SPEAKER_00: jacal looks like he's going to a night at the roxbury absolutely

SPEAKER_02: i mean you look horrible thank you absolutely fucking horrible okay appreciate it here we go

SPEAKER_19: thanks for coming this is the production board symposium 2021 tell us just a little bit about why we're here david and what this is and what it represents for the production board

SPEAKER_23: the production board symposium second ever thank you all for being here we're excited we have an amazing group of science scientists engineers folks from academia from business from the investing community some of our investors so we're excited to share thoughts and ideas over the next

SPEAKER_25: couple days um and thought we would chase half of you away by hosting the all-in pod tonight so um

SPEAKER_26: here we go great uh okay so first up in the news rolling stone uh amplifies false ivermectin story

SPEAKER_29: you were following this chamath what do you think this uh ivermectin controversy and you want a little

SPEAKER_31: give a little summary of what the issue is before we talk about the hypocrisy of it well on september

SPEAKER_32: first oklahoma news station k4 ran a story and published an article on ivermectin overdoses backing up rural hospitals the article was titled patients uh overdosing on ivermectin backing up rural oklahoma hospital hospitals and ambulances uh first line of the article quote a rural oklahoma doctor said patients who are taking the home dewormer medication ivermectin to fight coven 19 causing emergency rooms and ambulances to uh back up on september 3rd rolling stone amplified the story in its own article uh the only problem was uh they treated they tweeted it with a picture that featured people lined up in the cold it turns out the picture was people waiting for vaccine shots back in january not gunshot victims waiting to get into the hospital yeah the story is totally

SPEAKER_36: false you understand that right well i didn't want to say fake news but i know it was beyond it was

David Friedberg: beyond fake news this was basically a doctored up conjured article by some person trying to incite a

SPEAKER_29: moral mania at rolling stone look there you tell me if the the science of this is wrong the whole the whole premise is ridiculous so ivermectin basically as far as we know because we don't know that much acts on a handful of uh specific characteristics one we know to be glutamate which we don't really

Chamath Palihapitiya: expressed in the same way as like worms and so yes technically it can be used as a dewormer but there are four or five other ways in which it acts which we don't know anything about because we haven't taken the time to do a broad-based double blind study so i think the fairest thing to say about ivermectin is we don't know what it is and so neither the people that propose to use it as a solution for for covid nor the people that rail against it aren't really starting from the basis of fact but then what happens is you have these folks who basically are so turned off by the idea that you know people aren't getting vaccines they're going to use this other thing they basically doctored up an article that wouldn't be so bad because nobody reads rolling stone right it's kind of a it's like it's kind of it's an ancient brand nobody's going there for medical

SPEAKER_46: news yeah but then the problem is you get a handful of these folks who think they're really really smart who amplify it rachel maddow amplifies it jimmy kimmel does it on a comedy skit and then all of a sudden there's this enormous outrage but the problem is you can't put the genie back in the bottle when it turns out to be a completely fabricated lie and then all the people that are purporting to basically push this lie who now have been outed have no consequences because they're on the left screaming at the right and what happened when it was the other way around we basically started to put people in boxes we basically kicked them off these platforms and again so you have this compounding building double standard that to me is the whole the worst part about it

SPEAKER_48: david when we look at uh the ivermectin story we also saw joe rogan got covid that was a big

SPEAKER_32: haha moment for a lot of people um and he took ivermectin as part of his treatment and then people started amplifying that he was taking a worm uh drug for horses dewormer dewormer and uh it's at best an antimicrobial right right it's used for both situations and a doctor prescribed it to him he's thinking of suing some folks for for treating this what what does this overall say about the state of

SPEAKER_00: communications around this pandemic yeah i mean look this is really a media story you had rolling stone publish this article based on a single source you have this one crank basically saying that

SPEAKER_35: emergency rooms are turning away gunshot victims and people having heart attacks okay and all they had

David Sacks: to do all rolling stone had to do was call up any one of these several hospitals they immediately would have refuted the source but they didn't do that they also could have simply googled the number of toxic ivermectin cases to find out if it was even plausible statistically that you could have ivermectin overdoses flooding oklahoma hospitals but they didn't do that either why didn't they confirm the sources because the article was too perfect it confirmed all of their priors their first prior was about ivermectin they've been waging this war on ivermectin claiming it's a horse dewormer when it's actually that is one of its purposes but it's not the only one it was a it was a drug designed for humans and it's used against parasites now as jama said we don't know whether it's effective against covet they got to do the double blind studies and we'll find out but that was sort of their first prior and let's face it the second prior was that this is in oklahoma right and so

SPEAKER_55: rolling stone wants to believe you have all these maggie idiots out in oklahoma eating horse paste okay and that's why they love this story so much and that's why rachel maddow loved the story so much and she then starts spreading it okay and after she gets called out including by say glenn greenwald as of last night she had not taken it down now why because she knows there are no consequences for misinformation and lying why because twitter and facebook do not punish people on the left for misinformation that is some penalty they only meter out for people who disagree with their cultural and political biases she's part of the secret cabal that gets the get out of jail free card i don't i don't even think it's secret i just think these people all are part of the same cultural sort of milieu they all have the same political and cultural biases and there is never look where is the twitter warning the twitter label on the rachel maddow post even now saying that

SPEAKER_62: this tweet this article is misinformation uh it doesn't exist because it's inconvenient freeberg let's

SPEAKER_67: talk about the science of i think i would pay 40 for all in podcast live it's dynamic it's that it

SPEAKER_70: works yeah by the way you're on the show so okay i'm here too um tell me the last time we heard

SPEAKER_71: a news story that didn't have bias to it what was the last general thing that was reported

SPEAKER_25: that we didn't feel had the angle that then elicited emotion either love or hate or alignment or not um

David Friedberg: with the audience you can have that reaction to facts there was an article in the wall street journal just now about like the the democrats proposal on taxes i have an emotional reaction to it but it's

SPEAKER_25: fact-based i've got a hundred is it really was it my reaction or no the story yeah they just said

David Friedberg: that they the the house proposal now is to move the cap gains rate to from 20 to 25 the corporate tax rate from whatever it was to 26 and a half but it's my point is there are articles written by folks who just want to get the facts across and let you judge whether it's good or bad who knows time will tell then there are folks that basically manufacture shit because again i think and i think is matt taiby that said this because it creates moral mania drives the narrative drives the emotion but it's

Chamath Palihapitiya: the last grasp power of journalism that's all they have left at this point is just to basically make it a complete free-for-all and in it they still have some kind of relevancy i have these old new york

SPEAKER_71: times uh newspapers like the whole year printed from like 1936 through 1944 it's cool it's like in this huge book and you know but you must have been out all the time but you didn't have time to

SPEAKER_84: read those yeah i mean but you flip through these things they're like they they are they are just like old like ticker stories you know it had absolutely no like narrative attached to it there was

SPEAKER_87: no like these are the people almost the implicit right and wrong right the implicit morality of every decision that's being made of everything that's being reported on i have a feeling the only thing

SPEAKER_71: that's going to be left in like 10 years is the economist and then like the mob rule in the meta

SPEAKER_89: verse and that's kind of well i mean you also have podcasts where people can discuss these things and maybe a more um honest transparent there's still a few great podcasts like that mr mr anti-facebook

Chamath Palihapitiya: what do you think about this wall street journal article says that there's a secret cabal that basically gets to get out of jail free card on facebook and nobody else does

SPEAKER_94: there's millions of people though it's it right yeah that's a lot you work there it's exactly the

SPEAKER_96: point i've been making right which is that there's two sets of rules if you are part of the in crowd

David Sacks: if you share the cultural biases if you're part of the same class whether it's you know social economic or political or whatever that of the people who are doing the content moderation doing

SPEAKER_55: the censorship you get a get out jail free card the rules are different for you you can be rachel maddow and post an article that's complete and even after the entire twittersphere calls you out you don't post a correction but you don't get labeled you don't get censored but if you're on a different part of the political spectrum you do i mean there's two sets of rules

Chamath Palihapitiya: yeah i mean i think i think it's insane i mean this is exactly what i think people have been saying

David Friedberg: for a long time when people say oh you know it's algorithmic it's not really human controlled there's there's no real intervention and then you find out there's actually literally something called cross check which its definition is check the hue you know check the algorithm and override it

SPEAKER_46: with my own bias that's the that's the definition of what the feature is well i mean and whenever

SPEAKER_32: we start down this censorship route route like who gets to decide and then what is their motivation

SPEAKER_19: even if they have pure motivation there's no way to you know not but assume the platforms die

SPEAKER_71: assume everything de-platforms and decentralizes and then like all media is through sub stack or through the colon app or through other kind of media decentralized uh crypto based exactly there's no longer a platform there's no longer a sensor model what's going to end up happening people are going to click on the stuff that they want to hear confirmation bias it's going to become more extreme it's going to become you know even more heated there's going to be splintering of media creation as there is right now that we see today right every every element of the spectrum will be kind of produced and you're going to end up clicking on the stuff that creates the greatest emotional

SPEAKER_32: response because that's what people like to consume how does a citizen who wants to inoculate themselves from fake news bias how do you recommend they go after science and how do they have to learn this stuff for themselves they have to try to become an expert themselves yeah it's hard like anything that's

SPEAKER_71: hard right i mean there's got to be a will i don't think that that's really um it's it's not to be discouraging i just think that it's a lot easier to not do that right so it's a lot easier to consume ice cream all the time it's a lot more fun to consume ice cream all the time and to kind of plan your diet eat healthy and work out and all this sort of stuff and i think that's really where you know media like a lot of things is headed as we create these kind of feedback loops that are all because everything's digital everything ends up becoming a feedback i bet i bet you i bet

SPEAKER_29: you if you look inside because like now some rabid politician will get a hold of this facebook cross-check thing i bet you um if you look and graph the number of people that were essentially

Chamath Palihapitiya: whitelisted from being able to say whatever the hell they want versus what was popular on facebook you'd see a left versus right distribution very clearly you'd basically see it because if you look at it now i think there's a i can't remember his name but he's a he's a former new york times reporter that tweets out every day um the top 10 links that are shared on facebook and it's like a

David Friedberg: fucking train wreck it's like one normal article and then it's like nine like right-wing info wars ben shapiro daily wire it's a train wreck every day and so if you're you know a hipster sitting in east menlo park you know at some point like the cuffs in your jeans are rolled up too tight the shirt cuffs are rolled up too tight you know um and you're just freaking out and then you're like we need to create something what do we call it and we're like cross check you know and then all of a sudden what

SPEAKER_116: happens is you just start introducing people hoping that then the list that gets published every day on twitter changes but then what happens actually is you find the exact opposite thing happens that people are so like they sniff out the they're like what is going on here but then they double down and then

SPEAKER_46: next thing you know ben shapiro's nine you know eight of the ten top stories every day on facebook and that's how you have donald trump and everything else next topic well go ahead well it's gonna i mean

SPEAKER_00: i don't want to believe it themselves yeah look i i think both sides are capable of both sides of

SPEAKER_35: the political spectrum are capable of spreading misinformation and and you have to vary your information diet right i mean if all you do is participate in you know the right wing or left wing echo chamber you're gonna buy into the ivermectin hoax you're gonna be story here from

SPEAKER_122: rolling stone or whatever it is so you have to make an effort to to again to vary your information

SPEAKER_124: but or the uh lab leak theory i mean lovely theory exactly but we now have five of these during the

SPEAKER_100: pandemic alone right right but see what what i object to is the fact that these censorship rules

SPEAKER_35: only seem to apply to one side of the spectrum is look both sides are capable of spreading misinformation

David Sacks: but only one side is being censored why because the people running these powerful tech companies

SPEAKER_129: agree they're like you know 90 plus percent of that political persuasion that is not healthy

SPEAKER_48: can we serve in the audience and see if they agree raise your hand if you agree how many people uh agree with sacks that trump should be reinstated on all platforms

SPEAKER_137: all right there you go how many people agree that the tech platforms have a political bias how many disagree with that statement nobody interesting

SPEAKER_142: to tell phil do it yeah phil do it's phil do it's called his wife is the chief business officer

SPEAKER_145: facebook thanks for the viewers tell us let us check out after the next vesting date

SPEAKER_146: requisite handwritten super for the viewers at home who couldn't see that because i don't know

SPEAKER_148: do we have the audience on yeah no yeah go ahead so it was 99 percent every no everyone yeah

SPEAKER_150: everyone except for phil do these are silicon best described as silicon valley to marty so that's why

SPEAKER_151: you have to raise his hand no but to be clear for people listening phil's wife works a hundred

SPEAKER_153: percent he's got it he's got to say no it's okay it's okay 99 but everybody else here agreed with

SPEAKER_155: that and these are all people who are in the tech industry they know yeah they know so how many of

SPEAKER_157: us are democrats i mean we're all mostly democrats i would guess how many people voted democrat in the

SPEAKER_161: last election how many are not democrats how many people voted for trump raise your hand nice and hi no nobody nobody no literally there's only that's a very interesting here's a question i have

David Friedberg: okay so we are we are firmly going down because i think it's pretty it's pretty clear to me i'd be willing to make the bet that the media is on the side of vaccine mandates okay they want the top-down control and the sense of theoretical safety that a vaccine mandate gives them in their own little bubble and so that's why i think they support this and i think you know blowing up ivermectin was kind

Chamath Palihapitiya: of a method of many that they've undertaken to do that whether we believe in vaccine mandates or not

David Friedberg: but now it's coming it's coming in the la school district it's you know biden is trying to push

Chamath Palihapitiya: this thing through the bls this is going to be a very very big deal what do you guys think is the

David Friedberg: right thing to do on vaccine mandates irrespective of all we're going to hear over the next

SPEAKER_171: government government or private employer mandates or both well we should let's walk through it i'm

SPEAKER_48: using both uh for the government government employees let's start with that yeah well the

Chamath Palihapitiya: government mandate no it goes through the bls it says any company public or private that is 100

SPEAKER_48: employees or more well i mean i think we all agree that people in the military or people in health care

SPEAKER_89: they should all be vaccinated or they shouldn't come to work correct

David Friedberg: well but that's also not not even enforceable like sorkin andrew ross sorkin tweeted out like

SPEAKER_46: he had to take his kid to the urgent care and he walked in and the doctors weren't wearing masks or something yeah i read that and said something about like not being vaccinated it doesn't matter or blah

SPEAKER_179: blah blah and he like well that goes to enforcement but i mean moral liberal military has said i thought

SPEAKER_180: wait you brought your kid to the urgent care don't you first need to know what's wrong with the kid you

SPEAKER_116: can't prosecute this person's opinion on masks and vaccines before you figure out what's wrong with

SPEAKER_19: your kid well what do you think sax military military healthcare teachers i think the crux of the

SPEAKER_122: issue is whether employers should be able to require that well there's two issues one is whether um

SPEAKER_35: employers should be allowed to require it which i think everybody agree not everyone but but most people i think agree that private employers and you could lump the government with this should be allowed to um test or their employees or require their employees be vaccinated if they want to and or at least i would support that part of it is let private enterprises require vaccination if they want if they decide hey in order to come back to the office you got to be vaccinated so everyone's safety they can impose those rules now the question is do we need to go beyond that to have a federal mandate and it's not that i'm anti-vaccine i just think that's like an awfully authoritarian thing to do and it raises a bunch of of questions so for example um i have a friend who owns a chain of dry cleaners okay he's got over 100 employees mostly minimum wage in a bunch of different locations about 20 percent of his what is his ethnicity

SPEAKER_96: what does that have to do with anything just curious he's sri lankan

SPEAKER_119: anyway so he's the third most famous sri lankan american yes anyway so he's got 100 employees about

SPEAKER_35: 20 of them are anti-vax and they will not get vaccinated okay so they will walk out if you know if this is required to another job hold on but he can't run his business if there's a 20 walkout he just can't do it okay so now we get to the soft part of the mandate which is well instead of requiring

David Sacks: the vax he can do a weekly test well we did that outside here who's going to pay for those tests who's going to administer them is it like you know they had a nurse out here with the full you know uh you know hazmat yeah the hazmat thing so you know that's not cheap so how who's going to pay for that who's going to do that what's the documentation around that going to be is that get logged into a computer system what kind of proof is it does it require a trip to the lab or is this something we can do in five minutes i mean look if we had done what freeberg said a year ago on this pod we should do which is have these one dollar five minute tests be available everywhere then maybe that sort of rapid test out would make these mandates more palatable but we don't have that yet um you know there aren't enough of these things it turns out we still need it even with

SPEAKER_193: the vaccines because no vaccine is going to be 100 effective and with right but my point is since we

SPEAKER_153: don't really have that solution operationalized you know having a hard vax mandate on a hundred

SPEAKER_55: million employees of private enterprises you know that's going to cause i think chaos in the economy

SPEAKER_48: what if we get a variant david or if we get a variant god forbid that is more dangerous than delta let's say it spreads just as fast but it's five times as deadly does that change your thinking about

SPEAKER_83: this mandate and where do you stand on the mandate no i i think the mandate in this very specific

Chamath Palihapitiya: narrow instance makes sense and i think what we should be fighting about is how we actually write it so that it's not wholly expensive and the reason is because we know that there is a probabilistic distribution of outcomes where a non-trivial percentage of them results in a variant that is

SPEAKER_83: deadly and so we can understand the math and we can understand a sense of time to figure out that if

Chamath Palihapitiya: we don't do something and if we don't get to some amount of control around what this is ruin we're all in really big trouble so because of that specific thing i just think this is where you know look the president has the ability invoke the war measures act to do all kinds of things that are super normal and you know we would never say that those abide in normal times and we've created a framework for him to be able to do those things in non-normal times and then revert to normal i think this is one of those cases just because i don't think the economic consequences and the social consequences if we let this thing uh continue to compound and continue to mutate it doesn't make any

SPEAKER_48: fucking sense we're not learning anything we uh could have used the warming mandate act across two presidencies to demand some companies make a dollar test yeah we have 75 80 tests approved in germany they're down to two or three dollars why uh has the fda not uh gotten us to that level that germany's

SPEAKER_204: at and why haven't we done the war mandate act i mean we have like a constructed capitalist model of

SPEAKER_71: like let the free market tell the government what is the right thing to do and so then they invite abbott and they invite the the guys in and they're like you know the white house they have a consortium meeting and everyone's kind of a little bit chuckling about this like oh this is awesome it's another two billion dollar payday which is what they just got i don't know if you saw uh the the write-up today but the federal government is paying walmart for the difference between the wholesale cost and

SPEAKER_80: the retail cost so that consumers cannot now go buy abbott tests at the wholesale price at the store

SPEAKER_71: two billion dollars taxpayer money gone when we could have had a bunch of smart scientists get together at the white house with a bunch of engineers take over a freaking factory and on a piece of paper print 8 billion tests and then chop them up and distributed them for 50 cents and instead we have this problem where we're like depending on the korean supply i kid you not of the test kits that are

SPEAKER_87: like plastic that's where they make all the like pregnancy test kits and all this stuff and these um this like the commercial model is like tell us how you want to make these tests tell us what the right model is and of course you end up with a 30 test when in germany you can go buy a 50-cent test at any liquor store um and so it's it's constructed straight up corruption and if you go back like you know i

SPEAKER_84: don't know if you know the the production boards named after the straight into the microphone named

SPEAKER_171: after the war production board which was um set up during world war ii humble what's that it's pretty

SPEAKER_84: humble yeah um took the war out you know um but it was uh but the idea was like how do you take a system

SPEAKER_71: level uh design approach uh to solving kind of big problems and um one of the issues that we had during world war ii was a supply chain problem on making tanks and planes and so they put together a bunch of smart people don't you know this better than anyone because he was alive back he was alive

SPEAKER_84: and he was you can look at the old photos sitting in the front guys you have the hammer in the factory

SPEAKER_25: floor old as fuck and um and there was basically a coordinated effort it's his birthday today by the

SPEAKER_218: way sorry lakheim happy birthday happy birthday um but there was a coordinated effort by engineers

SPEAKER_71: at the top down to design a system for making these things cheap and fast and that's an approach that i

SPEAKER_74: think we lost right like we kind of gave way to this model of yeah laissez-faire like you come in you tell me what you think we should do okay that's a good idea let's take photos and we're out and that's it like we don't have a wartime mentality right now we haven't had a wartime mentality since

SPEAKER_71: covet hit everyone's continued to try and parade around and get re-elected and you know earn votes

SPEAKER_74: we're not taking this well we're not acting we're you know like every every time kind of a business or a government or any organization goes through a phase it goes through a wartime phase or a peacetime phase we should be acting like we're in a wartime phase and we're not can ask you a question

David Friedberg: if you may three or four of us basically putting up some money could you go and print eight billion

SPEAKER_226: of these tests in the us you cannot get them approved without the fda i'm not asking for

SPEAKER_227: approval i'm saying could you do it 100 and how long you could buy some old freaking paper mill and

SPEAKER_71: in three months i mean you know this is actually people in this room who could do this in um now

David Friedberg: isn't there a framework with an fda that basically allows you to effectively experiment on yourself

SPEAKER_71: there's a compassion there's a it's for drugs it's for therapeutics not for diagnostics so you're

SPEAKER_229: saying that if i want you can't build my own test and use it if you want to build it if you want to

SPEAKER_87: build a diagnostic test that tells them on whether or not they have an illness you have to get fda approval in the united states so that's also published the formula summary statement is regulatory capture

SPEAKER_232: like is one of the biggest issues we have and in related uh news by the way another insane statistic

SPEAKER_87: just sorry to interrupt i saw this today i forgot someone we know tweeted this the who wants to guess

SPEAKER_80: the ratio of administrators to doctors in the u.s healthcare system 300 to 1. yeah i saw it 300 to 1.

SPEAKER_74: 900 to 1 today oh my god and that is up from 5 to 1 in 1970 by the way think about that can i just

SPEAKER_229: build on what you said 900 to 1. your initial tweet said 300 to 1 and it ended in 2010 right before obamacare passed so from 300 to 900 was all obamacare yeah regulatory catcher zach's is shaking his

SPEAKER_29: head which by the way uh nothing against obamacare because i think like coming as a canadian i actually believe in subsidized health care and i think the the principle of obamacare was great but there was one fatal flaw which is it basically said okay you know what you're capped at the following margin

Chamath Palihapitiya: and the minute that people said wait a minute i can only have a 20 gross margin what do you do you just jack up prices to basically jack up revenue because if you can only take 20 you're going to take 20 of a bigger number than a smaller number and so it completely burned the incentives for any healthcare company in the united states to do anything other than just basically walk prices up

David Friedberg: and it's funny because if you look at the stock prices of these companies you you would have made

SPEAKER_83: more money being long united healthcare than you would have been uh owning facebook google any of

SPEAKER_48: these other tech companies in the last decade crazy stat uh speaking of regulatory capture tesla uh got left out of this new tax credit or proposed tax credit insane for electric cars i don't know if you saw

SPEAKER_32: that but tesla wasn't invited a couple of months ago to biden's ev summit elon responded like i wonder why i wasn't invited it turns out it's because they're not a union shop their employees make much more money than union employees make uh and now as a punishment but hold on as a punishment the twelve thousand dollar credit that they're giving to or they're proposing to give to all ev v manufacturers is only if you have union employees it's 4 500 less to tesla so literally two massive

SPEAKER_247: regulatory captures and corruption go or maybe sacks no i mean i don't have much more to add to

SPEAKER_35: that i mean you hit the nail on the head i mean this is to serve the unions it's not to serve

SPEAKER_198: uh clean energy or the ev industry i mean a little bit for ev but it's mostly for the unions

SPEAKER_29: the um on the one hand what we do is we say that climate change is this existential issue but then when the rubber meets the road if you look inside the infrastructure plan today we unveiled basically how

Chamath Palihapitiya: we're going to do all the tax credits and again it's just an enormous amount of just sloppy um regulatory capture we're doubling and tripling credits in certain places we're disallowing credits in other places when you follow the dollars what happens is you can map it to companies those companies tend to be mostly public large balance sheets large lobbying efforts and it's not necessarily the most important companies that matter so if you know if i said to you what are the most important

SPEAKER_83: companies in climate change you'd probably say well maybe it's direct air capture maybe it's nuclear

Chamath Palihapitiya: maybe it's some other thing that basically helps you go to a different place and where does all the tax credits and tax dollars go sun run sun power these are companies that basically you know have this oligopolistic hold strangle hold on essentially installing solar panels and battery walls in homes across the united states and it's not to say that that job isn't important but to basically explicitly block other people out because all the chatter today on um you know or some of the chatter today

SPEAKER_46: was around just if this bill passes as written you're going to see these stocks rip and so obviously the positive reinforcement loop of wall street and hedge funds getting behind these companies

SPEAKER_83: their market cap goes up the amount they allocate to lobbyists go up and then all this just

SPEAKER_32: continues to cycle through the system free break how far are we away from small nuclear reactors and fusion just from a science perspective and then on a regulatory basis i don't know enough i mean

SPEAKER_71: yeah i look i mean from what i've seen there there are great technologies that you know we should be able to kind of realize my understanding and speaking to investors some in this room and i know

SPEAKER_260: some of us looked at this area a lot is um you know there's the the regulatory burden that's made it so difficult to launch nuclear um technically it seems like there's great breakthroughs there was an announcement from a group this past week cfs yeah on a new um uh superconducting magnet system that they spent years designing this is a bill gates backed company anyone here an investor no uh huh no no and uh basically it enables like the tokamak plasma fusion based systems uh to be kind of reliably produced now and so they've they've had a proof of demonstration of this uh of the superconducting

SPEAKER_71: magnet system that effectively allows you to control a plasma which is like 10 million degrees celsius in a little donut that spins around and that plasma allows you to kind of pull energy out that can be used for you know effectively you put a bunch of material in this thing runs and more energy comes out that you put in it's magic um and so you know this has been a theoretical kind of concept for decades uh getting the superconducting magnet system to control the plasma in a very small space

SPEAKER_25: uh using a very small kind of system was proven and now they think that they're you know call it four or five years away you know by the way everything in nuclear is always four or five years away so four or five years away with a grain of salt uh from kind of having a demonstrable kind of system so there's technologies that are clearly like on the brink or proceeding nicely but as we know um a lot of a lot of these sorts of technology similarly are kind of regulatory burdened

SPEAKER_29: we're about 100 degrees away i think from a from a operational functional room temperature semiconductor and superconductor sorry and you know i've told a team that i'm working with on this project i don't want to go into energy generation or unless we can do it in a small form manufacturing

SPEAKER_83: thing that can be adopted broadly but if you try to go and you know basically build some distributed energy resource out over here that powers cavallo point it's impossible because you run into these people who don't really understand the science won't take the time

Chamath Palihapitiya: and you know we've taken so many steps backwards from nuclear that it's probably just going to take decades and it's going to take some cataclysmic climate change event where the only way out is this

SPEAKER_83: super abundant energy source where you're willing to basically say ah it we're otherwise by the way if you were to go to mars today you wouldn't be pulling a bunch of

SPEAKER_71: fucking you know oil out of the ground and burning it and you know rotating uh you shouldn't i mean and you wouldn't necessarily i mean you'd be using you know solar at the beginning but you wouldn't necessarily rely on solar the you know the cost of material to transport from here to mars to yield the best energy potential would likely be some sort of nuclear power source right um as it is in a lot of military system question sax elon was saved by obama i mean just kind of like having

SPEAKER_29: we were there you meaning like you know it was in that moment he was able to get that deal with daimler he was able to get these you know tax credits the the auto bailout you know all of that

Chamath Palihapitiya: stuff but then it seems like we're in the middle of a democrat administration and they may go out of

SPEAKER_35: their way to basically try to this guy i just think it's like become a special interest free for all there was an article today that the national deficit year to date is 2.7 trillion and i think that we're on october first fiscal year so there's one more month so it'll be about three trillion last year it was over three trillion because of covet there haven't gotten to the infrastructure bill yet that's gonna be another 1.2 trillion on top of that the democrats are saying they want another three and a half well not all democrats but thank god for joe manchin but another three and a half trillion and you know most people can't even really say what's in that three and a half trillion dollar bill i mean it's we're at 28 trillion something like that of national debt i mean and it's all just

SPEAKER_274: like special interest plunder well i mean if you look at the results the results aren't there correct

SPEAKER_35: yeah and then on top of that um well you know i i understand i mean with respect to obamacare okay that's a major item on let's call it the democrat wish list was to give everyone health care and we didn't even get there okay but you can sort of understand that but most people i think even on the left can't really say what the big ticket item is that's going to be delivered for this three

SPEAKER_276: and a half trillion that is proposing to be spent so um i mean it's just it it's just become this like

SPEAKER_88: you know special interest free for freeberg we talked about not having a wartime stance with the

SPEAKER_174: pandemic we don't have a wartime stance with global warming or extreme weather whichever uh term you

SPEAKER_281: want should we yeah yeah i mean we're yeah we're burning money out of like a drunken seller what's

SPEAKER_218: going on right now and actually a lot of what we're going to talk about this symposium over the next day

SPEAKER_71: or so is that there is effectively now a raging free market appetite for these solutions um the capital is pouring in the entrepreneurship is blossoming ballooning the technology is advancing so you know to some degree folks might say you know this is going to get solved but there are major infrastructure

SPEAKER_80: solutions that are needed for us to accelerate the outcome and win the war and those infrastructure

SPEAKER_71: solutions aren't going to get funded by softbank and they're not going to get funded by chamath they're going to need to get funded by the type of dollars i mean keep you keep building your book like you are you you will fund them in the next decade but sax you know kind of speaks to the kind of numbers that i think you know are necessary here i mean you think about how much money we spent on covid

SPEAKER_25: without any results over the last year it really begs the question if we were kind of to take an

SPEAKER_71: roi based approach to where are we spending these dollars this would probably be the first on the list and by the way the private market and jobs will benefit and what happened in this this this bill this infrastructure bill this past um this past year that's now been you know more kind of definitively drafted is a bunch of infrastructure jobs that are basically giveaways they're not actually solving problems with climate change they're not pushing technology forward they're not creating uh these alternatives that we're talking about they create 10x and 100x outcomes they are yesteryear solutions and they're not going to move the needle enough and so you know look i do think like it's unfortunate but the climate change war production board is needed to kind of get the kind of dollars motivated that are needed to create the kind of infrastructure to solve these problems

SPEAKER_87: despite the free market appetite the free market appetite by the way fuels the outcomes

SPEAKER_179: but it still needs uh it needs something behind it is it possible just as we're having this

SPEAKER_32: discussion here we're looking at an incompetent corrupt government that is filled with grifters who are bought and sold and then on the other side and causing massive problems that's a that's a

SPEAKER_71: mouthful i wouldn't say that people i disagree that people are corrupt and grifters i i i do think that really yeah i do think that there's a lot of good motivations i just think that the government yeah look there may be corruption but i don't think that that's the the universal truth right people are generally you you know you we've all met politicians right we've all met people which one is it

SPEAKER_137: it's it's it's a it's a point of perspective right and and there's a what's your perspective my perspective is that they're all being told by their constituents what they want and then they're doing it or by lobbyists or by lobbyists but are they supposed to listen to lobbyists at the end of the

SPEAKER_71: day the way that the the system is set up is people get re-elected by doing what they're the people that are going to vote and put the dollars and put the votes out for them are asking them to do and that's the way that this has kind of resolved itself so and by the way when the war when when wars happened you know when i guess when a war happened in the 20th century that wasn't the driving force

SPEAKER_87: the driving force was existential and it was we have to win the war and that's the that that really needs to be the mindset we all need to adopt today which is an existential mindset we need to win the war and it can't be about what my constituents are telling me what the lobbyists are telling

SPEAKER_48: me so despite this either incompetence graft or if you're more charitable you know it's a complex

SPEAKER_32: problem to solve despite all of that we have massive entrepreneurship in the country we have massive capital allocation uh at a extreme violent rate in fact a lot of that money is coming from all this money being pumped into the system so in a way do you think the only solution we have jamoth is entrepreneurs in startups who are getting large amounts of money to solve these problems because

SPEAKER_29: it's not going to happen by government obviously we have a ton of great entrepreneurs and i think that we're doing things we're doing okay so this is this is if you look at the internet in the 20 years that

Chamath Palihapitiya: we've been grinding in the internet we've had an incredible tailwind that helped us which is all these people much like the folks in this room but in different companies 10 or 20 years earlier than you are now abstracting parts of the stack so that the rest of us could use it right um and so you know i remember 2006 we were racking and stacking servers at facebook in santa clara

SPEAKER_83: me adam d'angelo like we're and i was like what the are we doing and i remember in 2008 what adam d'angelo he was our cto at the time left he started a company called quora d'angelo's like i'm building on aws and i thought he was a idiot i thought who builds on aws you build

SPEAKER_46: your own data centers now if you said that to somebody you would be the idiot right so if it's that

Chamath Palihapitiya: or if it's the tooling and the tool chains that we've been able to build on top of all of that

SPEAKER_83: abstraction and simplification has allowed an order or frankly probably even maybe two orders of magnitude

Chamath Palihapitiya: of entrepreneurship to come that's also now happening in biotech so all of that is an incredible progress the problem now is we used to be a part of the economy that was an afterthought we were over here politicians didn't need to understand they didn't need to take the time their first reaction

David Friedberg: is denial because it basically pushes up against power and that really freaks them out but now we're

SPEAKER_46: at a point where we are so integral they need to understand it better here's a perfect example last week illumina's patents expired so if you're in the business of healthcare and if you're in the business of like you know crisper gene therapy any of the stuff that actually a lot of you guys are involved in you would love for the fact that you know next gen sequencing could have a thousand flowers boom bloom 90 different methods the cost of a sequence goes down to a penny it's not possible today because you have to go through one methodology you have one company to work through you have one set of reagents or a set of reagents that one company sells and it's basically cordoned off that can't change because of technology because they can then sue you go to courts and they win and so this is where you have to interface with the government and they just need to get smarter because otherwise there's only so much innovation

SPEAKER_201: we can do before their historical legacy things like patents and ip come and bite you in the ass sex

SPEAKER_48: what do you think is entrepreneurship alone in capital allocation by aggressive you know thoughtful and

SPEAKER_89: bold capital allocators enough to solve the incompetence in washington or the graft well it's

SPEAKER_35: going to have to be and i mean here's the good news bad news okay i had a tweet that kind of went viral so when afghanistan happened you know we spent two trillion dollars 2500 american casualties 40 000 wounded and what have we gotten out of it the chinese are about to take up residence in pogrom in our splendid air force base and uh the taliban are one of the best equipped armies in the world that's basically what our two trillion dollars got us and china's going to build a superhighway right

SPEAKER_296: by the way they're going to extract all the thing where like the taliban were flying around in our helicopter it was how did they learn to fly our helicopters no it was fake apparently

SPEAKER_74: there was fake news they do have more black hawks now apparently the helicopters that were left behind are non-functional so let's just clear that up that's not true yeah they have more black hawks

SPEAKER_35: than any other army in the world except for us um i mean haven't you seen all the photos of them they're all down in our uniforms it's incredible yeah oh yeah they got our night vision goggles and the whole photos on the internet no no no there was reporting itemizing the inventory the cash of weapons we left behind it was gigantic all right let's get to the question the good news bad news okay so that that's that's the bad news that's what two trillion dollars of government spending got us um the the good news is i went back and i looked at how much money has been invested in the venture capital space over that same 20-year period that we're in afghanistan and it roughly tallied up to about two trillion dollars i didn't know that actually i just i added up the charts and about and most of it was in the last five years because there's actually been a huge acceleration and the amount of money coming into vc over the last several years the soft banks the tigers and

David Sacks: so that you've had these late stage funds the mega late stage funds so the truth is for really way

SPEAKER_35: less than i'd say a trillion dollars of you know early stage like true venture money we've been able to create the entire technology ecosystem as we see it today i mean not entire i guess go back 20 years there's five years in the late 90s so the the the private enterprise system has accomplished

David Sacks: so much with relatively so little money you compare the efficiency of it you almost wonder how did we squander so much money in afghanistan how is it possible it took active looting by many different forces to basically squander i mean think about like it literally had to burn money every bench

SPEAKER_314: venture back company at every stage test in the last 20 years that's how much money we spent in

SPEAKER_129: afghanistan i mean how much of that money went to line the pockets of private contractors and you know

David Sacks: warlords we were paying off i mean it was a giant kleptocracy okay so but the good news is look what we got for the same amount of money here you know and not just here every every private venture back company so i do think we are capable of accomplishing great things but with relatively small amounts of investment and thank goodness for that because that's the only thing that's producing anything

SPEAKER_318: our society but um but i mean it's true right but but look at what washington's about to do they want to stomp on all this innovation i mean they want to jack up the cap gains rate to the same to higher than ordinary income i mean that is the return on investment for the for the for venture capital for the kind of investment i'm talking about i mean they want to make it punitive now that's not going to pass thankfully because we got joe manchin but that's about it by the way i will i will contradict myself

SPEAKER_25: and agree with sacks i do think there will be a hundred x thousand x ten thousand x breakthrough that will resolve a lot of the challenges we face as a species on planet earth over this century so we're optimistic i'm 100 optimistic i'm actually this might that's my the the title you gave it away the

SPEAKER_71: title of my talk in the morning uh tomorrow morning um but yeah yeah i do and by the way my talk says absolutely nothing about the government and we've been railing against the government now everyone's kind of feeling sad and we sound like a bunch of old guys sitting at the starbucks talking yeah talking about the government now they suck um but at the end of the day i do think that um the ingenuity of uh the human spirit and science will resolve the problems that we face today jesus christ and we are

SPEAKER_328: not going to end up you're not going to end up in the government yeah to solve the problem all right i want to talk about one of the way we should kind of be mindful of the time questions uh from the

SPEAKER_19: audience so if you have a question i'm going to jump out there um should we do that now because we're yeah i'll just end with the ccp uh is now um moving to break up ally pays uh business this is after jack ma went on a holiday to learn how to oil paint thoughts chamath well i think this is sort of

SPEAKER_29: like one other step in what we've been talking about for a while which is that china is basically

David Friedberg: becoming a completely vertically integrated government where the public and private sector has no real clear delineation and i think that that actually has a lot of implications to us

Chamath Palihapitiya: because they export an enormous amount of technology and building blocks to us and we have no recourse if those guys either change their mind and this is sort of what pulls us into this next very complicated phase of uh geopolitics because for example if they decide to cut us off you know in ours it they will invade at taiwan i've said this before but i think that they will and we will have

SPEAKER_46: no choice except to deploy troops into taiwan because in the absence of the silicon that we need from tsmc and a couple of other manufacturers there we have zero capability here this is why you see intel

David Friedberg: i mean for any like any second when you guys hear an intel press release that says they're investing 90 billion dollars do you not think where does intel come up with 90 billion dollars right this is a pull through from us government because it allows us to start to rebuild an enormous amount of critical infrastructure that we've left to other people so you know china is systematically decomposing and basically destabilizing all the china internet companies they're going to control and inbound all of the critical resources and we're going to have to have these really hard conversations unless

SPEAKER_46: this is again why i go back to i don't believe what you said entrepreneurs are not enough of the solution we need the government to step in with intelligence not with anything other than that they

David Friedberg: don't need laws necessarily they just need to understand the problem and then or get out of the way in some cases or step in and for example like you know allow the regulatory regulatory capture to be disrupted but they won't do it because special interests and by the way special interests what

SPEAKER_116: do they spend you know if you try to donate to a congressman four thousand dollars two thousand five hundred dollars like these people aren't spending 80 million dollars to defend an 80 billion

David Friedberg: dollar business they're spending 80 000 and that's why we can't have progress that's crazy to me

SPEAKER_197: saks your thoughts on china's recent actions to basically deprecate entrepreneurship it's a

SPEAKER_35: it's a continuation of the trends we've been talking about on this show like jamaath was saying i mean they're bringing these um entrepreneurs these their moguls uh their their oligarchs under their thumb

SPEAKER_00: under the thumb of the ccp and xi jinping they're consolidating control and power and money and it's

SPEAKER_35: also about the data that was another part of the this new law is they want to get their hands on the data that um that all they control all the credit data of every single person that

SPEAKER_342: uses alipay all throughout southeast asia that's crazy and they also control everybody yeah we'll get there at the same time yeah it's crazy it's crazy if you were running the chinese government

David Friedberg: wouldn't you do the same i would do everything that they're doing which is why it's crazy to us that we are sitting here allowing it to be done to us that's what the crazy the crazy there's nothing about what they're doing doing is not illogical right what we are doing is illogical because we should have a reaction to these things we should have a point of view it can't be tacitly sticking

SPEAKER_352: our head in the sand all right who's got a question for one of the besties okay let's try and make it a tight question talk up the book jan of course these bills are incredibly wasteful but you're you guys are

SPEAKER_353: engaged so how come you're not looking through them and saying this piece i like this piece is messed up because it doesn't sound like you've read them either to be to be honest with you i haven't read

Chamath Palihapitiya: them i rely on these summaries that i get from my team and to be honest with you the legibility of

David Friedberg: these things are incredibly low and the problem is every bill that gets written now it's almost like it goes through a process if you take a two-page bullet point bill which is really what senators or congress congress people understand and approve and then out comes the other end 2 000 pages that are undigestible so you're absolutely right i don't i rely on these summaries i have zero idea what's

SPEAKER_357: really in there let's take another question yeah um i'm alex filipenko you did this poll of whether the media are right winning leaning or left leaning and the overwhelming majority said left leaning but do you think that that's in part because for four years we had been fed so many lies and so much misinformation

SPEAKER_360: from the extreme right david that question was directed to you i mean look i think there were

SPEAKER_35: plenty of polls if you go back like 10 20 30 years there's a media organization there's a guy named brent bezell who was doing studies of media bias and if you were to actually look at how people in the media

SPEAKER_00: voted it was 90 plus percent democrat i mean it's it's been it's been a thing for a long time and now it came to a head i would say during the trump administration because the the press i think in going after trump gave up something important which is they gave up their objectivity i mean they flatly would i mean it was you know whether you want to call it trump derangement syndrome or whatever i mean they now saw it as their duty not to report objectively both sides but they would just flatly declare uh things that trump were saying were false you know you still see this today i'm not saying that

David Sacks: all the things he said were true maybe he did say false things but normally if you wanted to say that one person's saying something false you would get a source on the other side and then you would quote them and then that's how you would basically construct the article and you had the press basically almost really become unhinged and i think they they kind of ripped the umpire jersey off their backs um to in order to chase after trump and i think you know ultimately they got him um trump was a one-term president but i think that it's really contributed to the polarized media environment we have now any way

SPEAKER_274: to get that referee jersey back on the press you think no no sax well how i mean they you know the

SPEAKER_253: problem is the journalism and media have changed so much the nature of press has changed yeah right

SPEAKER_71: it's fragmenting and splintering much like everything else there's um you know we talk about this at some of our companies i keep referring to our companies because i know a lot of people are here

SPEAKER_260: today but you know we talk about the fragmentation of food brands for example or the fragmentation of

SPEAKER_71: people's kind of individual media selection the same is happening in the press where you know you're now kind of going to pick and choose the five articles you want to read as opposed to buying one of three newspapers and reading everything in that newspaper each day and i think that's fueling this

SPEAKER_80: which is not necessarily in my opinion i've said this before not necessarily a constructed or design decision of the quote-unquote press but it's more a phenomenon that arises from the individuals that consume the media and they make selections and that selection bias ends up driving the clicks and the

SPEAKER_71: votes and the counts and the prints of that particular form of media and guess what we end up choosing the stuff that triggers us more and makes us feel some stronger emotion and then it creates a feedback loop and that's where this is coming from and i think it's enabled by the internet not necessarily bad actors at platform companies but it's it's inevitable in a decentralized world or a

SPEAKER_88: platformed world that's where we're going also part of the story is advertising went away as an option as google and facebook took over those markets so they went subscription and how do you

SPEAKER_247: get subscribers you pick a side you can't really go down the middle i want to feel something emotional

SPEAKER_218: when i click and buy and spend 99 cents or whatever like it's not i just i don't want to like be

SPEAKER_87: bored to death everything is so stimulating in this digital world like i want to be stimulated right so

SPEAKER_35: there's a really interesting poll that came out today that speaks to this which is um they they ask you know people on the left or the right what do you think the country's biggest problem is um on the left the number one answer was trump supporters you know so you know now on on the

SPEAKER_153: right it was a little bit more varied it was the taliban it was china you know um it was what should

SPEAKER_374: we be most concerned about objectively from each of you what do you think the top three things we

David Sacks: should be concerned about as americans i i don't think the right answer for either side is like the other half of america i think i think that happens because you haven't varied your information diet you're sitting there watching one station on cable news and you're being fed you're being basically being fed this stuff that the others demonizing the other side right and you know the other side is you know is being otherized all right let's take two more questions nico uh chamath this goes back to a

SPEAKER_380: point that you made about entrepreneurs not being enough and bringing the government i think a lot of the

SPEAKER_382: topics covered are bringing a lot of government uh support um or involvement so um from y'all's perspective how do we bring in uh maybe new incentives on the government side to bring in younger people smarter people people who are going to make better change than what we may be seeing today

SPEAKER_83: i mean if you look at country countries like singapore their solution was to elevate the role of government to be so high from a societal value perspective it was an incredibly respected role

Chamath Palihapitiya: it was well compensated and it was a thing that was a real jumping off point to other positions of true influence here we started with that idea so like you know when you think about what's what played out in

SPEAKER_83: the 1940s 50s and 60s i think we had a lot of that but then the problem was we had a handful of things

Chamath Palihapitiya: that completely perverted the cycle the cherry on the cake i think was citizens united that basically just tore the band-aid off um and we are where we are where it's not clear today that the most intellectually curious people are in government nor does it even get its fair share okay so what do you do about it i think that there's an element of it which is you have to play the game on the field which is folks like us what i would encourage all of you to do is if you're in a position to actually accumulate political power you have a responsibility to do so and it is directly

SPEAKER_46: correlated with money and so as you find come found companies and you get liquidity

Chamath Palihapitiya: you have a responsibility to be engaged because you will have a louder voice i'm not saying that it's right i'm not saying that it's fair but it's the game on the field the more you spend the more

SPEAKER_46: time you get with all these folks and you should use that beyond that we have to find a way of orienting them so once you get a seat at the table i think it's about showing them that there's

Chamath Palihapitiya: these nuanced laws that are a lot less sexy than they want to talk about but that actually have real

SPEAKER_277: impact sacks what do you think of senators getting paid like ceos would that help solve the problem if people could look at it and say well you paid a half million dollars in that job

SPEAKER_386: or a million dollars in that job would we draw a different caliber of person i wouldn't be opposed

SPEAKER_146: to that i wouldn't be opposed to people in government that the top people making more money

SPEAKER_35: i don't know that though that that really would be the thing that attracts a higher i mean i think most of those people go into it for for power and um you know the problem isn't that they're not smart i mean some of them i guess aren't very smart well you also have the lack of um you know they

SPEAKER_389: it's just they can't make money when they're in they have to figure out how to make it on the way

SPEAKER_35: out you know before so you probably alleviate some of them a pay increase is not something i would be opposed to um i mean it's something that's hard for them to do because it's easy to campaign against

David Sacks: politicians who want to pay themselves more but yeah i'd rather pay them more salary so they're less

SPEAKER_276: beholden to the special interests when they get out of office um but i don't think that by itself is

SPEAKER_395: going to solve the problem let's take another question so my question is how do we get both sides to agree right we want to get back to the truth and in science and economics we have a way to measure the truth in science design scientific experiment and you measure it against reality so you both sides can agree what's reality in economics the other make money or don't make money right you can measure it against something so what can we do to get back to both sides agreeing on what is true

SPEAKER_23: i mean i think the challenge is it takes more than 15 seconds to walk someone through the experimental

SPEAKER_260: design and the outcome and the and the action to be taken as a result same with any i mean i don't know what the viewership is of the economist but i'm pretty sure it's been going down zero right but

SPEAKER_00: this is why markets work better thank you for my subscription than politics right this is why markets

David Sacks: work rather than politics because freeberg in order for you to pursue what you want to pursue you don't have to convince a majority of the country to support it you just need to find one person who's willing to fund it you know you raise the money so and and the same is true for every startup and

SPEAKER_35: that's why progress is made by startups and not a lot of progress is made by this is actually why

SPEAKER_402: by the way that's why i don't think any of us spend time in politics even though we talk about

SPEAKER_29: it all the time no but because it influences our decision making i think politics has done more

SPEAKER_83: to rekindle my interest in all things technology and specifically web 3.0 and defy than anything else because these last four years have completely convinced me that we need to find a very decentralized

SPEAKER_71: way of building the future it's going to be ugly though i i am i am i am convinced i am convinced in the next 80 years is exactly that like you know in the physical world there's a bunch of stuff that's going to happen in the social world it's going to be related to this defy decentralization movement that's underway and it's underway because of what we're hearing about happening in china what we're talking about happening in the us and you know i mean i don't know i was like i won't give the context i was hanging out with some people the other day they were they were uh working on my house and they um they were telling me every single one of them were trading crystals uh every single one of them were trading crypto and the whole conversation really expensive on the whole the whole conversation really expensive the whole conversation was about crypto and i don't trust the us dollar and everything's inflating away and i i think politically we're not really awake to the fact that this is a broad meaningful social movement it's playing out with crypto bubbles and nfts and other nonsense but those are short-lived bubbles those are little feedback loops frothiness happening as the tide rises um and i do think that that is going to be kind of the big pushing force

SPEAKER_92: socially which david is why china said no more crypto what are your thoughts that's the big battle and by

SPEAKER_35: the way everyone's going to end up saying that let me come back to crypto just one point on on movement so there's political movements and then there's kind of uh economic movements like private

David Sacks: initiative i wrote a blog post called your startup as a movement in which i compared being i said a good startup founder is an evangelist for their cause it is almost like leading a political movement you have to go out there kind of have a stump speech and evangelize people to your cause which you know it is ideally a larger mission than just whatever you know benefits your company right this is why elon has been able to um you know frankly why he's been able to sell uh so many cars without spending a dime on marketing is because he creates a much larger movement than just what's good for tesla right but the the difference i think between uh sort of a private movement and a political movement is this is that when you're successful as the leader of a company everyone imitates you so now because elon's successful everyone else is trying to introduce their own electric cars whereas in politics whenever you start a political organization you know an equal and opposite organization will spring up to oppose you and it's just very hard to get anything done maybe that's the way it should be because we don't want people imposing their political will on us but this is why i i am a big fan of startups and

SPEAKER_276: smart young people pursuing startups and not politics what do you think about decentralized crypto you

SPEAKER_277: know finance in america should we should we allow it should we tax it well we should clearly we should

David Sacks: clearly allow it because um this whole crypto stack this whole uh decentralized finance stack that's being built could very well be the future of finance and we certainly want to be ahead of that curve maybe there's some bubbles inherent in that but i think what's really interesting there's certainly a lot of really smart engineers coders entrepreneurs who are going to that area and so i think it'd be a mistake just to discount it i think we want america to be on the forefront of that technology wave just

SPEAKER_71: like every other technology wave i'll make a prediction my prediction is in the next 20 years the defy movement will catalyze um a movement against the open internet and it is because state actors will compete with private actors for this battle between centralized institutional state-based control systems like i want to have a know your customer if you want to buy crypto in the us versus all of these offshore places where i can go and sign up get a bunch of money and trade forever and never pay the irs a cent and live my life in the ether and the open internet will start to get threatened we've seen this in the past where proxy servers and dns servers got you know requests from the doj and takedown notices and if that starts to happen where all the servers and all the fiber lines that are running in and out of the us and elsewhere start to get kind of tackled like china has a closed internet um you could start to see this become a really ugly battle that that starts to play out and i think we're not too far i mean i don't know if you guys agree but i think the open internet is kind of going to be the great battleground to resolve this well and the original battle was over

SPEAKER_28: information and now it's over money and well i think there's a really interesting point there which is

David Sacks: you know i remember the late 90s early 2000s where the big technology investing wave was all about connecting people and goods into seamless global networks and that's where all the investment went today and and behind that was sort of this utopian idea that the internet was going to break down barriers and tribalism and remove geographic borders and create a single connected world well what what exactly is the bet on crypto today it's a bet that fiat currencies are going to collapse and deteriorate be undermined by money printing the us dollar will stop being the world's reserve currency most likely that individuals need to be protected against the rise of the authoritarian state these are the big themes of crypto and if you think of major technology investing waves as essentially a prediction market on what smart people think the future is going to look like it's pretty scary that we're going from a utopian technology investing wave to a very dystopian it technology investing destroys capitalism

SPEAKER_31: you know if you think about what capitalism is it's not just a return on investment but it's

SPEAKER_29: the tonnage of dollars right so anyone who's a big investor here um i'll pick out jan because he's done an incredible job you know you're putting more and more dollars in for more and more dollars

Chamath Palihapitiya: out that's the pressure brad you know these guys are under enormous pressure to get tonnage of dollars through the system in a productive way and so you know these guys are at the forefront um but when

SPEAKER_46: you look at you know most of the projects on solana they're seated with a few million dollars and these

Chamath Palihapitiya: are 60 80 billion dollar market cap projects um and so i don't know how capitalism survives in that world number one number two governance goes completely out the window because you're essentially replacing um a set of norms that we've all agreed to about what a company is it's an llc or it's a c

SPEAKER_46: corp that is incorporated with laws there is recourse for you you can go to these places and sue them now it's a dow it's a bunch of rules written in a blockchain here's how it all works here's how i make

Chamath Palihapitiya: my hr decisions here's this here's that here's the other thing um and then you basically decompose

SPEAKER_46: everything into a service where it's recursive you cannot build with me unless you make yourself buildable to others okay so when you add all these three things together i think to me it's the most

Chamath Palihapitiya: incredibly positively disruptive force i have seen i think it will destroy wealth i frankly couldn't

SPEAKER_201: give a fuck um and i think it's better for the world let's take a final question thanks jason um and

SPEAKER_422: maybe to connect some of the dots you know i think the the power of the individual perhaps reflected in crypto has never been greater relative to the power of government right thomas friedman talked about super empowered individuals 20 years ago um whether you're a terrorist or whether you're a capitalist the power of the individual is is um never been greater the four of you started a movement earlier this year around what was going on in california right a lot of people got excited about the recall about what might come next i think where we fail as entrepreneurs where we fail as allocators is we had no strategic plan for california we have no strategic alternative plan for america the parties have platforms why don't we put together a strategic plan for the state a strategic plan for the country that brings in these folks the production board is a strategic plan for winning world war ii right and so to chamas point that it's incumbent upon us to get involved i think it's incumbent upon us to step up what it means to be involved it's not hire a lobbyist in dc it's not you know just show up and vote but i actually think that the voice that you have carries a lot of responsibility and i think that i would have liked to have seen the all-in step up and do something to catalyze a strategic plan for california right not necessarily endorse a candidate but let a candidate stand on top of that strategic plan if we really think about decentralized right you actually i'll let you roll i'm really honest

David Friedberg: with you i think why didn't you run for governor you're supposed to run for governor we don't know you fucked it up we don't we don't have as four people our act together we are still learning

Chamath Palihapitiya: because we are like anybody else in a startup you stumbled into some success there's about a million people that will listen watch consume this a week and all the polling or all of the data that you pull it's like new york san francisco dc we don't internalize that and use it for any

David Friedberg: strategic intent there's still if i could just to be honest with you they're still infighting bitching complaining you know all kinds of nonsense where if you saw the inside of it you'd be like hey dipshits wake the up get a plan together and act we don't have that brad and we disagree on a lot that's okay but what we but we we can't get we can't get away from ourselves we are learning how to do that um and we've had a bunch of instances where we've had to come together and say

Chamath Palihapitiya: hey our friendship is the most important so let's sort this out and we've always been able to sort it out we're going to get pushed to what every other you know startup founder story gets pushed to which is now what are we just going to sit here babble on for another fucking three four years through a pandemic and you know maybe you get to two million views three million views maybe spotify gives you a deal and you can make 10 20 million bucks a year who the cares

SPEAKER_83: so you're right we have a responsibility to figure out if we are for reasonable voices in the sea and people are attracted to those voices what do we use it for and we've talked about it

SPEAKER_439: but we haven't put pen to paper and finalize by the way we spend about 90 minutes a week on this podcast

SPEAKER_131: and then yeah we need to go on to our own lives and you know it's never been i also think we've also

SPEAKER_32: tried to experiment a little bit david and i collaborated on getting chessa boodin recalled but

SPEAKER_48: in different ways david sachs david sachs literally helped them start a recall chessa boodin campaign

SPEAKER_32: gary tan who listens to the pod started his own with democrats and then i tweeted anybody want to donate for an investigative journalist to cover chessa boodin's office because we couldn't find anybody covering it sixty thousand dollars showed up for that gofundme page and we just gave it to a journalist who started this week and she's reported in the first 10 days on three different like tragic cases in san francisco that have not been followed up on by the dea's office so that was just a little you know example of dipping our toes and obviously chamath you know being uh pushed to run for governor caught fire like we thought that was a joke it was literally somebody who listens to the pod put the website up he tweeted as a joke and then all of a sudden it's on cnbc but the best thing has been the feedback we've gotten from people like you brad and everybody in the audience bill gurley a lot of other people here and uh we have thought about hey what do we use this platform for in terms of making change like that i think that that'll be year two it's the right question and the right

SPEAKER_444: challenge brad it is appreciate it i appreciate it all right david we should let everybody get to

SPEAKER_71: pizza i want to say thanks to the besties to jcal tomorrow sax love you freeberg love you guys go

SPEAKER_448: and um just thanks for listening to the show thanks to friedberg if um you want to make things truly

SPEAKER_66: uncomfortable uh david loves to give a long embrace a nice hug tell him come on this motherfucker

SPEAKER_180: he there's another friend who shall not be named who is a side hugger nobody likes us who likes a

SPEAKER_456: side hugger anybody side hugging you want to get the full frontal hug when you have a frontal hug with

David Friedberg: sax right give it to him but i had to force him today because he comes into you like stand up i'll show you he comes in like this and then he does this the hip hug like he does he does kind of a hip

SPEAKER_458: that's called asperger's nice to see you it's called asperger's looks like he's going to a night at the

SPEAKER_02: roxbury i mean you look horrible thank you absolutely horrible okay appreciate it here we

SPEAKER_467: go all right let's wrap it up all right uh well this has been the all in podcast and enjoy your time at at the conference