basically it has become advocacy

SPEAKER_92: journalism yes that's the term i coined for it it's advocacy did you guys see this brouhaha where matt

SPEAKER_02: iglesias wrote this article about the fed and about the debt ceiling and through this whole multi-hundred word word thousand word tome he didn't understand the difference between a percentage point and a

SPEAKER_104: basis point and then calculate the interest yeah i did see that oh wow so wait a second you're saying

SPEAKER_107: the fed's raising 25 percent yeah that's a huge difference between my mortgage is going to 25

SPEAKER_109: between a principal and an outside analyst right like a principal has a better grasp typically of the

SPEAKER_45: topics and the material but you know the argument from a journalist the argument is considered within

SPEAKER_77: the journalist circle he's considered the conventional wisdom i get it but the argument from

SPEAKER_45: a journalist is that by having that direct access that person is also biased because they're an agent because they're a player on the field they do have a point of view and they do have a direction they want to take things so it is a fair commentary that journalists can theoretically play a role which is they're an off-field analyst and that don't necessarily bring i would argue they're less

SPEAKER_56: educated and more biased than we are that may or may not be true what the two of you guys are debating

SPEAKER_02: which is a very subjective take but the thing that is categorical and you can't deny is that there is zero checks and balances when something as simple as the basis point percentage point difference isn't caught in proofreading isn't caught by any editor isn't caught by the people that you know help them review this and so what that says is all kinds of trash must get through because there's no way for the average person on twitter to police all of this nonsensical content this one was easy because it was so numerically illiterate that it just stood out but can you imagine the the number of unforced errors journalists make today in their search for clicks that don't get caught out that may actually tip somebody to think a versus b that's i think the thing that's kind of undeniable right yeah you only

SPEAKER_32: need to do an article there's a very simple test for this if you read uh the journalists writing about a topic you are an expert on whatever the topic happens to be you start to understand okay well on that story i'm reading yeah that they understand about 10 or 20 or 30 percent of what's going on but then when you read stories that you're not involved in you know you read a story about hollywood or i don't know pick an industry or or a region you're not super aware of you're like okay

SPEAKER_125: well that must be a hundred percent correct and the truth is journalists have access to there's a name for that one there is a name for it yeah it's called the gentleman amnesia effect you

SPEAKER_128: just plagiarized michael creighton who came up with that yeah so you yeah but no it's exactly right

SPEAKER_57: but i think it's worse than that it's because now the now the mistakes aren't being driven just by sloppiness or laziness or just a lack of expertise i think it's being driven by an agenda so just to give you an example on the slate thing the slate article actually wasn't bad it kind of made us seem you know cool the sub headline was a close listen to all in the infuriating fascinating

SPEAKER_79: safe space for silicon valley's money man okay but the the headline changed so i don't know if you guys noticed this the headline now is elon musk inner circle is telling us exactly what it thinks first of all like they're trying for clicks so they're trying way too hard to like describe us in terms of elon which you know is maybe two episodes out of 110 but before inner circle the word they use was cronies and then somebody edited it because i saw cronies in like one of

SPEAKER_57: those tweet you know summaries you know where like it does a capsule or whatever yeah and those get frozen in time so you know they were trying to bash us even harder and then somebody took another look

SPEAKER_44: at it and turned it down here's what happened the i'll tell you what happens in the editorial process

SPEAKER_52: whoever writes the article the article gets submitted maybe it gets edited proofread whatever

SPEAKER_137: maybe it doesn't even in some publications they don't have the time for it because they're in a race

SPEAKER_52: then they pick there's somebody who's really good at social media they pick six or seven headlines they

SPEAKER_32: ab test them and they even have software for this where they will run a test sometimes they'll do a pay test they put five dollars in ads on social media whichever one performs the best that's the one they go with so it's even more cynical and because people who read the headlines sometimes they don't read the story right obviously most people just see the headline they interpret that as a story

SPEAKER_138: that's why i told you when they did that new republic piece on you with that horrific monstrous monstrosity of illustration don't worry about it people just read the headline they

SPEAKER_140: know you're important nobody reads the story anyway no but it wasn't a bad article actually

SPEAKER_32: it was well written actually i was in shock i was like who is this writer that actually took the time to write some prose that was actually decent yeah he had listened to a lot of episodes clearly

SPEAKER_115: that was a really good moment actually that was great advice because you gave it to him and you gave it to me because both of us had these things and jason said the same thing just look at the picture and if you're okay with the picture just move on and i thought this can't be true

SPEAKER_146: and it turned out to mostly be true yeah but my picture was terrible yeah but it's close to reality

SPEAKER_150: so

SPEAKER_143: i mean the person who did the worst there was peter thiel poor poor yeah but that just shows how

SPEAKER_157: ridiculously biased it is right my major wasn't so bad to uh hugh grant elon let's pull that up one more time here elon looks like hugh grant actually it's kind of yeah he does kind of not bad

SPEAKER_79: it kind of looks like hugh grant and like nodding hill i knew that article was going to be fine when the first you know item they presented as evidence of me doing something wrong was basically helping to oust chase a budine which was something that was supported by like 70 of san francisco yeah which is a 90 democratic city so not exactly evidence of some you know right wing movement look at the

SPEAKER_163: headline the quiet political rise of david sacks silicon valley's prophet of urban doom i'm just

SPEAKER_138: letting you know people don't get past the sixth word in the image yeah it's 99 of people were like

SPEAKER_167: oh my god congrats on the you know republic article it could have literally been laurel what do they call

SPEAKER_169: them uh laurel ipsum you know like it could have just been filler words from their second graph down

SPEAKER_57: and nobody would know yeah but now apparently if you notice that san francisco streets look like you know walking dead that apparently you're a prophet of urban doom i mean people are so out of touch i

SPEAKER_174: mean they can't even acknowledge what people can see with their own eyes that's the bias that's gotten

SPEAKER_29: crazy and i don't know if you guys saw this really horrible dystopian video of an art gallery owner

SPEAKER_138: who's been dealing with owning a storefront in san francisco which is challenging and having to clean up feces and you know trash and whatever uh every day and i guess the guy snapped and he's hosing down a homeless person who refuses to leave the front of his store oh i saw that i saw just like the humanity

SPEAKER_49: in this is just insane like really like you're hosing a human being down it's terrible who is

SPEAKER_57: obviously not living a great life and is you know i can feel for both of them i agree that it's not good to hose a human being down on the other hand think about the sense of frustration that store owner has because he's watching his business go in the toilet because he's got homeless people living in front of him so they're both like being mistreated the homeless person's being mistreated say more about the store owner say more the the homeless person's being mistreated the store owners being mistreated by the

SPEAKER_79: city of san francisco yeah say more about that person's not in a privileged position that person probably the store owner the store owner he's probably fighting to stay in business i'm just saying i'm not saying that's right but no no i'm just i'm laying the rope no i mean look i'm just

SPEAKER_77: what you're trying to do what you're trying to do is oh my god look at this this homeless person being horribly oppressed no that store owner is a victim too yeah there's no doubt it's

SPEAKER_189: horrible to run a business what is that person supposed to do no wait this is this is symbolic

SPEAKER_138: of the breaking down of basic society like these both of these people are obviously like it's just a horrible moment to even witness it's like oh it's like something jason do you have equal empathy for

SPEAKER_193: the store owner and the homeless person or no under no circumstances should you hose a person down in the

SPEAKER_138: face who is homeless like it's just horrific to watch it's just inhumane this is a human being now but as a person who owns a store yeah my dad grew up in the local business if people were abusing the store you're trying to make a living and you got to clean up you know whatever excrement every day

SPEAKER_81: which is horrific yes and this is in that moment look in that moment the empathy is not equal i think you have more empathy obviously for the person on the receiving end of that hose okay but in general

SPEAKER_79: our society has tons of empathy for homeless people we spend billions of dollars trying to solve that problem you never hear a thing about the store owners who are going out of business so on a societal level you know not in that moment but in general the lack of empathy is for these middle-class store owners who may not even be middle-class working class who are struggling to stay afloat and you

SPEAKER_85: look at something like what is it like a quarter or a third of the storefronts in san francisco are now

SPEAKER_44: vacant the person is running the shocking thing is like this person is running an art gallery storefront in san francisco like why would you even bother why would you bother to have a storefront in san

SPEAKER_52: francisco i mean everybody's left it's just what do you mean why do you bother if you've still

SPEAKER_205: opened a store so what are you supposed to start to code all of a sudden well no i mean you would

SPEAKER_207: shut it down at some point and find an exit and do what yeah but the store has large fixed costs right

SPEAKER_77: so that may be an investment he made 10 years ago exactly at some point you have to shut down your

SPEAKER_44: store in san francisco the second you can get out of the solution to everything jacal isn't go to

SPEAKER_145: coding school online and then you know i didn't say it was i'm just but moving to another city is a

SPEAKER_02: possibility so true a lot of folks in silicon valley i think in this weirdly up way do believe

SPEAKER_213: the solution to everything is learn to code or become an uber driver or yeah or become a masseuse

SPEAKER_114: get it get a gig job get a gig for the guys the guys the guy spent years building his retail business i mean the thing is a homeless person camps in front and the homeless and he calls the

SPEAKER_45: police the police don't come and move the homeless person the homeless person stays there he asked nicely to move customers are uncomfortable going into stores results yeah i stopped going to certain stores in my neighborhood because of homeless tents being literally fixated in front of the store and i'd go to the store down the road to get my groceries or whatever like i mean it's not a kind of uncommon situation for a lot of these small business owners they don't own the real estate they're paying rent uh they've got high labor costs you know everything's inflating generally city population's declining it's a brutal situation all around i think if everybody learns

SPEAKER_02: to code or drives an uber the problem is that in the absence of things like local stores and small businesses you hollow out communities you have these random detached places where you kind of live and then you sit in your house which becomes a prison while you order food from an app every day i don't think that is the society that people want so i don't know i kind of want small businesses to exist and i think that the homeless person should be taken care of but the small business person should have the best chance of trying to be successful because it's hard enough as it is the the mortality rate of the of the small business owner is already 90 percent it's impossible in san francisco let's just

SPEAKER_219: be honest like you're not genuflecting jake i'm not trying to push people to listen yeah you are

SPEAKER_223: because here you're here's how am i reflecting i'm saying the guy i'm just shocked that the guy even

SPEAKER_79: has a storefront i would have left a long time you're showing a tweet that's a moment in time and you're not showing the 10 steps that led up to it oh a thousand steps five times he called the police

SPEAKER_64: to do something about it stopian from the last customers the stuff that freeberg and chamath were

SPEAKER_45: just talking about maybe there was physical conflict that we didn't see in that you know and he's resolving it it's not who knows man it's really hard to look at these videos and know what's

SPEAKER_230: going on it's awful to see but man we don't know it's the whole thing actually you want to know

SPEAKER_232: another reason why we can't solve this problem is just the language we use around it the fundamental

SPEAKER_79: problem here is not homeless no it's addiction it's addiction you see you know this and it's mental illness shellenberger's done the work it's like he said 99 of the people he talks to it's either mental illness or addiction but we keep using this word homeless to describe the problem right but the issue here is not the lack of of housing although that's a separate problem in california but it's basically the lack of of treatment totally so we should be calling them treatment lists and mandates

SPEAKER_32: around this because well and enforcement you you cannot have you you can't have a super drug be available for a nominal price and give people you know a bunch of money to come here and take it and not enforce it you have to draw the line that's at fentanyl i'm sorry fentanyl is a super drug there's

SPEAKER_244: three alternatives is mandated rehab mandated mental health uh or jail or you know housing services if you're not breaking the law you don't have mental illness you don't have drug addiction and then provide those are the four paths of outcome here of success and if all four of those paths were both

SPEAKER_45: mandated and available in abundance this could be a attractable problem unfortunately the man the mandate i mean you guys remember that kevin bacon movie where kevin bacon was locked up in a mental institution but he wasn't like he wasn't mentally ill it's a famous story it's a famous it's what's that

SPEAKER_244: a famous story you guys someone's probably gonna call me an idiot for for for messing this whole thing

SPEAKER_45: up but i think um there's a there's a story where mandated mental health services like locking people up to take care of them when they have mental uh mental health issues like this became kind of inhumane and a lot of the institutions were shut down and a lot of the laws were overturned and there are many of these cases that happened where they came across as like torturous to what happened to people that weren't mentally ill and so the idea was like let's just abandon the cuckoo's nest you think well that's another one right and it's unfortunate but i think that there's some you know we talk a lot about nuance and gray areas but there's certainly some solution here that isn't black or white it's not about not having mandated mental health services and it's not about locking everyone up that has some slight problem but there's some solution here that needs to be crafted uh where you know you don't let people suffer and you don't let people suffer both as the the victim on the street but also

SPEAKER_252: talking about 51 50 i think like when people are held because they're a danger to themselves or others

SPEAKER_77: kind of thing right but jake about the power of language here if we refer to these people as

SPEAKER_79: untreated persons instead of homeless persons and that was the coverage 24 7 in the media is this is an untreated person the whole policy prescription would be completely different we'd realize there's a shortage of treatment we'd realize there's a shortage of remedies related to getting people in treatment as opposed to building housing but why why and laws that mandate it that don't enable it because

SPEAKER_45: if you don't mandate it then you enable the free reign and the free living on the streets and the open

SPEAKER_260: drug markets and all this sort of stuff there's a really easy test for this if it was if it was yourself

SPEAKER_32: and you were addicted or if it was a loved one or your immediate family members would you want yourself or somebody else to be picked up off the street and held with a 51 50 or whatever code involuntarily against their will because they were a danger would you want them to be allowed to remain on the street would you want yourself if you were in that dire straits and the answer of course is

SPEAKER_47: you would want somebody to intervene policy perspective on this jake house so let me ask you as our uh our die-hard liberal on the show no i'm not a die-hard liberal no no he's an independent

SPEAKER_81: only votes for democrats please get it right 75 percent of the time i voted democrat 25 right independent votes for democrats okay 25 republicans is it not that your individual liberties are

SPEAKER_45: infringed upon if you were to be quote picked up and put away you know my position on it is if you're

SPEAKER_138: not thinking straight uh you're and you're high on fentanyl you're not thinking for yourself and you you could lose the liberty for a small period of time 72 hours a week you know especially if you're a danger to somebody you know yourself or other people and in this case if you're on fentanyl if you're on meth you're you're you're a danger to society i mean i think if more i think if more people had that

SPEAKER_47: if more people had that point of view and had that debate as sacks is saying in a more open way you could get to some path to resolution on just not in san francisco it's not how it happens so

SPEAKER_271: you guys know this we won't say who it is but someone in my family has some pretty severe mental

SPEAKER_02: health issues and the problem is because they're an adult you can't get them to get any form of treatment whatsoever right right you only have the nuclear option and the nuclear option is you basically take that person to court and try to seize their power of attorney which is essentially saying that you know individual liberties are gone yeah and by the way it is so unbelievably restrictive what happens if you lose that power of attorney and somebody else has it over you it's just a huge

David Friedberg: burden that the legal system makes extremely difficult and the problem was a backstop you

SPEAKER_32: know if the person's committing something illegal like camping out or doing fentanyl meth whatever you can use the law as the backstop you know against personal law all that person can do is really get

SPEAKER_02: arrested even that is not a high enough bar to actually get power of attorney over somebody the other thing that i just wanted you guys to know i think you know this but just a little historical context is a lot of this crisis in mental health started because reagan defunded all the psychiatric hospitals he emptied them in california and that compounded because for whatever reason his ideology was that these things should be treated in a different way and when he got to the presidency one of the things that he did was he repealed the mental health i think it's called the mental health systems act mhsa which completely broke down some pretty landmark legislation on mental health and it's and i don't think we've ever really recovered and that we're now 42 years onward from 1980 but or 43 years onward but just something for you guys to know that that's that's well that breaking had a lot of positives yeah but that's one definitely negative check in my book against his legacy is his stance on mental health in general and what he did to defund mental health well let

SPEAKER_57: me make two points there so i'm i'm i'm not defending that specific decision there were a bunch of scandals in the 1970s and epitomized by the movie one flew over the cuckoo's nest with jack nicholson about the conditions in these mental health homes and that did create a groundswell to change laws around that but i think this idea that like somehow reagan is to blame when he hasn't been in office for 50 years as opposed to the politicians who've been in office for the last 20 years i just think it's

SPEAKER_79: letting them off the hook i mean gavin newsom 10 15 years ago when he was mayor of san francisco declared that he would end homelessness within 10 years he just made another declaration like that as

SPEAKER_81: governor so i just feel like i'm not saying it's reagan's fault i'm just saying it's interesting

SPEAKER_288: historical moment i think it's letting i think it's letting the politics society needs to start

SPEAKER_200: thinking about changing priorities we didn't have this problem of massive numbers of people living on

SPEAKER_57: the streets 10 15 years ago it was a much smaller problem and i think a lot of it has to do with fentanyl the power of these drugs has increased massively there's other things going on here so

SPEAKER_79: in any event i mean you can question what reagan did in light of current conditions but i think

SPEAKER_290: this problem really started in the last 10 15 years it's like in in an order of magnitude bigger way

SPEAKER_260: these are super drugs until people realize like these are a different class of drugs and they start

SPEAKER_295: treating them as such it's going to just get worse there's no path oh as far as i know reagan

SPEAKER_58: didn't hand out to these addicts 800 a week to feed their addiction so they can live on the streets

SPEAKER_271: san francisco that is the current policy of the city it's a terrible policy all i just wanted to just

SPEAKER_02: provide was just that color that we had a system of funding for the mental health infrastructure particularly local mental health infrastructure and we took that back and then we never came forward and all i was saying is i'm just telling you where that decision i think that's part of the solution

SPEAKER_301: here is yeah we're gonna have to basically build up shelters we're gonna have to build up and to support

SPEAKER_02: your point the problem now for example is gavin newsom says a lot of these things and now he's gone from a massive surplus to a 25 billion dollar deficit overnight which we talked about even a year ago because that was just the the law of numbers catching up with the state of california and he's not in a position now to do any of this stuff so this whole problem may get worse

SPEAKER_57: well they did they did appropriate i forget the number it's like 10 billion or something out of that you know huge budget they had to solve the problem of homelessness i would just argue they're not

SPEAKER_79: tackling it in the right way because what happened is there's a giant special interest that formed around this problem which is the the building industry who gets these contracts to build the quote you know affordable housing or the homeless industrial complex complex complex and so they end up building 10 units at a time on venice beach like the most expensive land you could possibly build because you get these contracts from the government so there's now a giant special interest and lobby that's formed around this if you really want to solve the problem you wouldn't be building housing on venice beach you'd be going to cheap land just outside the city totally and you'd be building scale shelters i mean shelters that can house 10 000 people not 10 and you'd be having treatment

SPEAKER_77: services treatment yes yeah but with treatment built into them right you'd be solving this problem at

SPEAKER_115: scale and that's not what they're doing by the way do you like do you guys want to hear this week in

SPEAKER_02: grift oh sure we're all in that's a great example of grift i um i read something today in bloomberg that was unbelievable there's about two trillion dollars of debt owned by the developing world that has been classified by a non-profit the nature conservancy in this case as eligible for what they called nature swaps so this is two trillion of the umpteen trillions of debt that's about to get defaulted on by countries like belize ecuador sri lanka seychelles you name it and what happens now are the big bulge bracket wall street banks and the nature conservancy goes to these countries and says listen you know you have a billion dollar tranche of debt that's about to go upside down and you're going to be in default with the imf we'll let you off the hook and you know we will negotiate with those bondholders to give them 50 cents on the dollar but in return you have to promise to take some of that savings and you know protect the rainforest or protect a coral reef or protect some mangrove trees

SPEAKER_211: all sounds good except then what these folks do is they take that repackaged debt they call it esg

SPEAKER_314: they mark it back up and then they sell it to folks like blackrock who have decided that they must own this in the portfolio so it literally just goes from one sleeve of blackrock which is now

SPEAKER_211: marked toxic emerging market debt and then it gets into someone's 401k as esg debt

David Friedberg: is that unbelievable so you could virtue signal and buy some esg to make yourself feel good yeah

SPEAKER_57: two trillion dollars here's all you have to know about esg is that exxon is like the number seven like top-ranked company according to esg and tesla is even on the list disastrous how crazy is that it's

SPEAKER_02: it's a complete scam yeah all of those that we've said this many times but each of those letters individually means so much and should be worth a lot to a lot of people but when you stick them

SPEAKER_322: together it creates this toxic soup where you can just hide the cheese yeah yeah i mean governance

SPEAKER_29: is important in companies of course the environment is important social change is important i mean but why are these things grouped together in this it just perverts it's an industry jay cal it's an

SPEAKER_169: industry of absolutely all right speaking of graphs microsoft is going to put 10 billion dollars or something into chat gpt degenerate ai as i'm calling it now is uh the hottest thing in silicon valley

SPEAKER_02: the technology is incredible i mean you you can question the business model maybe but the technology

SPEAKER_260: is pretty well i mean yeah so what i'd say is 29 billion dollars for a company that's losing a

SPEAKER_45: billion dollars in azure credits a year that's one way to look at it that's also a naive way to look at a lot of other businesses that ended up being worth a lot down the road i mean sure you can model out the future of a business like this and create a lot of really compelling big outcomes you know

SPEAKER_138: potentially yeah so microsoft is close to investing 10 million in open ai in a very convoluted

SPEAKER_168: transaction that people are trying to understand it turns out that they might wind up owning 59

SPEAKER_337: of open ai but get 75 of the cash and profits back over time 49 49 49 yeah of open ai but

SPEAKER_138: they would get paid back the 10 billion over some amount of time and this obviously includes azure

SPEAKER_339: credits uh and chat gpt as everybody knows this um just incredible demonstration of what ai can do in terms of text-based creation of content and answering queries is taking the net by storm people are

SPEAKER_29: really inspired by it sax do you think that this is a defensible real technology do you think this is

SPEAKER_301: like a crazy hype cycle well it's definitely the next vc hype cycle everyone's kind of glomming on to this because vc really right now needs a savior just look at the public markets everything we're investing

SPEAKER_57: in is in the toilet so we all really want to believe that this is going to be the next wave and just because something is a vc hype cycle doesn't mean that it's not true so as i think one of our friends pointed out you know mobile turned out to be very real i think cloud turned out to be i'd say very real social was sort of real in the sense that did lead to a few big winners on the other hand web 3 and crypto was a hype cycle it's turned into a big bust vr falls into the hype cycle i think vr probably a hype cycle so far no one can even explain what web 3 is in terms of ai i think that

SPEAKER_79: if i had to guess i would say the hype is real in terms of its technological potential however i'm not

SPEAKER_57: sure about how much potential there is yet for vcs to participate because right now it seems like like this is something that's going to be done by really big companies so open ai is basically a it looks like kind of a microsoft proxy you've got google i'm sure will develop it through their deep mind asset you know i'm sure facebook is going to do something huge in ai so what i don't know is is

SPEAKER_79: this really a platform that starts going to be able to benefit from i will say that some of the companies we've invested in are starting to use these tools so i guess i guess where i am is i

SPEAKER_57: think the technology is actually exciting i wouldn't go overboard on the valuations so i wouldn't buy into

SPEAKER_138: that level of the hype but you think there could be hundreds of companies built around an api for something like chat gpt dolly maybe yeah i don't i don't think startups are going to be able to create the

SPEAKER_57: ai themselves but they might be able to benefit from the apis maybe that's the feature okay that's

SPEAKER_244: the thing that has to be proven out there's a lot of really fantastic machine learning services available

SPEAKER_45: through cloud vendors today right so azure has been one of these kind of vendors and uh obviously open ai is building tools a little bit further down on the the stack but there's a lot of tooling that can be used for specific vertical applications obviously the acquisition of insta deep by bio and tech is a really solid example and most of the big dollars that are flowing in biotech right now are flowing into machine learning applications where there's some vertical application of machine learning tooling and techniques around some specific problem set and the problem set of mimicking human communication and doing generative media is a consumer application set that has a whole bunch of really interesting product opportunities but let's not kind of be blind to the fact that nearly every other industry and nearly every other vertical is being transformed today and there's active progress being made in funding and getting liquidity on companies and progress with actual products being driven by machine learning systems and there's a lot of great examples of this so you know the fundamental capabilities of large data sets and then using these kind of learning techniques in software and statistical models to make kind of predictions and drive businesses forward in a way that they're not able to with just human knowledge and human capability alone is really uh real and it's here today and so i think let's not get caught up in the fact that there's this really interesting consumer market hype cycle going on where these tools are not being kind of you know validated and generating real value across many other verticals and segments

SPEAKER_339: so when you look at this microsoft open ai deal and you see something that's this convoluted hard

SPEAKER_343: to understand what does that signal to you as a capital allocator and company builder i would put deals

SPEAKER_02: into two categories one is easy and straightforward and then two is you know cute by half or you know the too hard bucket this is clearly in that second category but it doesn't mean why is it in that category well it

SPEAKER_211: doesn't mean that it won't work in our group chat with the rest of the guys one person said there's a

SPEAKER_02: lot of complex law when you go from a non-profit to a for-profit there's lots of complexity in deal construction the original investors have certain things that they want to see there may or may not be you know legal issues at play here that you encapsulated well in the last episode i think there's a lot of stuff we don't know so i think it's important to just like give those folks the benefit of the doubt but yeah if you're asking me it's in the too hard bucket for me to really take seriously now that being said it's not like i i got shown the deal so i can't i can't comment here's what i will say the first part of what sac said i think is really important for entrepreneurs to internalize which is where can we make money the reality is that well let me just take a prediction i think that google will open source their models because the most important thing that google can do is reinforce the value of search and the best way to do that is to scorch the earth with these models which is to make them widely available and as free as possible that will cause microsoft to have to catch up and that will cause facebook to have to really look in the mirror and decide whether they're going to cap the betting that they've made on ar vr and reallocate very aggressively to ai i mentioned this in the i did this lex friedman podcast but that should be what facebook does and and the reason is if facebook and google and microsoft have roughly the same capability in the same model there's an element of machine learning that i think is very important which is called reinforcement learning and specifically it's reinforcement learning from human feedback right so these rlhf pipelines these are the things that will make your stuff unique so if you're a startup you can build a reinforcement learning pipeline how you build a product that captures a bunch of usage we talked about this before that data set is unique to you as a company you can feed that into these models get back better answers you can make money from it facebook has an enormous amount of reinforcement learning inside of facebook every click every comment every like every share twitter has that data set google inside of gmail and search microsoft inside of minecraft and hotmail so my point is david's right the huge companies i think will create the substrates and i think they'll be forced to scorch the earth and give it away for free and then on top of that is where you can make money and i would just encourage entrepreneurs to think where is my edge in creating a data set that i can use for reinforcement learning that i think is interesting that's kind of saying i buy the ingredients from the supermarket but then i can still construct a dish that's unique and you know the salt is there the pepper is there but how i use that will determine whether you like the thing or not and i think that you know that is the way that i

David Friedberg: think we need to start thinking about it interestingly as we've all pointed out here opening ai was started

SPEAKER_32: as a non-profit the stated philosophy was this technology is too powerful for any company to own therefore we're going to make it open source and then somewhere in the last couple years they said well you know what actually it's too powerful for it to be out there in the public we need to make this a private company and we need to get 10 billion dollars from microsoft that is the the

SPEAKER_45: disconnect i am trying to understand that's the most interesting part of the story jason i think if you go back to 2014 is when google bought deep mind yeah and immediately everyone started reacting to a company as powerful as google having a tool kit and a team as powerful as deep mind within them and that that sort of power should not sit in anyone's hands i heard people that i'm close with that are close to the organization and the company comment that they thought this is the most kind of scary threatening biggest threat to humanity uh is google's control of deep mind and that was a naive kind of point of view but it was one that was close that was deeply held by a lot of people so reed hoffman peter teal elon musk a lot of these guys funded the original kind of open ai business in 2015 and here's the link so i'm putting it out here um you guys can pull up the original blog post

SPEAKER_358: do all those don't people who donated get stock in so what happened was they were all in a non-profit and

SPEAKER_109: then the non-profit owned stock in a commercial business now but your point is interesting because

SPEAKER_45: at the beginning the idea was instead of having google own all of this we'll make it all available and here's the the statement from the original blog post in 2015 open ai is a non-profit ai research company our goal is to advance digital intelligence in the way that is most likely to benefit humanity as a whole unconstrained by a need to generate financial return since our research is free from financial obligations we can better focus on a positive human impact and they you know kind of went on and the whole thing about sam greg elon reid jessica peter teal aws yc are all donating to support open ai including donations and commitments of over a billion dollars although we expect that to only be a tiny fraction of what we will spend in the next few years which is a really interesting kind of if you look back historical perspective on how this thing all started seven years ago and how quickly it's evolved as you point out into the necessity to have a real commercial alignment to drive this thing forward without seeing any of these models open sourced and during that same same period of time we've seen google share alpha fold and share a number of tenser predictive models and and toolkits and make them publicly available and put them in google's cloud and so there's both kind of tooling and models and outputs of those models that google has open sourced and made freely available and meanwhile open ai has kind of diverged into this deeply profitable profit-seeking kind of enterprise model and when you invest in open ai in the round that they did before you could generate a financial return capped at 100x which is still a pretty amazing financial return you put a billion dollars in you can make 100 billion dollars that's that's funding a real commercial endeavor at that point well and then to it is the most striking question about this whole thing about what's going on in our ai and it's one that elon's talked about publicly and others have kind of sat on one side or the other which is that ai offers a glimpse into one of the biggest and most kind of existential threats to humanity and the question we're all going to be tackling and the battle that's going to be happening politically and regulatory wise and perhaps even between nations in the years to come is who owns the ai who owns the models what can they do with it and

SPEAKER_109: what are we legally going to be allowed to do with it and this is a really important part of that

SPEAKER_29: story yeah to build on what you're saying i just put in pytorch for people who don't know that's

SPEAKER_32: another framework uh p-y-t-o-r-c-h this was you know largely built inside of facebook and then facebook said hey we want to democratize machine learning and they made and i think they put a bunch of executives they may have even funded those executives to go work on this open source project so they have

SPEAKER_29: a huge stake in this and they went very uh open source with it and then tensorflow which you have a an investment in chamath tensorflow was inside i don't i don't have an investment in tensorflow we

SPEAKER_364: built tensorflow the public source came out of google and then you invested in another company but we were building silicon for machine learning that's different right but it's based on tensorflow

SPEAKER_02: no no no no it's the the the founder of this company was the founder of tensorflow oh got it okay sorry not of tensorflow pardon me of the of tpu which was google's internal silicon that they built to accelerate tensorflow right if that makes sense and so that's the you know i don't mean to be

SPEAKER_260: cynical about the whole project or not it's just the confounding part of this of what is happening here it reminds me i don't know if you remember this the biggest opportunity here the biggest

SPEAKER_02: opportunity here is for facebook i mean they need to get in this conversation asap i mean to think that like look pytorch was like a pretty seminal piece of technology that a lot of folks in in ai and machine learning we're using for a long time tensorflow before that and what's so funny about like google and facebook is they're a little bit kind of like they're not really making that much progress i mean facebook released this kind of like rando version of alpha fold recently it's not that good i think these companies really need to get these products in the wild as soon as possible it cannot be the case that you have to email people and get on some lists i mean this is google and facebook guys

SPEAKER_29: come on this is the i think the big innovation of open ai sax to bring you in the conversation they actually made an interface and let the public play with it to the tune of three million dollars a

SPEAKER_211: day in cloud credits or costs which by the way just on that my my son was telling me he's like hey dad do you want me to tell you when the best time to use chat gpt is i'm like huh he's like yeah my

SPEAKER_02: friends and i've tried we've been using it so much we know now when we can actually get resources oh wow and it's such an interesting thing where like a 13 year old kid knows you know when it's mostly compute intensive that it's unusable and when to come back and use it when's the last time

SPEAKER_339: sacks the technology became this mainstream and captured people's imagination this broadly

SPEAKER_57: i don't know maybe the iphone or something yeah yeah look it's it's powerful there's it's there's no question it's powerful i mean i'm of two minds about it because whenever something is the hype cycle i just reflexively want to be skeptical of it but on the other hand we have made a few investments in this area and i mean i think it is powerful and it's it's going to be an enabler of some really

SPEAKER_138: cool things to come there's no question about it i have two pieces of more insider information uh one i have a chat gpt ios app on my phone one of the nice folks at open ai included me in the test flight

SPEAKER_260: and it's the simplest interface you've ever seen but basically you type in your question but it keeps your history and then you can search your history so it looks sacks like you're in i message basically

SPEAKER_138: and it has your threads and so i asked them hey what are the best restaurants in yauntville uh in a town near um napa and then i said which one has the best duck and it literally like gave

SPEAKER_168: me a great answer then i thought wait a second why is this not using a siri or alexa like interface

SPEAKER_138: and then why isn't it oh here's a video of it i gave the video to nick by the way jason this what

SPEAKER_02: you're doing right now is you're creating a human feedback reinforcement learning pipeline for chat gpt so just the fact that you asked that question and you know over time if chad gpt has access to your gps information and then knows that you went to restaurant a versus b yeah i can intuit and it may actually prompt you to ask hey jason we noticed you were in the area did you go to bottega if you did how would you rate it one through five that reinforcement learning now allows the next person that asks what are the top five restaurants to say well you know over a thousand people that have asked this question here's actually the best answer versus a generic rank of the open web which is what the first data set is that's what's so interesting about this so this is why if you're a company that

David Friedberg: already owns the eyeballs you have to be running to get this stuff out there well and then this

SPEAKER_32: answer uh you know cited yelp well this is the first time i've actually seen chat gpt site and this is i think a major legal breakthrough it didn't put a link in but if it's going to use yelp's data i don't know if they have permission from yelp but it's quoting yelp here it should link to french laundry bottega and bouchon bouchon actually has the best uh confit for the record and i did have

SPEAKER_138: that duck so i asked this afterwards to see you know in a scenario like this but it could also if i was talking to it i could say hey which one has availability this afternoon or tomorrow for dinner and make the phone call for me like google assistant does or any number of i was thinking about next tasks and this was an incredibly powerful display in a 1.0 product i was thinking about

SPEAKER_40: what you said last week and i thought back to the music industry in in the world of napster

SPEAKER_02: and what happened was there was a lot of musicians i think metallica being the most famous one famously suing napster because it was like hey listen like you're allowing people to take my content which they would otherwise pay for there's economic damage that i can measure that legal argument was meaningful enough that ultimately napster was shut down now there are other versions of that that folks created including us at winamp we created a headless version of that but if you translate that problem set here is there a claim that yelp can make in this example that they're losing money that you know if you were going through google or if you are going through their app there's the sponsored link revenue and the advertising revenue that they would have got that they wouldn't get from here now that doesn't mean that chat gpt can't figure that out but it's those kinds of

Chamath Palihapitiya: problems that are going to be a little thorny in these next few years that have to really get figured

SPEAKER_57: out this is a very if you are if you are a human reading every review on yelp about duck then you could write a blog post in which you say many reviewers on yelp say that bouchon is the best duck so the question is like is gpt held to that standard or exactly or something different and and is linking

SPEAKER_339: to it is linking to it enough this is the question that i'm asking i don't i don't know it should be because i'll argue it should be because if you look at the four-part test for fair use which i had to go

SPEAKER_32: through because blogging had the same issue we would write a blog post and we would mention walt mossberg's review of a product and somebody else's and then people say oh i don't need to read walt mossberg's and need a wall street journal subscription and we say well we're doing an

SPEAKER_339: original work we're comparing two or three different you know human is comparing two or three different reviews and we're adding something to it it's a you know it's not a uh it's not interfering with

SPEAKER_343: walt mossberg's ability to get subscribers in the wall street journal but the effect on

SPEAKER_29: the potential market is one of the four tests and just reading from stanford's uh quote on fair use another important fair use factor is whether your use deprives the copyright owner of income or

SPEAKER_343: undermines a newer potential market for the copyrighted work depriving a copyright owner of income is very likely to trigger a lawsuit this is true even if you are not competing directly with

SPEAKER_32: the original work and we'll put the link to stanford here this is the key issue and i would not use yelp in this example i would not open the yelp app yelp would get no commerce and yelp would lose this so chat gpt and all these services must use citations of where they got the original work they must link

SPEAKER_29: to them and they must get permission that's where this is all going to shake out and i believe that's

SPEAKER_57: but forget about permission i mean you can't get a big enough data set if you have to get permission in

SPEAKER_87: advance right well no it's going to be the large data sets quora yelp the app store reviews amazon's

SPEAKER_32: reviews so there are large corpuses of data that you would need like craigslist has famously never

SPEAKER_29: allowed anybody to scrape craigslist the amount of data inside craigslist as but one example of a data set would be extraordinary to build chat gpt on chat gpt is not allowed to because as you brought

SPEAKER_348: up robots.txt last week there's going to need to be an ai.txt are you allowed to use my data set in ai

SPEAKER_29: and under and how will i be compensated for it i'll allow you to use craigslist but you have to link to

SPEAKER_40: the original post and you have to note that the other gray area that isn't there today but may emerge

SPEAKER_02: is when section 230 gets rewritten because if they take the protections away for the facebook and the googles of the world for the basically for being an algorithmic publisher and saying an algorithm is equivalent to a publisher what it essentially saying is that an algorithm is kind of like doing the work of a human in a certain context and i wonder whether that's also an angle here which now this algorithm which today david you use you said the example i read all these blog posts i write something but if an algorithm does it maybe can you then say no actually there is intent there that's different than if a human were to do it i don't know my point is very complicated issues that are going to get sorted out and i think the problem with the hype cycle is that you're going to have to marry it with an economic model for vcs to really make money and right now there's just too much betting on the come so to the extent you're going to invest it makes sense that you put money into open ai because that's safe because the economic model of how you make money for everybody else is so unclear

SPEAKER_29: right oh it's clear actually i have it for business i just signed up for chat gpt premium they had a survey that they shared on their discord server and i filled out the survey and they did a price

SPEAKER_32: discovery survey uh freeberg what's the least you would pay the most you would pay what would be too cheap of a price for chat gpt pro and what would be too high of a price i put in like 50 bucks a month was would be what i would pay but i was just thinking imagine chat gpt allowed you friedberg to have a slack channel called research and you could go in there or anytime you're in slack you do slash chat or sash chat gpt and you say slash chat gpt tell me you know what are the

SPEAKER_29: venues available in which we did this actually for i did this for venues for on summer i could say what are the venues that seed over 3 000 people in vegas and it just gave us the answer okay well that was the

SPEAKER_32: job of a of the local event planner they had that list now you can pull that list from a bunch of different sources i mean what would you pay for that a lot well i think one of the big things that's

SPEAKER_408: happening is all the old business models don't make sense anymore in a world where the software is no

SPEAKER_45: longer just doing what it's done for the last 60 years which is what is historically defined as information retrieval so you have this kind of hierarchical storage of data that you have some index against and then you go and you search and you pull data out and then you present that data back to the customer or the user of the software and that's effectively been how all kind of data has been utilized in all systems for the past 60 years in computing largely what we've really done is kind of built an evolution of application layers or software tools to interface with the fetching of that data the retrieval of that data and the display of that data but what these systems are now doing what ai type systems or machine learning systems now do is the synthesis of that data and the representation of some synthesis of that data to you the user in a way that doesn't necessarily look anything like the original data that was used to make that synthesis and that's where business models like a yelp for example or like a web crawler that crawls the web and then presents web page directories to you those sorts of models no longer make sense in a world where the software the signal to noise is now greater the signal is greater than the noise and being able to present to you a synthesis of that data and basically resolve what your objective is with your own consumption and interpretation of that data which is how you've historically used these systems and i think that's where there's you know going back to the question of the hype cycle i don't think it's about being a hype cycle i think it's about the the investment opportunity against fundamentally rewriting all compute tools because if all compute tools ultimately can use this capability in their interface and in their modeling then it very much changes everything and one of the advantages that i think businesses are going to latch on to which we talked about historically is novelty in their data in being able to build new systems and new models that aren't generally available example in biotech and pharma for example having uh screening results from um from very expensive uh experiments and running lots of experiments and having a lot of data against those experiments gives a company an advantage in being able to do things like drug discovering we're going to talk about that in a minute versus everyone using publicly known screening libraries or publicly available protein modeling libraries and then screening against those and then everyone's got the same candidates and the same targets and the same you know kind of clinical objectives that they're going to try and resolve from from that output so um so i think novelty and data is is one way that advantage uh kind of arises but really you know that's just kind of you know where's there an edge but fundamentally every business model can and and and will need to be rewritten that's dependent on the historical on the legacy of kind of information retrieval

SPEAKER_92: as the core of what computing is is used to do sex on my other podcast i was having a discussion with molly about

SPEAKER_339: the legal profession what impact would it be if chant gpt took every court case every argument every document and somebody took all of those legal cases on the legal profession uh and then the filing of a lawsuit the defending of a lawsuit public defenders prosecutors but what data could you figure out like if and like

SPEAKER_29: just to think of recent history look at chester budine you could literally take every case every argument he did put it through it and say you know versus an outcome in another state and you could uh figure out what's actually going on with this technology what impact did this have on the legal field that you

SPEAKER_343: are a non-practicing attorney you have a legal degree i i never practiced other than one summer at

SPEAKER_58: a law firm but no i think did you pass the bar what's that i did pass the bar yes yes first try yes

SPEAKER_420: of course of course yeah come on you gotta be kind of dumb like it's like it's like rolling his eyes

SPEAKER_423: yes i went to fairford dude i'm rated 1800 i may not have passed the bar but i know a little enough to

SPEAKER_79: know that you can't look i i i would be curious in terms of a very common question that a an associate

SPEAKER_57: at a law firm would get asked would be something like you know summarize the legal precedence in

SPEAKER_79: favor of x right and that you can imagine gpt doing that like instantly now i think that the question about that i think there's two questions one is can you prompt gpt in the right way to get the answer you want and i think you know chamath you shared a really interesting video showing that people are developing some skills around knowing how to ask gpt questions in the right way exact prompt engineering why because gpt is a command line interface so if you ask gpt a simple question about what's the best restaurant in you know napa it knows how to answer that but there are much more complicated questions that you kind of need to know how to prompt it in the right way so it's not clear to me that a command line interface is the best way of doing that i could imagine apps developing that create more of like a gui so we're an investor for example on copy ai which has been doing this for copywriters and marketers helping them write blog posts and emails and so you know imagine putting that like you know gui on top of chat gpt they've already been kind of doing this so i think that's part of it i think the other part of it is on the answer side you know how accurate is it because in

SPEAKER_77: some professions having 90 or 95 or 99 accuracy is okay but in other professions you need six nines accuracy meaning 99.9999 accuracy okay so i think for a lawyer going into court you know you probably need i i don't know i mean it depends on on the on the parking ticket versus a murder trial is two very different things yeah exactly so is 99 accuracy good enough is 95 accuracy good enough i would say probably for a court case 95 is probably not good enough i'm not sure gpt's at even 95 yet but could

SPEAKER_429: it be helpful like could could could the associates start with chat gpt get an answer and then validate

SPEAKER_02: it probably yeah if you had a bunch of associates bang on some law model for a year again that's that reinforcement learning we just talked about i think you'd get precision recall off the charts and it would be perfect by the way just a cute thing i don't know if you guys got this email it came about an hour ago from reed hoffman and reed said to me hey moth i i created fireside chat bots a special

SPEAKER_211: podcast mini series where i will be having a set of conversations with chat gpt so you can go to youtube by the way and and see reed having and he's a very smart guy so this should be kind of cool and by the way chat gpt will have an ai generated voice powered by the text-to-speech platform play dot ht

SPEAKER_145: go to youtube if you want to see reed have a have a conversation with chat gpt well i mean chamath we

SPEAKER_435: have a conversation with the two davids every week what's the difference we know how this is going to

SPEAKER_57: turn out uh hey but actually so synthesizing um jama's point about reinforcement learning with something you said jcal in our chat which i actually thought was pretty smart well that's first yeah so i'm going to give you credit here because i don't think you've said it on this this episode which is you said that these open ai capabilities are eventually going to become commoditized or certainly much more widely available i don't know if that means that they'll be totally

SPEAKER_77: commoditized or there'll be four players but there'll be multiple players that offer them and you said the real advantage will come from applications that are able to get a hold of proprietary data sets and then use those proprietary data sets to generate insights and then layering on what most about reinforcement learning if you can be the first out there in a given vertical with a proprietary data set and then you get the advantage the moat of reinforcement learning

SPEAKER_347: that would be the way to create i think a sustainable business just to build on what you said

SPEAKER_02: this week is the jp morgan conference freeberg mentioned it last week i had dinner on wednesday with this really interesting company based in zurich and what they have is basically a library of ligands right and so these ligands are used as a substrate to deliver all kinds of molecules inside the body and what's interesting is that they have a portfolio of like a thousand of these but really what they have is they have all the nuclear medicine about whether it works so you know there they target glioblastoma glioblastoma and so all of a sudden they can they can say well this ligand can actually cross the blood-brain barrier and get to the brain they have an entire data set of that and a whole bunch of nuclear imagery around that they have something for soft cell carcinoma so then they have that data set so to your point that's really valuable because that's real work that google or microsoft or open ai won't do right and if you have that and you bring it to the problem you can

David Friedberg: probably make money you know there's a business there to be built just building on this conversation

SPEAKER_339: i just realized like a great prompt engineer is going to become a title and an actual skill the ability to interface with these here you go ai coding school 2.0 well no a prompt engineer somebody

SPEAKER_32: who is very good at talking to these you know instances and and maximizing the result for them and refining the results for them just like a detective who asks great questions the that person is going to be 10 or 20 times more valuable they could be the proverbial 10x engineer

SPEAKER_29: in the future of as a as in a company and as we talk about austerity and doing more with less and the 80 percent less people running twitter now or amazon laying off 18 000 people salesforce laying

SPEAKER_32: off 8 000 facebook laying off 10 and probably another 10 000 what catalytic effect like could this have we could be sitting here in three or four or five years and instead of running a company like twitter with 80 percent less people maybe you could run it with 98 percent less people look i think directionally

SPEAKER_109: it's the the right statement i mean you know i've i've made the statement a number of times that i

SPEAKER_45: think we move from this idea of creator economy to narrator economy where historically was kind of labor economy where humans use their physical labor to do things then we were knowledge workers we used our our brains to to make things and then ultimately we kind of i think resolve to this narrator economy where the the way that you kind of can state intention and better manipulate the tools to drive your intentional outcome the more successful you're going to be and you can kind of think about this as being the artist of the past da vinci was um so what made him so good was he was technically incredible at trying to reproduce a photographic like imagery using uh using paint and there's these really great kind of museum exhibits on how he did it using these really interesting kind of like split mirror systems and then the the better the artist of the 21st century the 20th century was the best user of adobe photoshop and that person is not necessarily the best painter and the artist of the 22nd century isn't going to look like the photoshop expert and it's not going to look like the the painter it's going to look like something entirely different it could be who's who's got the most creative imagination in driving the software to drive new outcomes and i think that the same analogy can be used across every market in every industry however one thing to note jcal it's it's not about austerity because the the luddite argument is when you have new tools and you get more leverage from those tools you have less work for people to do and therefore everyone suffers the reality is new work emerges and new opportunities emerge and we level up as a species and when we level up we all kind of fill the gaps and expand our productivity and our capability set i thought what jcal was saying was

SPEAKER_271: more that google will be smaller didn't mean that the pie wouldn't grow it's just that that individual company is run differently but there would be hundreds of more companies or thousands more millions

SPEAKER_32: more yeah that's sort of i have an actual punch up for you yeah instead of narrative it's the conductor economy it's you're you're conducting a symphony oh a punch up punch up there but i do think like we're

SPEAKER_29: gonna there's gonna be somebody who's sitting there like remember tom cruise in minority report as a detective was moving stuff around with a interface the in yeah you know with the gloves and

SPEAKER_32: everything this is kind of that manifested you could even if you're not an attorney you could say hey i want to sue this company for copyright infringement give me my best arguments and then on the other side say hey i want to know what the next three features i should put into my product is can you examine who are my top 20 competitors and then who have they hired in the last six months and what are those people talking about on twitter you could have this conductor you know who becomes really good at that

SPEAKER_109: well the leveling up massive amounts of tasks yeah the leveling up that happens in the book ender's game

SPEAKER_45: i think is a good example of this where the guy goes through the entire kind of ground up and then ultimately he's commanding armies of spaceships and space and his orchestration of all of these armies is actually the skill set that wins the war yeah you predicted that there would be like

SPEAKER_211: all these people that create these next-gen forms of content but i think this reed hoffman thing could

SPEAKER_02: be pretty cool like what if he wins a grammy for his you know computer created podcast mini series

SPEAKER_45: that's what i'm saying the thing i'm really excited about when's the first ai novel going to get published by a major publisher i think it happens this year when's the first ai symphony going to get performed by a major symphony orchestra and when's the first ai generated screenplay get turned into an ai generated 3d movie that we all watch and then the more exciting one i think is when do we all get to make our own ai video game where we instruct the video game platform what world we want to live in i don't think that's happening for the next three or four years but when it does i think everyone's got these new immersive environments that they can live in i have a question when when i say live in

SPEAKER_02: i mean video game wise yeah sorry go ahead when you have when you have these computer systems just like to use a question of game theory for a second they're these models are iterating rapidly these are all mathematical models so inherent in let's just say this the perfect answer right like if you had perfect precision recall if multiple models get there at a system-wide level everybody is is sort of like they get to the game theory optimal they're all at nash equilibrium right all these systems working at the same time then the real question would then be what the hell do you do then because if you keep getting the same answer if everybody then knows how to ask the exact right question and you start to go through these iterations where you're like maybe there is a dystopian hellscape where there are no

SPEAKER_211: jobs maybe that's the elon world which is you can you can recursively find a logical argument where

SPEAKER_02: there is no job that's possible right and now i'm not saying that that path is the likely path but i'm saying it is important to keep in mind that that path of outcomes is still very important to keep in the back of our mind as we figure these things out well freeberg you know you were asking before

SPEAKER_29: about this like you know will more work be created of course artistic pursuits podcasting is a job now being an influencer is a job yada yada new things emerge in the world but here in the united states in 1970 i'm looking at um fred that's i'm looking at the st louis fred 1970 26.4 percent of the country

SPEAKER_339: was working in a factory was working in manufacturing you want to guess what that is uh in 2012. sorry one percentage it was 26 percent in 1970 and in 2015 when they stopped the percentage

SPEAKER_260: uh in manufacturing i say it's they discontinued this it was a 10. so it's possible we could just see

SPEAKER_29: you know the concept of office work the concept of knowledge work is going to follow pretty inevitable the path of manufacturing that that seems like a pretty logical theory or no i think we should move on but yes okay so how would we like to ruin the show now should we talk about biden and uh the

SPEAKER_169: documents and ruin the show with political talk or should we talk about since it's been such a great

SPEAKER_471: episode so far what do we want to talk about next i'll give you a couple choices you don't want to talk

SPEAKER_79: about we all know jay cal that according to you when a president is in possession of classified documents in his home yes that apparently have been taken in an unauthorized manner basically stolen he should

SPEAKER_29: have his home raided by the fbi almost close close uh if so anyway the biden uh as of the taping of this has now said there's a third batch of classified documents this group i guess there was one at an office one at a library now this third group is in his garage with his corvette certainly not looking

SPEAKER_79: good uh they say they say that in his defense they say the garage was locked meaning that uh you could use a garage door opener to open a closet so it was locked when it went closed so pretty much as

SPEAKER_32: secure as the documents of mar-a-lago same equivalency no no no i actually i mean just to be perfectly

SPEAKER_79: fair the documents in mar-a-lago were locked in a basement the fbi came checked it out said we'd like you to lock those up they locked them up so got it a little safer than maybe a little safer than

SPEAKER_81: in the truck of your corvette but functionally the same functionally the same uh the only difference

SPEAKER_372: here would be what sacks when you look at these two cases well that in one case merrick garland

SPEAKER_79: is appointed an independent counsel to investigate trump and there's no such a uh special counsel or investigator appointed to investigate biden i mean yeah these things are functioning

SPEAKER_85: the same put somebody on it though wait i don't think they've appointed a special counsel yet

SPEAKER_497: no they did as of an hour ago a special counsel was appointed okay did that just happen yeah one

SPEAKER_79: hour ago uh robert her is his name okay i guess there are real questions to look into here the

SPEAKER_77: documents apparently were moved twice why were they moved who ordered that what was a classified document doing in biden's personal library what do the documents pertain to do they touch on the biden family's business dealings in ukraine and china so there are real things to look into here but

SPEAKER_79: let me just take a step back now that the last three presidential candidates have been ensnared in these classified document problems remember it's biden now and then trump and hillary clinton before trump i think it's time to step back and ask are we over classifying documents i mean

SPEAKER_77: are we fetishizing these documents are they all really that sensitive it seems to me that we have an over classification problem meaning that ever since uh foia was passed the freedom of information act the government can avoid accountability and prying eyes by simply labeling any document as classified so over classification was the logical response by the permanent government to the freedom of information act and now it's gotten to the point where just about everything handed to a president or vice president is classified so i think i can understand why they're all making this mistake

SPEAKER_500: and i think a compounding problem is that we never declassify anything there's still all these records

SPEAKER_503: from the kennedy assassination well that's that have never been classified they and they're supposed to

SPEAKER_32: have declassified these the cia keeps filibustering on the release of the jfk assassination documents and they've been told they have they have to stop and they have to release them and then they keep redacting stuff which is making it i mean i hate to be a conspiracy theorist here but what are they

SPEAKER_35: trying to cover up i mean this is a long time ago that's the only way to interpret it but even for more

SPEAKER_77: mundane documents there are very few documents that need to be classified after even say five years you could argue that we should be automatically declassifying them after five years unless they go through a process to get reclassified i mean i'd say like what just you guys in business i know it's not government in business how many of the documents that you deal with are still sensitive or trade secrets five years

SPEAKER_509: later certainly 20 years certainly 20 years later they're not right like in almost like five years i

SPEAKER_77: mean the only documents in business that i think i deal with that you could call sensitive are the ones

SPEAKER_81: that pertain to the company's future plans right because you wouldn't want a competitor to get

SPEAKER_512: those there's a handful of things legal issues yeah even captive was not that sensitive because

SPEAKER_396: by the time you go public it's legally has to be public yeah like there's a hundred people who have

SPEAKER_57: that i mean it's exactly so like in business i think our experience has been there's very few

SPEAKER_79: documents that stay sensitive that need to remain secret now look if biden or trump whoever they're

SPEAKER_77: reviewing the schematics to the javelin missile system or to you know how we make our nuclear bombs or something obviously that needs to stay secret forever but i don't believe our politicians are reviewing those kinds of documents well we we both i don't really understand what it is that

SPEAKER_111: they're reviewing why are they keeping them that needs to be classified five years later why are they

SPEAKER_32: keeping them was the issue we discussed previously we actually agreed on that i think they're just

SPEAKER_77: keeping i think there's a simple explanation for why they're keeping them jason which is that the that everything is more classified and there's a zillion documents and if you look like both biden and trump these documents were mixed in with a bunch of personal effects and mementos my point is

SPEAKER_526: if you work in government and handle documents they're all classified so i mean if the national

SPEAKER_286: archive asked for them back or you find them you should just give them back i mean that is that's

SPEAKER_527: going to wind up being the rug didn't give them back and that's the only difference here well no no

SPEAKER_77: no hold on the fbi went to trump's basement they looked around they said put a lock on this they seem to be okay with it initially then maybe they changed their minds i don't know i'm not defending

SPEAKER_531: trump it's pretty clear that he wouldn't give them back him that was the point i'm making is that

SPEAKER_77: now that biden trump and hillary clinton have all been ensnared in this is it time to rethink the fact that we're over classifying so many documents i mean just think about the incentives that that we're creating for our politicians okay just think about the incentives number one never use email remember hillary clinton and the whole email server yeah you got to be nuts to use email

SPEAKER_533: number two never touch a document never touch a document never let anyone hand you a document flush them down the toilet never let anyone hand you a document i mean if you're a politician

SPEAKER_232: an elected official yeah the only time you should ever be handling anything is going to a clean room

SPEAKER_77: right you know make an appointment go in there read something don't take notes don't bring a

SPEAKER_526: camera and then leave i mean this is no way to run a government it's crazy who does this benefit

SPEAKER_77: it doesn't benefit our elected officials it makes it almost impossible for them to act like normal people that's why it benefits the insiders the permanent government you're missing the most

SPEAKER_29: important part about the sex this was if you want to go into conspiracy theories this was a setup biden planted the documents here we go so that we could create the false equivalency and start up biden versus trump 2024 this ensures that now trump has something to fight with biden

SPEAKER_343: about but and this is going to help trump because they're both tainted equally tainted

SPEAKER_542: yes the same source they are they are equally tainted now but it puts trump in the new cycle

SPEAKER_57: no i think i think it's the opposite i think merrick garland now is going to have to drop

SPEAKER_77: the prosecution against trump for the stolen documents or at least that part of what they're investigating him for they might still investigate him over january 6 or something they can't

SPEAKER_545: investigate georgia seems more sticky yeah i agree with that actually i think it's going to be hard

SPEAKER_77: to do but my point is like just think about look but both sides are engaged in hyperparsenship the way right now the that the conservatives on the right they're attacking biden now for the same thing that the left was attacking trump for my point is like just take a step back and again think about the incentives we're creating about how to run our government you can't use email and you can't touch documents and everything's an investigation the second you get out of office and by the way if you're don't ever go into politics if you're a business person because they'll investigate every deal you ever did private prior to getting into politics i mean what are you going to do when you try to get uh your

SPEAKER_232: treasury position what's going to happen nuts you got to be nuts to go into so you're not going to take

SPEAKER_77: a position my point is that that the that the washington insiders by which i mean the permanent washington establishment i.e the deep state they're creating a system in which they're running things and the elected officials barely can operate like normal functioning humans there interesting

SPEAKER_195: that's what's going on i heard a great rumor this is total gossip mongering oh here we go

SPEAKER_211: uh that you know one of ken griffin's best out is to get de santis elected so that he can become

SPEAKER_02: treasury secretary i mean ken griffin would get that if he wanted it and then he would be able to divest all of citadel tax-free so he would mark the market like 30 billion dollars which is

SPEAKER_211: a genius way to go out now then it occurred to me oh my god that is me and sax's path too

SPEAKER_554: with a lot less money but let's say that wait why would it be tax-free when you get appointed to

SPEAKER_02: those branch those senior posts you're allowed to either stick it in a blind trust or you can sell

SPEAKER_77: with no capital gains what yeah what well because they want you they want you to divest yes anything that presents a conflict they want you to divest and so the argument is if you have if you're forced to divest it to enter a government you shouldn't be forcibly wait if i become mayor of san francisco

SPEAKER_565: or austin no no federal government secretary of transportation jay cal you can do that oh i'm

SPEAKER_211: qualified for that i take the bus i got an electric bike to answer freebrook's point i think citadel

SPEAKER_02: securities there's a lot of folks that would buy that because that's just a securities trading business and then citadel the hedge fund probably something like a big bulge bracket bank or blackstone probably blackstone in fact because now blackstone can plug it into a trillion dollar

SPEAKER_145: asset machine it's a i think there would be buyers out the door this is this is an incredible grift now i know why sacks it's not a grift at all but it's a it's an incredible come on man a cabinet

SPEAKER_02: position for no cap gains well that's not a grift that's like those are the laws they force you to sell everything feels grifty to me and then you do public service i think you're i think you're misusing the word to continue to genuflect through the left no i'm not genuflecting i think you're being a little

SPEAKER_577: defensive because you see this as a bad bad or you're dumb i'm not stupid man i don't know when i see it

SPEAKER_581: you take a cabinet position you don't pay cap gains would you be secretary where does that exist

SPEAKER_57: yeah sacks if you were asked to serve look any normal person who wants to serve in government you can't use email and you can't touch a document and every deal you've ever done gets investigated

SPEAKER_77: why the hell would you want to do it yes yes why would you want to do it i mean all studying that

SPEAKER_587: you get to divest tax-free me think thou dot protesteth too much david sex the fact that you

SPEAKER_590: two know this rule and free bird and i don't no i know i know it's like a well known i'm the only

SPEAKER_02: person who doesn't know this rich people i looked up grift it means to engage it means that to engage in a petty or small-scale swindle i don't think selling a 31 billion dollar yeah no it's not small

SPEAKER_115: combination of black rock and blackstone would be considered a petty small scale did you did any

SPEAKER_45: of you guys watch the madoff uh series on netflix no it wasn't good no oh my god it is so so depressing i gotta say like just that that madoff series there is no glimmer of light or hope

SPEAKER_239: or positivity or recourse everyone is a victim everyone suffers it is just so dark don't watch it it's so depressing the main one is so depressing it's so they all kill themselves and die

SPEAKER_109: one guy died of cancer erving picard i didn't realize all this the trustee that went and got the money he went and got money back from these people who were 80 years old and retired and had spent that

SPEAKER_239: money decades ago and he sued them and took their homes away from them and no one and and they had

SPEAKER_109: no one that they were part of the scam no one no one won it was a brutal awful thing yeah by the way

SPEAKER_115: that's going to be really interesting as we enter this sbf trial because that that is the track that

SPEAKER_239: that is what happens if you got that's why the southern district of new york said that this case is becoming too big for them because all the places that sbf sent money all those uh packs and all those political donations before they have to go and investigate where that money went and see if they

SPEAKER_45: can get it back and it's going to open up an investigation into each one of these campaign finance and election and kind of interfering right now not political pro publica sorry pro publica on

SPEAKER_02: the other end of the spectrum i did watch this weekend triangle of sadness have you guys watched it

SPEAKER_211: too it was great oh my god triangle of sadness is great it's so dark to the davids uh listen this is one of the it i thought it was it didn't pay off the way i thought but this is one of the best setups you'll see in a movie so basically it's a bunch of people on an on a luxury yacht so you have a bunch of rich people as the guests then you have the staff that interacts with them and this is like mostly

SPEAKER_314: caucasian and then under in the bowels of the ship what you see are asian and black workers that support them okay so the the in some ways is a little bit of a microcosm of the world oh i thought you were

SPEAKER_40: going to say a microcosm of something else and then and then what happens is there's like a shipwreck basically right oh don't spoil it come on okay and so but no but i'll just tell it so so the plot is

SPEAKER_211: you have this caucasian patriarchy that that gets flip sides upside down because after the shipwreck the only person who knows how to make a fire and catch the fish is the filipino woman who is in charge of

SPEAKER_314: cleaning the toilets so she becomes in charge so now you flip to this immigrant matriarchy

SPEAKER_610: it's a pretty great meditation on class and unbelievable it's it's pretty well done it didn't

SPEAKER_434: end well i thought i thought yeah yeah well it's hard to wrap that one up well you know what they say

SPEAKER_29: boys still a little and they throw you in jail still a lot and they make you king uh famous bob dylan quote uh all right well this has been a great episode great to see you besties um austerity menu tonight chermath uh what's on the austerity menu tonight what are we doing salad uh

SPEAKER_40: some tuna sandwiches no i think uh i think kirsten is doing uh i think dorad dorad yeah that's yeah

SPEAKER_79: that's a good fish jake and i once had a great derod in venice in venice then the derod from

SPEAKER_148: that's one of the best meals we've ever had am i right so good i agree when it's done well the

SPEAKER_58: derod kicks ass there's only one way to cook a derod do you know what that is how you gotta you

SPEAKER_79: gotta it's the way they did in venice you gotta cook the whole fish yeah yeah okay and then after

SPEAKER_57: you cook the fish then you depone it right and uh right yeah that's the way to do it that was back

SPEAKER_484: when sax and i used to enjoy shows his company podcast made us into mortal enemies check out i'm

SPEAKER_79: a little disappointed you couldn't agree with my take on this document scandal instead of dunking in a partisan way i tried to explain why it was a problem of our whole political system i like your

SPEAKER_629: theory i i i i think you know you you keep too much to defend biden i think biden's a grifter i told

SPEAKER_633: you these guys are grifting i just think you're i just think your party grips a little bit more

SPEAKER_211: but yeah compare your grift are we going to play saturday after the wild card game are you guys

David Friedberg: interested in playing saturday as well because i got the hall pass i can i can do a game on saturday

SPEAKER_55: i don't know uh i have to check with my boss who's going to the are you guys all going sex are you going to come to play poker at that live stream thing for the day in la i doubt it no

SPEAKER_193: he doesn't want to interact with humans that does not uh play well in confirmation hearings

SPEAKER_79: no the last time i did one of those alan keating destroyed me on camera i like that's true i had two left feet and every time he bluffed i folded every time he had the the nuts i called it was brutal

SPEAKER_50: that was a shellacking a classic sax so it's an image saving thing is that what's going on you're

SPEAKER_137: no no preserving it has to do with the cabinet positions he doesn't need to be seen recklessly

SPEAKER_55: gambling it's a bad look if you could take any cabinet position sex which one would it be state treasury states a lot of travel say the words a lot of travel you never stay at home you're

SPEAKER_57: always on a plane that's what he's looking for i don't know that those like cabinet positions are that important i mean they run these giant bureaucracies that again are permanent you can't fire anyone so if you can't fire a person do they really report to you right i mean this idea was

SPEAKER_45: like put a bunch of hardline ceo type people in charge have them blow up these things and make

SPEAKER_142: them more efficient it didn't really work did it yeah well you know why a ceo is actually in charge like elon he walks in if he doesn't like what you're doing he'll just fire you you can't fire

SPEAKER_77: anyone how do you manage them when they don't have to listen to anything you say that's our whole

SPEAKER_300: government right now our cabinet heads are figureheads for for these departments for these

SPEAKER_101: giant departments is that a no or is that a yes you'd still take state look at that well i you know i

SPEAKER_661: think i have another thing i think he's going for the ambassadorship first what is the best ambassadorship well you can't you can't die london france historically you can tell which

SPEAKER_57: ambassadorship is the best one based on how much they charge for it yeah so i think i think london is the

SPEAKER_667: most expensive i think that one's 15 million million for london 10 to 15 10 15 million yeah

SPEAKER_670: 10 15 million that's that's what sax's fourth least expensive home cost no no you have to spend that every year to run it jason you only got you got a fix for him you could be the ambassador to

SPEAKER_02: guinea or the ambassador to the uk you get the same budget actually what's kind of funny is i know two

David Sacks: people who served as ambassadors under trump and it was really cheap to get those because no one

SPEAKER_79: no one wanted to be part of the trump administration oh they were a fire sale two for

SPEAKER_146: one they were on a they were on fire sale after because of trump but who wants to be tainted but

SPEAKER_314: by the way one of them and you can just beep out the name was telling me it was the best thing because

SPEAKER_572: he ended up selling they already get the all-time highs to take the job he was like i got to get out of

SPEAKER_79: all of this stuff no but listen let me tell you the the ambassadorships it was a it was a smart trade by those guys because ambassador's a lifetime title so you're ambassador whatever no one remembers was

SPEAKER_383: president when you were ambassador no one cares so you are going for the ambassador so steve i think

SPEAKER_79: it's fair to say i think he's going ambassador i'm not i'm not interested in ceremonial things i'm

SPEAKER_35: interested in making an impact and the problem with all these positions i mean being a cabinet official

SPEAKER_680: is not much different than being an ambassador so you're gonna you're gonna enlist in the navy no what what would it what has a bigger impact being on all in pod or being an ambassador who's

SPEAKER_138: more influential sacks on the all-in pod or beep as the ambassador of sweden it's obvious actually all

SPEAKER_45: in pod is more impactful by the way this is why i take issue with your statement about the term mainstream media because i think you have become the mainstream media more than most of the folks that we're independent

SPEAKER_687: media we're independent trust me it's independent this thing's hanging on my thread and stop genuflecting

SPEAKER_689: no it's independent who knows if this thing's gonna last another three episodes i just like saying

SPEAKER_434: the word genuine i know you like genuflecting i know that is the top word of 2023 so far for me oh is

SPEAKER_32: that is somebody doing an analysis with chad jpt of the words used here no but sax brought that word up

SPEAKER_559: it was just so it's a wonderful word it's it's not used enough all right everybody we'll see you

SPEAKER_528: next time on the all in podcast comments are turned back on have at it you animals love you guys bye bye