0:00

To Mark did you go down to the breakthrough thing? It's

0:02

we get. The. Breakthrough Prize is amazing. It's

0:04

like observing exotic animals and better natural habitat.

0:07

Or friend of mine who you hung out

0:09

with down there called me. Last

0:11

night. To give me the breakdown on

0:14

all the individuals he saw and what was going

0:16

on Or them. I mean he's like I don't

0:18

even know how not and I keep getting invited

0:20

to this but like to say we were outclassed

0:22

is an understatement for a clip of got pregnant

0:24

worker. what is your regular awards debris of Rise

0:27

Up? Yeah, I couldn't make it, I got invited

0:29

to she's Only variable. Okay, first of all, shudder

0:31

to your and Juliet It is incredible. There.

0:33

Were two moments where. I.

0:36

Cried. This. Woman: Goes.

0:39

Up on stage to give an award to

0:41

the people that had made this investment in

0:43

cystic fibrosis. Yeah. And she

0:45

says. My. Child is

0:47

born with cystic fibrosis, And.

0:49

Then my second child was born with

0:51

cystic fibrosis and then my second child

0:53

died. She said that I just burst

0:55

into tears. And then

0:58

you present a war to the person that

1:00

actually is helping them. Stamp. Out

1:02

the disease we celebrated the people that found the

1:04

gene that. Cause. Parkinson's and then

1:06

the at them. Indeed, The people at

1:08

that is pretty incredible. It's an ally,

1:10

right? they did in Los Angeles. Yeah,

1:12

me like look. Yuri Milner and Julia

1:14

Milner. Zoc.

1:17

And Priscilla Chan and and Widgets and

1:19

Sergei Brin. Those six people are the

1:21

ones that organizes Breakthrough Prize and I

1:23

think it's just. A.

1:26

Modern version of the Nobel. Which.

1:28

Tries to really. Shine. A

1:30

spotlight on people doing really groundbreaking work in.

1:33

Physics. And math and life sciences. And.

1:36

So you get people that have just.

1:39

Done. Things that are just very. Practical.

1:42

And are very real. And.

1:45

I think what they do is they make. Frankly,

1:47

these kinds of achievements. Much.

1:50

More. High level

1:53

in the sense that you're bringing together people

1:55

from Hollywood and people from Silicon Valley and

1:57

the awareness is up and it's just incredibly

1:59

well produced. than. Yeah,

2:01

it's really a cool thing to be a part of. But I

2:03

mean, seeing some of these

2:06

people are very intimidating. I sat beside

2:08

Vin Diesel. Oh,

2:11

really? That was super cool. He

2:13

is a super nice guy. And

2:16

on the other side of me was someone that

2:18

actually Sax knows Toby Emmerich, who's, uh, who's the

2:20

chairman of Warner Brothers. So just

2:22

talking to these guys was super cool. Moving

2:24

it to Los Angeles was a great move.

2:26

Great idea. Yeah, it's just I was invited.

2:28

I couldn't so sorry. Thank you to Julia

2:30

and Yuri for

2:32

inviting us again. But it's really

2:35

great that they're giving

2:37

it the celebration it deserves and

2:40

making it, you know, like, dare I

2:42

say, sexy and cool and hip to

2:45

be a scientist and solve the world's biggest

2:47

problems. I think it's just so awesome. And

2:49

you're right. Sergey Brin, Anwojecki, Sakha

2:54

Priscilla, and Julia and Yuri are

2:56

the founders of the Breakthrough

2:58

Five. The easiest thing is they give a

3:00

they give a youth Breakthrough Award. So the

3:02

Breakthrough Prize is this beautiful globe. And

3:04

then the junior winner gets like a

3:06

smaller version, very appropriate. And it

3:08

was a video of this kid in India

3:10

who had wanted a few years ago, and

3:13

then went off to MIT, and

3:15

then graduated. And then

3:18

the video is of him coming back to

3:20

Bangalore, because his sister had

3:22

won this year. And he

3:24

presented to the sister. And all I could

3:26

think of was, this is

3:28

an incredible achievement by like a 16

3:30

year old. And literally at the

3:33

same time, my 16 year old

3:35

was like, dad, the chicken tenders from

3:37

DoorDash. I

4:00

said give me the spicy. Fries not

4:02

the regular. Kids. Brides the

4:04

girl that one is that would free

4:06

bird did something with Yamanaka factors. Result.

4:10

It's like it's really incredible and inspiring. But.

4:13

Fortunately, Dory. My. My sixteen

4:15

year old was able to get the chicken tenders

4:17

and everything was forced to sell Can Can just

4:19

because. Rerouted it sucks

4:22

get guess it's answers

4:24

were treated as similar

4:26

as a. Bit better the

4:28

other the everything else is. The. Person

4:30

that performed is really amazing. Frawley Peace and

4:32

and the reason I say it as. If.

4:35

You google. Charlie.

4:37

Puce. This

4:39

guy. He's a young guy. In.

4:42

His early twenty's I'm guessing she is so talented.

4:44

There's all these videos of Trolley Peace where. He'll.

4:47

Make a random noise like killed clink a

4:49

coke bottle with a fork. And

4:51

then he'll recorded. And. Then he'll put

4:54

it into these digital editing tools. And

4:56

then he'll make like of entire five minutes

4:58

song using that as the base. Like.

5:01

As the basic. Building. Block. The

5:05

guy is so. Talented.

5:08

and was was very it was a very

5:10

cool then fantastic. How. You doing sachs

5:13

your body? Gets distorted.

5:17

Earnest folks were back to

5:19

the reality show. let's go

5:21

to their fuckers time. With

5:24

my guns, pants or thousand people soon

5:26

as the banter of a mentor bro,

5:29

how you doing free Berkeley, I lula

5:31

seen from the movie? Mouth.

5:35

Work strong! Start your the girls a

5:37

contribution. The. I got

5:39

to shrug from Freiburg, I gotta. Grind.

5:42

When I started from Saxon I'm talking about

5:44

my backrest with got. Anything good

5:46

on the menu tonight? Your mother just one uncommon

5:48

of poker ones you know there's an octopus. Ah,

5:52

To the Greek comes back. And. You

5:54

get the octopus on. Get the octopus. I'd say

5:56

that I miss you. Yeah he did. By the

5:58

way, Shot experimented with some. Green. Tea

6:01

that you grill that was pretty delicious.

6:03

Five billion back ability coloring. Are.

6:05

Editor. Who. Was a

6:07

plural Octopuses Octopi. Party.

6:10

Licensing creatures or something. Hulu.

6:12

Me or you know what is interesting? You bring

6:15

that up. I. Had a

6:17

grilled octopus stand. that one of our

6:19

events in somebody who. Is.

6:23

The. Are conscientious, Consumer.

6:25

Of calories. Lobby

6:27

me to take. The. Grilled

6:29

octopus off of the many. I

6:32

would say help. For. What What we

6:34

was. I. Got lobbied

6:36

very strong. Not only is it

6:38

deeply wrong. To. Eat every I'm

6:40

at that young people eat and you

6:43

will one day realize it. Or your

6:45

children. Are your children, children or realize

6:47

it. But octopus in particular have the

6:49

I Q afforded a year olds. they

6:52

can actually sign. They can communicate. They.

6:54

Can solve problems. Are you

6:56

can watch you tube videos on this? It's pretty

6:58

incredible. They're amazing creatures. It's also why in the

7:01

movie The Arrival. The. future

7:03

alien race is made out to be

7:05

cephalopods because they're the most. Advanced.

7:07

Creature that likely to become a civilized.

7:10

Form. As Humans in excess. Of one

7:12

word reaction to the. Young.

7:17

Anything. About

7:23

art are. At

7:26

the same like yours. like the spice up

7:28

with the fat content you know it or

7:30

kind of like that marveling that it's the

7:32

margins. The Murrah building, Omnibus, Zarganar. Oh yeah

7:34

by the way Thanks guys yeah I'm fine.

7:36

yeah I'm great. I'm feeling great your the

7:38

truth is he all the got the anyone?

7:40

could you been eating? Well. So

7:43

I just only things with above one hundred twenty. are

7:45

you off the would go be earth the somebody call

7:48

it no no you don't I did was I got

7:50

off the would go be so I could eat more

7:52

animals. And has been added Getting

7:54

Back On A Society. Also half a bottle

7:56

about how many apps? how is it on

7:58

that? I hate everybody. Generally.

8:00

I'm sorry, but in yoga. If

8:03

you eat. High I Q

8:05

Foods doesn't make you smarter? Absolutely

8:07

Absolutely. This is why the Greeks

8:09

invented so many things. We invited:

8:11

Bath, plumbing, cities, democracy, all the

8:13

great things The Greeks. Created.

8:16

Comes from the fact that we ate so

8:18

many high I Q creatures. Cracks are you

8:20

able to be vegetarian? Were able to find

8:22

good vegetarian or vegan options in Austin. Who

8:26

tried to make the I. Have

8:29

a huge ice the events through. I push it

8:31

on. hey. I'm. Like

8:33

wait a second day goes on, a seafood

8:35

died in Austin of his ass off or

8:37

the a that you're not over but. It's

8:40

not inaccurate. The barbecue he

8:43

in Austin is so spectacular.

8:45

Terry Blacks beef ribs. I.

8:48

Had with a friend of ours, Bad

8:50

Marriages Dynamite and then the Salt Lick

8:52

Brisket. Franklin's. Brisk and mean

8:55

it is just extraordinary shot at home. I

8:57

burped folks there and sorry for triggering every

8:59

animal that wasn't. Button. Down.

9:02

Shirt and on the Saturday and barbecue

9:04

sauce and. Sedona.

9:07

Broke out the rent was the bison. I'm sorry

9:09

I was way apologies the audience it took out

9:11

a tooth at. you know as far as I

9:13

feel worse it what does a bison referees and

9:15

because it tastes like Matt as it is it's

9:17

the beef. Ribs are very tender, the bisons got

9:19

a little more chew to it's that little more

9:22

tax for yeah he and his and and they

9:24

let this thing go. At the Salt

9:26

Lick. For. Like twelve hours

9:28

and they're just. Barbecue.

9:30

Sauce and it forever so little chewy, Until.

9:33

After got the tooth. But. Great

9:35

job Free bird on moderating. Episode was fantastic.

9:37

Yes, I was something on the bit. quite

9:40

literally. Sachs to talk about sums it up.

9:42

Shopping. On the bit to the point out that a shutter to

9:44

sooth. I have asked and I have

9:46

so much m I miss you guys!

9:48

I actually miss y'all Freiburg! So much

9:50

good stuff happening with the summit and

9:52

I. Am delighted that Johnny's doing

9:55

all this work. You're doing. all this work.

9:57

I can just sit back. And

9:59

enjoy. It so tell us is or an update

10:01

on the summit. There. You just clicking

10:04

your coupon. But. The

10:06

yeah we had within. Seventy

10:08

two hours. I think we had more

10:10

applications than we have seeds, but we're

10:12

still leading applications open and in the

10:15

next week will start to. Respond.

10:17

To people so. Basically. If

10:19

you're interested in going to Summit, Sign.

10:22

Up Now get your applications in the sweet

10:24

Apply early in his the key yeah cause

10:26

it's gonna be done in order of one

10:29

it's received. And they're going

10:31

to start processing applications this week. We'd

10:33

love to. Get. Everyone wants

10:35

to show up. shot and if you went in the

10:37

past. Your. Registration.

10:40

Window. Is wrapped up this week so. But.

10:43

The rest of us and I automatically get

10:45

in Alumni automatically are in a can tell

10:47

all about scholarship because I'm getting bombarded in

10:50

everybody who's and up and coming all in

10:52

fan or going on outside a couple weeks

10:54

so a plane yes he he will still

10:56

do scholarships because I think they were super

10:59

successful and helpful to people that otherwise couldn't

11:01

afford the ticket. I know it's expensive this

11:03

year but the reason was we actually spent

11:06

a lot more per person last year. Than.

11:08

People actually type of it is so it's less

11:11

intense, some it we're we're we're trying to get

11:13

the price to so that we can make make

11:15

the same break even. And. We're

11:17

gonna scholarship tickets with the balance. South.

11:20

To be a couple speakers come in. there's

11:22

to know about it yet. but I'm not.

11:24

Come on. just can we just tell the

11:27

two speakers who said yes, No yes I'm

11:29

not yet. Will doing an act made it

11:31

a big speaker and I think it's gonna

11:33

be awesome in a week in week. will

11:35

announce a bunch together message. but one thing

11:37

I don't want to wait on is today

11:39

socket because it is unbelievable. Welcome everybody to

11:41

Episode One Seventy Five. That's right,

11:43

Zappa. So one seventy five of

11:45

your favorite podcast and. The.

11:48

Largest and most listen to podcasts in the

11:50

world. Officially Episode One Seventy Five New Holland

11:52

Podcast starts right now. And. Asked.

11:55

the get some recently made about les mis of the

11:58

largest most listen to podcasts in the room I'm

12:00

manifesting. Oh, you're manifesting.

12:02

I'm manifesting. I'm off. Just

12:04

like, just like Fel Helm Youth is the

12:06

world's greatest poker player, and then we watch

12:08

Robo roll over him. Is that a new

12:10

word that narcissists use for lying? Manifesting?

12:13

No, it's just like the

12:15

world's greatest poker player, and then we see Fel

12:18

Helm Youth get dominated by

12:20

Jason Kuhn. Just so you know, tonight

12:22

is a murderer's row, and Helm Youth

12:24

is flying back. You saw the lineup.

12:26

I'm very excited to see what happens to that. Is

12:28

Jason Kuhn coming or no? Yeah.

12:31

I mean, Kuhn and Robl, and then the world's

12:34

greatest Helm Youth playing is so great to watch.

12:36

It's like a meta ego battle. It

12:39

is. And those, you know, it's interesting. Two of those three

12:41

guys are like the most humble guys you

12:43

would ever meet in

12:45

your life. Am I correct? In your life. Just,

12:48

you could not be more low key and self-effacing

12:50

than Robl and Kuhn for how good they are. If

12:54

you were honestly going to rank the three of them

12:56

in a high stakes cash game, could you just

12:58

handicap it for the audience? Because we are

13:00

in a lucky position, you and I, to

13:03

play with these three epic players in the

13:05

world. Break down

13:07

how they play in a home game, you know,

13:09

like ours. So

13:15

I would say the most dynamic

13:19

range would probably be Robl, because Robl

13:21

has the most experience playing super, super

13:23

high stakes cash. I

13:26

think Kuhn is the most precise

13:32

and like

13:35

true to GTO. Part

13:37

two exploit. I mean, Kuhn is impossible to

13:39

exploit. Impossible. No

13:41

mistakes. No mistakes. No

13:43

mistakes. Robl knows how to gamble in certain spots. Kuhn

13:46

knows how to be unexploitable. And

13:49

the third player is from obvious. And

13:51

the third person just loses his mind. And

13:55

instead of... Now

13:57

The thing with Talby says he's capable. Like

14:00

anyone I've ever seen a folding. In

14:02

spots that are and and she's correct By the way,

14:04

I've seen how me for. A King

14:06

and Spots had none of us would ever do

14:08

it. As scene unfold, Kings and spots that are

14:10

basically impossible. So how means is able to get

14:12

the soul read Some people. that I mean. Are.

14:16

Amazing. Yeah, but. Look

14:18

as the the. The. Higher

14:20

and higher the steaks get. The.

14:22

More and more I think Robot will be

14:25

comfortable and and coon will just go to

14:27

a playbook that he knows and trusts. I'm

14:31

I'm so excited to be back at the

14:33

game tonight. Or it. listen. The.

14:35

Docket is so great! This week we got a great

14:37

classic all and Doc and I want to start with

14:39

google. Firing. Twenty eight employees

14:42

who were involved in this protest at

14:44

their offices. We. Didn't think that this

14:46

would happen. You're having a discussion on the group chat.

14:49

On. Tuesday about a dozen employees engage

14:51

incidence of the company's offices in Sunnyvale,

14:53

a New York City. Protesting.

14:56

The. Conflict. In. The Middle

14:58

East between Israel and. Palestine.

15:01

And so they took over. Literally

15:04

to have the offices of the as

15:06

Ceo of Google Cloud and nine employees

15:08

were arrested after refusing to leave. The

15:10

protests was organized by a group called.

15:12

Know. Tech for Apartheid. And.

15:15

They posted a bunch eclipse. Of.

15:17

This sit in on acts. Those

15:19

twenty eight employees were. Fired.

15:22

On Wednesday after a quick investigation,

15:24

the Vp of Global Security. Was

15:27

pretty direct and candid am in.

15:29

This is based. He

15:31

took over office spaces, defaced our property,

15:33

and physically impeded the work of other

15:36

Googlers. Behavior like this has no place

15:38

in our workplace and will will not

15:40

tolerate it. If you're one of the

15:42

few who are tempted to think we're

15:45

going to overlook conduct that violates our

15:47

policies, think again. So. What

15:49

were the protests about? Google is are

15:51

involved in a project Nimbus a one

15:53

point two billion dark cloud contract with

15:55

Israel's government. Both. Google and Amazon or

15:57

involved in the project which was in as and twenty.

16:00

Twenty One Google has denied it was doing

16:02

work for the military. Saying.

16:04

It was working with department's like fine, it's

16:06

healthcare transportation. There's a lot of detail so

16:08

this, but let let's start with you free

16:10

broke since you were a Googlers and we've

16:12

been talking about the culture of Google putting

16:14

aside what the protests were about. How

16:17

do you feel about. Protests in

16:19

the workplace. We talked about it before

16:22

here with coin base and others. And.

16:24

Then. Is.

16:26

This. A distinct change in

16:28

tone that I'm hearing from Google that

16:30

they've had enough. Of Social

16:33

Activism at the Office. I'm

16:38

yeah, there's obviously a line crossing. An

16:40

old. The. View of

16:43

security but. I did.

16:46

You. Could look at a two ways. You.

16:49

Could look at us as being a culture

16:51

of entitlement. That led

16:53

folks feel that our employees that they

16:55

have permission. To

16:57

stage sit ins and behaviors. I

16:59

this because google is so. Infinitely

17:02

tolerant. Man and giving

17:04

employees. The space and the.

17:07

Room. To do whatever they want to do and

17:09

all of their wishes and demands can be met and

17:11

will be met. If they demanded

17:13

strongly enough. That's. One

17:16

way to look at this and that back. culture. Manifested.

17:19

This behavior. Another way to

17:21

look at it is that these people feel so

17:23

deeply, strongly and passionately about the issue at hand.

17:25

That. They were willing to risk their jobs. And

17:28

Arrest. And. They care so deeply about

17:30

an issue that they think know and pay enough

17:32

attention to that they're willing to put themselves in

17:34

sacrifice themselves for. So. I

17:36

want to be empathetic to that point of view.

17:39

As well. but I do think that there's.

17:43

A. Belief that there may have been this kind of.

17:46

Entitlement culture where any time Google employees

17:48

ask for stars, they get it. Someone

17:50

told me the other day. How

17:52

are T G I asked the google now what

17:54

they do these all hands and people get ask

17:56

questions. This person is kind of executive level. They're

17:58

so sick and tired. of how

18:01

every question is all about employees asking

18:03

for more things that they want. So

18:06

it's like, when are we gonna get this bonus? When

18:08

are we gonna get this, yeah, when are we gonna

18:10

get this, that so much of the orientation of being

18:12

an employee at Google is all about what Google can

18:14

do for me and how

18:16

I can get more. And that becomes

18:18

what you ask for. It's like you give a kid something, you

18:21

give them candy, they're always asked for candy. And

18:24

I think that there is certainly an element of that

18:26

culture kind of being frothed

18:29

up over the years at Google. But I do think

18:31

that this is an issue that people care very passionately

18:33

at right now and you're seeing it all over the

18:35

place. So certainly

18:37

not- In the same week we had the

18:40

Golden Gate Bridge get shut down, the

18:42

Bay Bridge gets shut down as well. Chamath,

18:44

your thoughts on these protests and then

18:46

obviously the entitlement issues that

18:48

Freeburg alludes to specifically at

18:50

Alphabet slash Google. They're

18:53

two separate things and I think it's

18:55

important to deal with them individually. Groups

18:59

of people in society in a democracy should

19:01

have a right to protest. That's

19:04

absolutely fundamental and I think

19:07

they can raise a lot of issues that could otherwise get

19:09

swept into the carpet. When

19:11

that stuff impedes the public functioning

19:13

of society for other people, then

19:16

I think there's a responsibility for

19:20

law enforcement and other people to act and

19:22

make sure that that is better

19:25

managed. So shutting down

19:27

an entire bridge is not

19:29

only disruptive, it can be really dangerous.

19:32

Of course, and it can hurt your cause because

19:34

then people dislike the cause because it hurt

19:37

them. Typically what happens is you're

19:39

supposed to file for a permit to protest and

19:41

when you get that, there are areas that are cordoned

19:44

off and then people are allowed to express their views.

19:46

That's a really healthy form of democracy. Going

19:48

rogue like this will only blow up in people's

19:50

faces because the folks that are somewhat

19:53

sympathetic will eventually get burned by this experience

19:55

and turn against them. So that's

19:57

one set of issues. I think that's just people

19:59

going. rogue and I think that you can't

20:01

be tolerant of that kind of chaos. There

20:03

should be organized protests but not

20:06

disorganized chaos. And law enforcement needs

20:08

to get a control of that. Inside

20:10

of a company, I think this is different. It's this

20:12

weird thing that I see, which is like what I

20:14

would call like left on left violence. It's like left-leaning

20:17

people creating all

20:19

of these distractions and demonstrations inside of

20:22

left-leaning organizations for not being left leaning

20:24

enough. And

20:26

so it's kind of like a little bit nutty

20:29

because I think it actually shows

20:31

how totally naive these employees are

20:34

and what basic business understanding they

20:36

have. The first and

20:38

foremost being that they are at will employees.

20:41

These are not people that are contracted players

20:43

in the NBA or are part

20:45

of a union, okay, where you

20:47

have guaranteed employment through some mechanism or

20:49

some arbitration process to even be let

20:51

go. The fact that you don't

20:54

even understand that you are at will means that you are

20:56

there because you want to be there. And Google allows you

20:58

to be there because they choose for you to be there.

21:00

And at any point, if either of you break a covenant,

21:02

you can be gone. That

21:05

kind of stuff, I think, is very distracting

21:07

and it just belies a poor understanding of

21:10

what you're there to do. Google is a

21:12

for-profit business and they are in

21:15

the business of generating maximum profit on

21:17

behalf of their shareholders. They are also

21:20

incentivized to do that in a way that achieves

21:22

a mission and a set of values that the

21:24

majority of their employees

21:26

agree with. And the

21:28

fact that a small cohort of people can

21:31

try to hijack and sabotage that overall

21:33

direction, I think, is very

21:35

misguided. Sacks,

21:39

I don't know if you have any opinions on this. I

21:41

didn't see anything in the docket. I'm not sure if you

21:43

have any strong feelings here. But your thoughts

21:45

on Google employees and the protests, putting

21:48

aside the nature

21:50

of the protests. This could be for

21:52

BLM. This could be for Trump's indictments.

21:54

You could be protesting any number of

21:57

things. But the protesting at work issue

21:59

and then Google's The civically which we

22:01

talked about. With. A Gemini your

22:03

shoes and. Your. Job this stuff

22:05

bleeding over into product getting free. Bird said

22:07

it really nicely. Hey

22:09

are or people. Actually focused on products

22:12

and cool anymore or is the

22:14

whole place? Just focus on

22:16

social issues that have nothing to

22:18

do with their waning apparently products

22:20

and. Why? He got no choice

22:22

but to fire these employees. They were

22:24

being disruptive and they were trespassing and

22:26

good was a business or on. So

22:28

this is what any business would do

22:30

and I don't think they deserve either

22:33

credit or blame. For. Taking

22:35

the actually tough. And. Sorts of

22:37

the protesters themselves. I

22:39

think that. In

22:41

the fullness of time we may come to

22:43

think of them. And a slightly different

22:46

light. And some of this reminds

22:48

me a little bit of of another

22:50

war, The Protesters, and another war. The.

22:52

Vietnam War. Where. They

22:54

were very disruptive. In some cases

22:56

they trespass. In some cases they got

22:59

arrested. They. Were easy to make fun of

23:01

in terms of what they look like they were serve

23:03

and. Camped on saving all the rest

23:05

of that suffer hippies. And

23:07

at the time people were I'd say

23:09

very dismissive of them or actually antagonistic.

23:11

There are seen as giving aid and

23:14

comfort the enemy and they were. Sort.

23:17

Of demonized. But. Now in the

23:19

fullness of time, we look back on that war

23:21

and realize that than a point of fact, maybe

23:23

they were right. In fact,

23:25

maybe their actions were justified.

23:28

And I think that's. How we view

23:30

these protests were google since Be does now I

23:32

think it's def be judged on the full time

23:35

based on. How. We perceive this war in

23:37

Gaza. And. I want to make

23:39

two points about why I think this

23:41

war will eventually be viewed as Israel's

23:43

Vietnam. The. First is that.

23:46

In. Gaza, Israel faces. A.

23:50

A guerrilla style. Force.

23:53

At. Their en o'clock Meyer. And if

23:55

you read the latest news that's coming out

23:57

of Gaza, While. You're here. That.

24:01

After Israel has supposedly cleared in

24:03

the area like Gaza City or

24:05

Khan Yunis, they then move south.

24:07

Hamas has pop back up again. This

24:10

whole idea that they can clear and area. Has

24:12

been proven False is like playing Whack A Mole.

24:15

They. Basically hit a mass in one area. I'm

24:17

asked. disappears down the tunnels, they come back in

24:19

a different area and this is why you're seeing

24:22

a lot of articles now in horror as switch

24:24

the Israeli newspaper saying the war in Gaza is

24:26

ready last. You. Had the Wall Street Journal.

24:28

Last. Week run an article. Saying.

24:31

That Israel is winning every

24:33

battle, but losing the war.

24:36

Which. Is the weekend shades

24:38

of Vietnam? Hear? And understand

24:40

the was You Journal is the most

24:43

pro israel of all the major mainstream

24:45

publications. I don't think the most you

24:47

girls ever written a truly critical. Article.

24:49

About Israel and they described as

24:51

Guatemala. Dynamic. You. Also

24:53

have the general. Dot. The I's

24:55

and cop whose as. A member of.

24:58

The. War cabinet is members of the sort

25:01

of war government. In Israel came

25:03

out and said that we can degrade Hamas

25:05

in Gaza but we cannot destroy it. And.

25:08

He said anyone who's telling you that we can story.

25:10

Hamas. Is tell you a tall tale

25:12

and that was I think, an appointed reference

25:14

to Netanyahu's claim that they would destroy. Hamas.

25:17

In Gaza. So. You've. Got seeds

25:19

of Vietnam In terms of a being this on

25:22

winnable war I think the second aspect. Of

25:24

of a similarity to Vietnam is

25:27

just the you summer civilian casualties.

25:29

You. Recall that in Vietnam the Vietcong try

25:32

to grab a spy the belt buckle. They

25:34

knew that America had superior firepower, so they

25:36

tried. To. Get in close. Use.

25:39

Ambushes, booby traps, snipers and

25:41

in response to that. The.

25:43

Americans used immense amounts of

25:45

firepower and bombing to try

25:47

and subdue the Vietnamese, and

25:49

three point, four million. Vietnamese.

25:52

Were killed in that war according to

25:54

our Robert Mcnamara. The.

25:56

second thing that happens the rules of engagement

25:58

in vietnam got extremely li You

26:00

took a bunch of scared American kids, many of

26:03

whom were conscripts, you dropped them in a jungle,

26:05

pretty much because they feared ambushes, they

26:07

shot anything that moved. And

26:10

then finally, I think, partly to justify this,

26:12

you had a

26:14

dehumanization of the Vietnamese that they

26:16

were seen as somehow kind of

26:19

subhuman. In any event, if you

26:21

watch movies about Vietnam, like Platoon, which was

26:23

made by Oliver Stone, who was a GI

26:25

in Vietnam, or if you watched

26:28

Stanley Kubrick's masterpiece Full Metal

26:30

Jacket, which was based on

26:32

books about Vietnam, you can see these dynamics

26:34

in play very vividly. Now,

26:36

turn to Gaza. All you

26:38

got to do is look at the miles and miles

26:41

of video to see. It

26:43

looks like a lunar surface. I mean, even

26:45

in the words of Joe Biden, there's been

26:47

indiscriminate bombing there. In terms of the rules

26:49

of engagement, the rules of engagement have gotten

26:51

very loose. A week or two ago,

26:53

you had the deaths of those seven aid workers from the international

26:57

kitchen organization. And

26:59

there's an article in Heretz recently about the kill zones

27:01

have been set up pretty much. If

27:04

you come within a certain invisible perimeter of Israeli

27:06

troops, you can be shot. I mean, those are

27:08

the rules of engagement. And this is why there

27:10

were three Israeli hostages who escaped,

27:13

and they were running towards Israeli troops and yelling

27:16

in Hebrew, and they still got shot. And again,

27:18

this goes back to the rules of engagement being

27:20

very loose. And then the final

27:22

piece of it is you do have this

27:24

dehumanization going on of the Palestinians. You

27:26

can see this in a lot of the videos that

27:28

have been posted by IDF soldiers. So look,

27:31

I think that these

27:33

protesters, their actions are going to be judged

27:35

in the fullness of time. I think

27:37

there are actually good reasons to

27:40

believe that Israel's war

27:42

in Gaza, its shades of Vietnam. And

27:44

I think that over the long term,

27:46

people may regard these protesters in a

27:49

different light. They're being

27:51

disruptive and annoying and

27:53

interfering. But if this

27:55

war ends up being Israel's Vietnam, which

27:57

I think it's on track to be. Again,

28:00

I think that people may in time give these protesters

28:02

a little bit more credit. Jay,

28:05

what do you think? Interesting

28:07

question, you know, putting aside what they're

28:09

protesting about, I think they knew

28:13

or some number of them knew they were going to

28:15

get fired. So I think they're kind of resigning by

28:17

sit-in. And I think, yeah,

28:20

there could be nobility to that. If you

28:22

do not want to participate in

28:24

supporting things in the world, you do not have

28:26

to work at Google and you can protest and

28:29

you can get fired. And we've

28:31

seen some pretty intense protests. I don't know

28:33

if you guys are aware of what Greenpeace

28:36

and other environmentalists did to stop whaling. I'm

28:38

sure you are aware, Friedberg, for your

28:40

passion on the subject. Those

28:42

people went to jail in Japan for

28:45

boarding Japanese whaling ships. Those

28:47

are really intense protesters. But

28:49

then to your point, Chamath, you

28:51

can really hurt your cause. Climate

28:55

activists have been throwing paint on works of art. I

28:57

don't know if you've seen that. And that's just infuriating.

29:00

Like, I have no tolerance for people

29:02

destroying works of art or attempting to

29:04

get attention. Here it is

29:06

benign to sit in an office and

29:09

get fired. So I just consider it resigning by

29:11

sit-in. If they want to do that, that's fine.

29:14

I do think there is something to Google enabling

29:16

all this, to your point, Friedberg, over

29:18

time. And listen,

29:20

they were parodied on

29:22

Silicon Valley, the TV show, because

29:24

of how coddled and entitled people are.

29:27

So there's a bunch of things going

29:29

on at the same time. And

29:31

if you want to do these intense protests, you have

29:34

the right to do them. And history

29:36

will judge you over time. But you need

29:38

to be able to pay the price. In

29:40

this case, the price is getting fired. In

29:43

the case of shutting down the Golden Gate Bridge, you

29:45

should get a fine for doing that, I believe. And

29:47

the fine should be based on whatever that costs to shut

29:49

that bridge down. And

29:51

that's got to be a serious fine. And

29:54

you're right, Chamath. If there's an

29:56

emergency situation, somebody's got to get to a hospital

29:58

or something. That's what I always... think about

30:00

when I see those things when you block streets

30:02

and stuff or you block airports or you block

30:05

these throughways, there's a lot of

30:07

just normal everyday people trying to live their life

30:09

who are probably very sympathetic to what

30:11

you stand for. But when you

30:13

disrupt their everyday lives and or threaten

30:15

their physical security,

30:18

they're not going to think that that's worth it. I'm

30:22

also shocked that these people actually came to

30:24

an office. I mean, these Googlers, I don't

30:26

think they've actually been to an office before.

30:28

They probably had to check that their badges

30:30

weren't. To Saksa's point, I actually would have

30:32

had more respect for these

30:34

people if they actually protested the

30:37

war. But they didn't do that.

30:39

They had a very discreet, specific claim,

30:41

which was that they wanted to dissolve

30:44

a business deal that Google had to

30:46

provide cloud services to the state of

30:48

Israel called Project Nimbus. And I

30:50

think that's such a discreet

30:52

thing that it's hard to understand

30:54

that those 28 people would have

30:56

even enough knowledge of what that is. But

30:58

it sounds like a cloud hosting

31:01

deal. Well, what's hosted there? And

31:03

it could be any number of things. And I

31:05

suspect if it's a billion dollar a year deal,

31:07

it's many things. It's probably like the Israeli DMV.

31:09

Is that really what you want? And

31:11

I think that it would have been much of

31:14

a more powerful thing

31:16

to do to protest the actual war if

31:18

that's what they cared about. You know, dovetails

31:20

nicely with the discussion you all had last week

31:22

about would you back a

31:25

not a defensive, but an offensive

31:27

weapons company, a technology company. And

31:30

it seemed like you all had

31:32

reservations on if you would not

31:34

back a defensive one, anybody, I think,

31:36

reasonably would back a defensive,

31:39

you know, dome or interception of bombs coming

31:41

in. That's an easy one. But

31:43

going around the horn here, how

31:45

many of us would back a

31:48

company making missiles or

31:50

bombs that blow people up or

31:53

mines? Would you back a

31:55

robot that had weapon systems on

31:57

it? I think if you want to summarize what we

31:59

said last week. week. It's like there

32:01

are all kinds of businesses where you'll end up investing

32:04

in it and over time as

32:06

it morphs, some

32:08

of us will be faced with some of those decisions and

32:11

it'll frankly depend on what is the

32:13

alternative in that moment. So

32:15

I don't think anybody of

32:18

us are going into go

32:20

and build a nuclear bomb but you should

32:22

not be naive that if you're building nuclear

32:24

reactors, you could

32:26

end up being in a situation where that

32:28

thing gets licensed into a thing that you

32:30

either agree or disagree with. So this

32:33

is my point is I think that those

32:35

kinds of answers or those kinds of questions

32:39

are missing the nuances and the nuances are

32:41

very important. So it's impossible to answer this

32:43

question in a thoughtful way I think would

32:45

be my honest answer. Okay, Sacks, any

32:48

closing thoughts here? Well,

32:51

I think Chamath brings up

32:53

an interesting point about why didn't the

32:56

protesters just focus on the war itself rather than

32:58

Google doing business with Israel. My

33:00

interpretation of that is they're trying to create a nexus to

33:03

themselves, meaning they're employees of

33:05

Google. They're trying to create a reason for

33:07

them to stage the sit-in at

33:10

Google. Otherwise, if they just

33:12

grab picket signs and were on the street, it

33:14

would just be much less newsworthy. So

33:16

I think they were just trying to create something newsworthy

33:18

here and it's kind of worked in the sense that

33:20

we're talking about it, other people are talking about it.

33:23

So that's my interpretation of that is they

33:26

were just trying to elevate the issue

33:28

in a slightly novel way.

33:31

But look, I think that they should

33:33

be willing to pay the price of getting fired

33:35

or getting arrested. I mean, if you're going to engage in

33:37

that kind of civil disobedience or

33:39

protest, you should be willing to accept the price.

33:42

And I did see some comments by

33:44

the Googlers who got fired saying that they thought

33:46

they're being treated unfairly by Google. I think that's

33:48

the wrong attitude. I think the

33:50

attitude is, hey, this cause is

33:53

so important to me that I'm willing to accept the

33:55

price of being fired, saying

33:57

that you don't deserve to be fired for disrupting

34:00

the workplace, that is kind of an entitled attitude.

34:03

So I think they should have just said, yeah, we did this

34:05

on purpose because it's a

34:07

really important cause. Yeah. They

34:09

should say I'm proud to get fired because that's how much I

34:11

believe in it. My stock options at Google

34:14

are less important than this issue to me. Yeah.

34:17

And I accept them. I think they would have gotten

34:19

just as much press if they actually protested the war.

34:22

I think in a week from now, everybody will

34:24

forget what Project Nimbus is. The odds that it

34:26

gets canceled are less than zero and

34:29

everybody will move on. And

34:31

it will not add to the drum beat,

34:33

as SAC said, of people that may be

34:36

eventually on the right side of this issue

34:38

theoretically. I say

34:40

theoretically because that stone is still

34:42

yet to be overturned on that topic. So

34:44

I think that they missed the mark. And

34:48

I think that the part of the press that people glommed

34:50

onto was it was happening inside of a company in

34:53

real time and there is video of it. That

34:56

mission accomplished for them. We're talking about it here as

34:58

the top story. And if

35:00

that was there, if they wanted to raise

35:02

awareness, they succeeded and they should just own

35:04

their firing because they knew they would get

35:06

fired, I think. All

35:09

right. There has been a ton of

35:11

chaos and the culture wars continue over

35:13

NPR. A couple of

35:15

things happened simultaneously this week that are worth

35:17

discussing. Catherine Marr was named NPR's new

35:19

CEO back in January. I'm going to have to give

35:21

a little bit of a timeline here before I get

35:24

comments from the boys because there's

35:26

a little setup. And

35:29

so she was named the CEO back

35:31

in January. She officially started in March.

35:33

Okay. She formally worked at

35:35

Wikimedia Foundation. Those are the people who run

35:37

the Wikipedia, obviously. NPR's mission,

35:39

if you don't know, is to create

35:42

a more informed public, one

35:44

challenged and invigorated by a deeper understanding

35:46

and appreciation of events, ideas, and culture.

35:48

That's their state admission from their website.

35:51

On April 9th, Uri Berliner, an editor

35:53

who's been with NPR for 25 years,

35:55

wrote an op-ed for Barry Weiss's Free

35:58

Press from the Department of Health. explaining

36:00

how NPR lost America's trust by

36:03

going hard left and becoming closed-minded.

36:05

He said, quote, an open-minded spirit no

36:08

longer exists within NPR and now predictably

36:10

we don't have an audience that reflects

36:12

America. Last Friday,

36:15

Marr put out a statement calling

36:17

his actions profoundly disrespectful, hurtful, and

36:19

demeaning. The Sunday, conservative activist

36:22

Christopher Rufo, he's the

36:24

person who exposed

36:27

former Harvard president's clotting

36:29

gaze, plagiarism, he's a vocal

36:31

critic of LGBTQ stuff at

36:34

schools, started reposting old tweets from Marr,

36:36

this new CEO. Her tweets

36:38

are super far left, Trump's a

36:40

racist, yada yada. There's an

36:42

interesting clip of her talking at TED,

36:45

talking about how truth is

36:47

a bit of a distraction that prevents people

36:49

from getting things done. People have gotten

36:52

pretty inflamed about that clip

36:54

and then on April 16th Berliner

36:58

was suspended for five days without pay.

37:00

Wrapping this all up, Berliner then resigned

37:02

after 25 years saying, quote, I cannot

37:05

work in a newsroom where I

37:07

am disparaged by a new CEO whose divisive

37:10

views confirm the very problems

37:12

that NPR cite in

37:14

my free press essay, Sacks

37:16

or Thots? I mean this

37:18

just seems like a dog bites man story.

37:20

I mean what is the novel revelation here?

37:23

The person running NPR is a liberal? I

37:27

mean I'm kind of with you but what took

37:29

25 years to resign? I mean all you have

37:31

to do is listen to NPR. It's always been

37:33

liberal. Okay? This is not some recent capture of

37:35

an institution by the left. So why is it

37:38

going so crazy viral right now? Why has this

37:40

become the topic of the moment? Well

37:43

apparently there are some quotes that this

37:46

new CEO Catherine Marr tweeted

37:49

or said that you can point to That

37:53

seem kind of woke and kind

37:55

of crazy woke, but they're just

37:57

actually pretty standard. I Just don't

37:59

see. The. Breaking News Your. If

38:01

they and of firing Catherine Mar, they're going to

38:03

hire someone to spiker. I mean they're not have

38:06

the same views. And. Pr is always been.

38:08

Left. Of Center. And. The only

38:11

change has happened is that the left

38:13

has now. Become. Woke.

38:15

The. And so it's become of Sicily.

38:17

Focus with the ideas of. White.

38:20

Supremacy and and will and. White.

38:22

Privilege. And she's simply suitably

38:24

reflects that. I agree. I was

38:26

singing Tempest in a teapot like

38:28

newsflash. Npr is woke and left

38:30

leaning. I mean, I.

38:32

Guess maybe that somebody who was there for

38:35

twenty five years wrote the expos. A is

38:37

interesting or. An announcement any boss on

38:39

this one and why it's. taking up

38:41

so much head space where people. I.

38:43

Don't think it is. I think it's taking a bloody had

38:45

space. Amongst breathless journalists and I'll

38:47

take it matters to the public at

38:50

large in on the Anybody Cares has

38:52

had one thing which is I do

38:54

think that the government should not be

38:56

funding this anymore. I think Npr at

38:58

this point is mostly funded by private

39:00

donations. Yeah, they got started with government

39:02

money and the government's dolphins it. And

39:04

given that it is this who left

39:07

institution at this point and and really

39:09

always has been recently, no reason for

39:11

the government to be funding one side

39:13

of the political debate that way. So

39:15

I think there. Is maybe an

39:17

issue there in terms of

39:19

reminding people? That. Hey, this is

39:21

like government funded Why? And there's no reason

39:24

why npr it be funded. With.

39:26

Either private donations or. Private.

39:28

Yeah percentages I just to give people some back

39:30

of your blog math. It. And

39:32

be ours, budget is like three hundred twenty

39:34

million dollar. Prefer American. And. They.

39:37

Get a bunch of programming fees and

39:39

some corporate sponsorship. Corporate sponsorship is like

39:41

one hundred million bucks. The program visas

39:43

what the local radio stations play them.

39:45

net net. This is costing like may

39:47

be. On our know study sense

39:50

in american hand if you just swap out and

39:52

this is the way I like to look at

39:54

these to be objective. If you were saying this

39:56

was funding Fox News or. I. Don't know

39:58

Ben Shapiro in Delhi? Why? How would you

40:00

feel about. It you black boys, the government funding that.

40:03

They. Should just cut Npr in all this public broadcasting

40:05

stuff loose over the next year or two. Winded

40:07

down. And. Let them

40:09

fend for themselves in the new media landscape.

40:11

Luggage a Calgary through, they could easily sub

40:13

socket Mps. I've always just. Christmas.

40:16

Gifts sense and you're far. Yeah.

40:18

I'm it's only like they're down to whatever

40:20

it's it's It's very hard to find the

40:22

numbers as a little like hiding of the

40:24

money here, but they're so little at stake

40:26

here. I think that's why it's so contentious.

40:28

Know what you're going to dobie funding one

40:30

sided a theological institutions on either side of

40:32

the political debate. And you're right, if this

40:34

was funding going to up. Daily. Wire

40:36

something like that. People would be up

40:38

in arms so. The event was

40:40

gonna be this good for the gander. The

40:43

next Tempest in a teapot. Issue.

40:45

Mains A I can getting barbecued by

40:47

our modern day What? Mossberg Marquez Brownlee

40:49

who is an awesome you tube or

40:52

I love his reviews. And.

40:54

Is quite a bit of our social media

40:56

Russia Taseer. Getting. A

40:58

lot of feals from people in Silicon Valley. Let's

41:00

is t disappear. Humane is a hardware store that

41:03

bad that you may have heard of. They make

41:05

an Ai powered wearable computer specially have any but

41:07

on your chest. To. Buffer size of

41:09

a pack of cigarettes. maybe half the size of

41:11

it, Cited. By to Apple exact

41:14

back and Twenty eighteen raised a

41:16

quarter of a billion dollars or

41:18

so. And. Damn. the device

41:20

is now in the. Hands of reviewers it's

41:22

pretty innovative and marked as talks about

41:24

how innovative it is in his review.

41:27

It. Will I'll let you talk to. it's got a camera

41:29

on it. Will. Show it here on

41:31

the screen If you're not subscribed to the youtube

41:34

channel, just go to Youtube right now uses. Claimed.

41:36

Video of it Search from fallen. And.

41:39

I'm the really interesting interface at does obviously

41:41

voice to connect you to an L am

41:43

on the back and so if you want

41:46

to know. That. You know

41:48

some piece of information. he can answer those

41:50

questions for you. But Marquez I showed it.

41:53

Just. Absolutely failing out a bunch of

41:55

tests. Being. Overpriced. And.

41:58

He called it the worst pro. product

42:00

he's ever reviewed. It's

42:03

very thoughtful and methodical, but the

42:06

title is obviously a bit link-fading.

42:08

As a co-founder of Engadget, I can tell you if

42:10

you want to get a lot of clicks to say something is

42:13

the best or the worst ever, and you can get 10 times

42:16

the views. The

42:19

pin, according to him, doesn't

42:22

do anything better than a smartphone. It's low.

42:24

It doesn't work. It's often

42:26

wrong. It's $700. The battery

42:28

sucks. So many different ways

42:30

to go with this. Everybody

42:32

is talking about it on X and

42:34

in the media. Where

42:37

do you stand on this one, Friedberg?

42:41

Both on how

42:43

people are responding to it in the

42:45

tech industry as being like anti-tech, anti-innovation

42:47

versus, hey, it's just a reviewer giving

42:50

his candid feedback on a product that's

42:52

clearly not ready for prime time. I

42:54

think there's a lot of issues. One

42:56

is just the challenge of deep

42:59

tech, more specifically

43:01

in this case, hardware investing. You have

43:04

to invest a lot of capital before

43:06

you even have your first product, and then you

43:09

don't really know how well it works until you've

43:11

already burned through a lot of capital. This

43:14

is one of the stunning stories of

43:16

a startup that has raised a quarter

43:18

billion dollars, and then they come out with their first

43:20

product, and it turns out it needs a lot of work because

43:23

it doesn't do anything that

43:25

consumers really are compelled by,

43:28

as evidenced by the review.

43:31

I think it highlights that challenge and

43:33

why that market finds,

43:36

particularly in this environment, it to be so

43:38

hard to get

43:40

capitalized. Now, obviously, there are some

43:42

entrepreneurs like Elon who can

43:44

take that capital and drive

43:47

to the outcome, spending hundreds

43:49

of millions of dollars before you get your first rocket

43:52

into space, and you have a lot of failings

43:54

along the way. But

43:56

the general tone here is tech

44:00

investment is very likely to fail

44:02

because you spend so much money before you've known at

44:04

that point you have less money and you can't really

44:06

make the necessary iteration to get there.

44:09

So it's a tough data point

44:11

for other deep tech companies that

44:14

need to raise a lot of capital. Then I

44:16

think it brings up the point about ex-Apple

44:19

people, that there's a degree of

44:21

confidence because people come from Apple and

44:23

a degree of hubris in the employees

44:25

that come from Apple that says,

44:28

I have worked at the best hardware company in the

44:30

world, therefore this person is likely to succeed. It turns

44:32

out that when you don't have

44:34

all that built-in infrastructure for testing and

44:36

optimization, all of that built-in distribution, all

44:39

of the feedback systems that Apple has engineered

44:41

into their business model for so long, maybe

44:43

you missed some of the data around what

44:45

makes a product great or not before you

44:47

launch. I think that's your key point,

44:50

Freeberg. That is the best point. If these folks come

44:52

from Apple, they're used to

44:54

unlimited resources, and

44:56

what you don't see is all the product

44:58

Apple doesn't release, right? They never release their

45:00

car, correct, Freeberg? I

45:03

think then there's also this question about where

45:05

is the value in the product because

45:07

they thought, hey, if we have AI

45:09

on a pen, it'll work without

45:12

the consumer feedback about whether

45:14

or not people are willing to sit around and wait

45:16

for 12 seconds to get an

45:18

answer to a question. And then it brings up

45:20

this other really important point, which is half

45:23

the people in Silicon Valley are running breathlessly

45:25

into the conversation saying, do not

45:27

disparage a startup that's working really hard at

45:29

getting their first product right. It'll destroy the

45:32

motivation of other startups that need to kind of

45:35

iterate to get there. And we

45:37

can't just take the first V1 and

45:39

say, that's it. Tramat, your thoughts? Your

45:41

laughing hysterical at this. No, the

45:43

other half of Silicon Valley are running in and saying,

45:45

this thing's a piece of shit. What are you talking

45:47

about? It doesn't work. So it is a really interesting

45:49

kind of, you know, debate.

45:51

Yeah. We're shocked. Test on what's going on. What

45:54

do you want? What do you want in block

45:57

of a product? Neither of

45:59

those two. I think that

46:01

incredibly motivated, dedicated

46:03

entrepreneurs don't even know

46:05

that this is happening and don't care. Got

46:08

it. In other words, the

46:10

reviewers are going to review products and

46:12

you just got to plow ahead and make a better product.

46:15

The idea that in 2009,

46:17

10 or 11, right, that

46:21

when all the rockets weren't working, you know, and

46:23

Elon was back against the wall, that

46:26

he was reading TechCrunch or getting

46:29

upset because a product failed, some other random product

46:31

that had nothing to do with his, I

46:34

think is laughable. I think no great entrepreneur

46:36

cares. I don't think Freiburg

46:38

is going to change what's happening at

46:40

O'Hollow based on, what is

46:43

this thing called? Humane. Right.

46:46

Freiburg, have you made decisions? Are you sadder

46:48

today in O'Hollow when you walked into the

46:50

office demanding your team? Okay, so there you

46:52

go. There's your answer. Not a big matter.

46:55

You're failing on this? I'm having a hard time

46:57

understanding all the controversies this week. I mean, reviewers

47:00

are going to review, protesters are going to protest,

47:02

and the NPR presidents are going to NPR. Here

47:04

we go. What's going on? Everyone's

47:07

just doing their job. Here's

47:11

an idea for the Humane team. Be thankful somebody

47:13

took the time to review your product

47:15

and give you candid feedback and incorporate it back

47:17

into your product and make it work. An

47:20

irreverent elitist who will eat octopus. Here

47:23

we are. Absolutely. High

47:25

IQ foods. We should create a new

47:27

category. High IQ foods? Yeah, what are the other

47:29

high IQ foods? Acorn-fed

47:32

beef. Yeah, for sure

47:34

high IQ. Pigs, very

47:36

high IQ. I saw that cow playing

47:38

chess before he was served for dinner.

47:42

I was having a pork sandwich from

47:44

Bucky's, and it helped me

47:46

solve Wurdle for the day before

47:49

I ate it. So I got Wurdle in

47:51

two tries. Oh,

47:53

I'm so sorry. I'm a lad.

47:56

I didn't want that one to land. Yeah,

48:00

I mean, okay, let me ask this question.

48:03

Do we think the world, let's say this thing

48:05

did respond in one second. Here's the

48:07

theme, Jason. Here's the theme, Jason. The

48:09

problem is that I think people right now,

48:12

the real Rorschach test is if you

48:14

are so easily distracted, you probably don't

48:16

have enough to do. Right,

48:19

that's the entitlement is that you don't have enough

48:21

work on your plate. I don't wanna

48:23

call it entitlement, but I think the reality is that

48:25

if you get caught up in

48:27

all these silly little fake

48:29

battles or decisions, I think

48:32

what it really means is that you're not busy

48:34

enough and or you're not working on something that

48:36

matters enough to you. Because when either of those

48:38

two things are true, people tend

48:41

to have blinders on and they are super focused.

48:43

And they just don't have an opinion, they don't

48:46

care. Like honestly, many of these topics today, I

48:48

really don't care. And it's not because I'm better

48:50

or worse or smarter or dumber, it's because I'm

48:52

so overworked right now, I don't have time to

48:54

have an opinion on this stuff. Your mom's got

48:57

a CEO job and now he's gotta work. And

48:59

I think that anybody else trying to do their

49:01

job well is probably in the same category. I

49:04

hadn't even heard of this reviewer. What's his name? Mark

49:07

Marquez? Brown? Marquez

49:10

Brownlee. I never heard of him. If you're

49:12

on YouTube, he's kinda like the new Walt Mossberg.

49:15

He does 20, 30 minute videos.

49:17

They get millions of views. Yeah.

49:19

He's cute. I don't know that he makes or breaks a

49:22

product though, by the way, he does not make or break

49:24

a product. The product makes or breaks itself. When

49:27

I was running companies, I wouldn't

49:29

care about what one reviewer said. I

49:31

would care about the totality of the

49:33

reaction to the product, which would include

49:36

customers as well as reviewers and so

49:38

forth. So I don't think there's

49:40

any point getting too bad out of shape about

49:42

one review. I think what's kinda happening in terms

49:44

of the reaction here is that

49:47

people wanna give this company

49:49

mercy points for being innovative.

49:52

So my guess is the product just isn't ready for prime

49:54

time but everyone wants to kinda like, they

49:57

want their reviewers to take it easy on them or

49:59

something because. They are being innovative and

50:01

they're breaking new ground in this area of

50:03

wearables, but the reality is in

50:05

the real world, where you

50:07

want to charge people for your product like customers

50:10

don't have mercy points. No, so

50:13

if it is the car breaks down, the car breaks

50:15

down and by the way, Marquez got a

50:17

little bit of heat just a month ago because he

50:19

reviewed the Fisker. The Fisker is just

50:21

a piece of garbage car. He said it's the worst

50:23

car he's ever reviewed and you

50:26

know what reviewers exist in the world. To

50:29

inform customers about what products and services they

50:31

should buy and then they should inform you

50:33

to make a better product period full stop.

50:36

There is an easy solution to this by the way, which Apple

50:39

did they released the vision pro as

50:42

a developer kit. They put a

50:44

bunch of caveats on it and said hey,

50:46

we understand this is high priced. It's a

50:48

developer kit. This is in beta.

50:50

What humane should have done is they should

50:52

have said this is the humane beta for

50:54

developers. I still don't know what it is.

50:56

What is this? Okay, it's a wearable. It's

50:58

a square. It has a

51:01

projector on it. You put your hand out. It

51:03

projects a little screen that shows you like

51:05

a computer screen and you can talk to

51:07

it. Well, the primary function is like a

51:10

chat assistant that sits on

51:12

you and has a camera. And

51:14

so you can say it's taping everything

51:17

that it sees. It doesn't do

51:19

that by default, but it could. But sorry, let

51:21

me just give the quick overview and basically you

51:23

ask it questions and it can go

51:25

get the answers. The problem is that it

51:27

has to go make a request to the Internet,

51:29

run an AI model and come back. So it

51:32

takes like 12 seconds to get results. Most

51:34

of the time, according to the reviewer, the

51:36

results are actually wrong because it's an L.

51:38

And models suck. The voice to text translation is

51:40

wrong. There's a lot of things that are wrong

51:42

about it. So it takes a long time. It's

51:44

clunky. And then the battery burns out every two

51:46

hours and it gets super hot because of the

51:48

way they get it to magnetically think your clothes.

51:51

So it gets very hot. So there's also

51:53

a $700 bucks. Other

51:55

than that, how is the play? It misses Lincoln.

51:58

And by the way, most importantly to you. off,

52:00

it will screw up your fabrics. If you wear this

52:02

with a Laura Piana sweater, I'm going to drag your

52:04

sweater down. Hold on, I was just thinking this. You

52:06

would never attach it to a $6,000 sweater. Yeah,

52:10

it's basically what you're telling me is

52:12

it's an overpriced device that could give

52:14

you first-degree burns, and

52:16

it will ruin your sweaters. It doesn't answer the

52:18

questions that you ask. Yeah, basically.

52:21

But then do I think the questions or do I have

52:23

to say it out loud so it looks like I'm talking

52:25

to myself? You look like a lunatic. Yes, you're walking around

52:27

like a crazy person talking to yourself. That was the other

52:30

thing he said is like when you're in a crowd and

52:32

there's a voice around, you can use your hand and hand

52:34

gestures to control it and do things

52:36

with the projector thing that it does. And it's a

52:38

major problem. It's some really cool, interesting features. It's just

52:40

like it's not quite there yet. Who invested in it?

52:43

Let's not make fun of it. Let's make fun

52:45

of the investors. Who invested? Sam

52:47

Baldwin. Shout out to Sam. He's coming out of the

52:49

program, I think. Yeah.

52:52

Listen, the concept I think

52:55

is good. Wearables are going to

52:57

provide some distinct value when they work because

52:59

you don't have to take your phone out. And

53:01

so the idea behind wearables, like

53:03

your watch, is you know, like there

53:05

are some things I do on my watch now where

53:07

I don't take my phone out. I have fun at the club. I'll

53:09

take the other side of this. Yeah, I'll take the other side. When

53:12

you're done. Yeah, I use Fitbit, a company we

53:14

invested in and it puts all my workouts on my watch.

53:16

When I'm doing weights, I started doing weights now. That's why

53:18

I look so buff, folks. Subscribe to

53:20

the YouTube channel to see. And I do

53:22

my sets and I log them all with my watch.

53:25

I don't have to take my phone out. That's like

53:27

the first thing. And then when I'm skiing, I can

53:29

see each one. I showed you slopes. I'm not an investor in.

53:32

Shmof, where I could see my speed and all

53:34

that stuff. But you're saying something totally different. That's

53:36

utility. Of course, you'll find a device

53:39

will give you utility. I thought you were saying

53:41

something else, which is everybody's going to have wearables.

53:43

And I want to take the exact

53:45

opposite side of that. Okay, go ahead. Yeah. I don't

53:47

know that everybody will have wearables, but I do find

53:49

a couple of little things that work for me. I

53:51

totally get that, you know, the use of an accelerometer

53:54

or whatever in a watch or in a band that

53:56

you wear on your wrist for a workout. And

53:58

I think that that's valuable. heart rate, a

54:01

glycemic monitor so that you get all of that stuff

54:03

makes super sense for you as an individual. But that's

54:06

not an experience where you're

54:08

engaging with it to replace some

54:12

other social interaction. That's

54:14

just you getting utility as you live your life.

54:17

What I'm saying is the idea that you

54:19

start to rely on a device as

54:21

your interface into the world, I

54:23

would take the exact other side of the bat which

54:26

is I think that humans are getting so sick

54:29

and tired of being, of

54:32

only communicating in these

54:34

very rigid ways. Like I'm telling

54:36

you, like if you look at our children's generation,

54:39

they don't know how to make eye contact, they don't know how to

54:41

talk, and I think it's going to come back and

54:43

bite them in the ass. And so I think

54:45

the pendulum is going to swing in the other direction where it's

54:47

like, okay, enough of this stuff. Let's

54:50

actually look each other in the eye and talk to each

54:52

other the way that humans were meant to be. And

54:54

I think that in that, devices

54:57

like a glucose monitor or a band has value,

54:59

but I don't think it's going to be this

55:01

interface where you're sign languaging it while you're at

55:03

Coachella. I think you're going to rip the devices

55:05

off and actually be at Coachella without

55:08

any devices. Did any of you guys read

55:10

Jonathan Hates' book, Anxious Generation? It

55:12

is unbelievably awesome. I'm not right yet.

55:14

Stop what you're doing and

55:17

just listen to the audio book on your

55:19

walks on Audible. This book is super important

55:21

and awesome. The Anxious Generation by Jonathan

55:23

Hates. I cannot tell you how important it is.

55:25

Sacks, any closing feelings here? You have a take?

55:28

Any hot take? Well, I would slightly

55:30

disagree with you guys about this

55:33

device. So first of all, I think that humans

55:35

are becoming more and more cybernetic. We're getting more

55:37

and more immersed with computing

55:39

power. And I agree, it creates this anxiety and

55:41

all these problems. But on the other hand, I

55:44

think it's an irreversible trend. So I

55:46

think that I would not bet against things

55:48

that make us more cybernetic. I think the

55:50

problem here is that this company is

55:52

trying to do two difficult things. The first thing

55:54

is it's trying to capture everything that's

55:57

happening in the world around you to feed it into

55:59

an AI model. model so it can make

56:01

you smarter. The other thing

56:03

it's trying to do is reduce your

56:05

dependence on your phone by creating this

56:07

new projection surface. And

56:10

in my experience, when you try to do

56:12

two hard things, you actually square the complexity

56:14

and you square the difficulty as opposed to

56:16

adding it. So I think of

56:18

these two things, the one that sounds interesting to

56:21

me is taking in all the information from the

56:23

physical world and putting in an AI model that

56:25

can be helpful to you. But

56:27

I see no reason to replace the phone. I

56:29

think it should just work with your phone. The

56:31

problem they're going to have is that that pendant

56:33

will compete with the Apple glasses and all

56:36

the other wearables that are

56:38

going to be created to suck in

56:40

all this information, this computer vision from

56:43

the world. Nonetheless, I do think

56:45

that is the opportunity. It's not replacing

56:47

the phone. It's layering a new

56:49

platform on top of the phone that can kind of, again,

56:51

give you that terminator

56:54

mode in the real world. And that was

56:56

a complaint about this device specifically. It was

56:58

detached from the phone. I understand why they

57:00

want to make it standalone, but... And

57:03

then this opens up all the privacy. Let me

57:05

ask the panel here, what do

57:07

you think about this concept of recording the

57:09

entire world, all these conversations and video with

57:11

these devices? I think it's a quick way

57:13

to get yourself punched in the face. I

57:15

mean, we saw that with Google Glass. People

57:18

showed up at bars in San Francisco and parties

57:20

with these Google Glass things on and

57:22

literally got punched in the face. Well, this is...

57:24

This is why... The privacy of things

57:26

recording your entire life with a pendant? Man, no,

57:28

thank you. This is why I said what I

57:30

said. I do think Saks is right that ultimately,

57:32

you'll have some kind of brain interface because

57:35

I do think a chip implant of some

57:37

kind is very valuable. But what

57:39

I'm also saying is that I think that that will

57:41

actually lessen the

57:44

social acceptability of

57:46

these visible devices that are constantly getting

57:48

in between you and another person. And

57:51

so the idea that we're kind of already

57:53

in a quasi-surveillance state and now we're going

57:55

to increase that by N-factorial

57:58

to the number of people. The

58:00

kids are very depressing. It. Is depressing

58:02

and either in Brooklyn Jonathan his book.

58:04

He talks about phone lockers for schools

58:06

and the transformative power they have had

58:08

when you go to school. There are

58:10

some schools now high schools where the

58:12

students put their phones in specific. Really?

58:14

Doctor? do it. They do it in

58:16

my kids. It's a it's actually Jason.

58:18

The special pouches pouches. Yeah, but those

58:20

are the largest comedians use like Chappelle.

58:22

He shows Chappelle use a cabin use

58:24

of them. Yeah, exactly. And they are

58:26

great. And then what?

58:29

what? The school now also teaches the kids at

58:31

least our school, which I found really interesting is.

58:34

The. Graduated form of that is the actually Now

58:36

allow you to put it in a. Envelope

58:38

because their training the kid like the pouch you

58:40

can't get access to the have to go back

58:42

and lox in a lot unlocked of I see

58:44

him and then I saw that my son last

58:47

week had it actually in a in a white

58:49

envelope and yet to close the envelope and just

58:51

keep it with him. As.

58:53

As like a way of graduating from the.

58:55

Prison. Form of. Cute. As

58:57

on a way to like you know having it in your

59:00

pocket. So the love that front of do a lot to

59:02

try to teaches kids are to be so dependent. they should

59:04

ban these devices the schools one hundred percent. And then at

59:06

the poker game tonight we should meet people stack their phones

59:08

in charge somebody a thousand dollars whoever takes the form. Funny

59:11

I landed that I could do it tonight. Greek.

59:13

Really give us a shout out to were

59:15

my favorite Psi Phi book series is called

59:18

Nexus by Ramos Nom as kind of like

59:20

Cyber Palm. Futuristic.

59:22

Series. But where he talks about is it it

59:24

where we have this brain. Computer.

59:26

Interface. you'll be on upload your memories.

59:29

And so you're you. Talk about this idea of.

59:31

Recording. Your whole life through upended while

59:34

you eventually. You. Be able to record your

59:36

whole life based on to sue your eyeballs. And.

59:39

You know you'd be able to upload

59:41

in Syria. First person view. Of

59:43

whatever conversation the you've been in the

59:45

you know and so. There's. A certain

59:48

that are you up this pretty far off, but

59:50

there is maybe a certain inevitability to that. And.

59:53

Dot Org have to figure out of your part

59:55

of research says there's a black mirror bestowed on

59:57

this exact idea of the up. Here. you

59:59

have to dvr your entire life. And

1:00:01

it is gnarly to think these things will exist. And

1:00:04

I think humanity is going to have to

1:00:06

make a decision, I think, to fight this or embrace it.

1:00:08

I think we should fight it. I think it's going to

1:00:10

ruin, like, social existence.

1:00:12

And it's already ruined poker games, etc. when

1:00:14

everybody's on their phone. It's ruined dinner parties

1:00:16

when everybody's on their phones. A

1:00:18

constant distraction is just horrific. And it's having a

1:00:20

horrible impact on this generation. I'll double down on

1:00:22

what you're saying. It is so lovely to be

1:00:25

able to have a dinner where everybody just talks

1:00:27

to each other and looks each other in the

1:00:29

eyes. And then when you have a handful of

1:00:31

people always on their phone, it's depressing.

1:00:35

It's actually not even neutral. It's

1:00:37

a net negative and a drag on the entire

1:00:39

night. Absolutely. I

1:00:42

am trying to come up with ways to

1:00:44

remove these devices from the social settings.

1:00:46

I mean, I've been to a couple of parties with high profile

1:00:48

people where they have everybody check their phones

1:00:50

at the LA and the door. I gotta say those

1:00:52

are the best nights of my life. Those

1:00:55

are the best nights. And, you know, no offense to people

1:00:57

who are addicted to their phones. I am to a certain

1:00:59

extent. I put my social media at one

1:01:01

hour on my phone. My lord, it

1:01:03

is hard to do less than an

1:01:06

hour of social media in our job positions. I

1:01:09

deleted TikTok about a month ago. It's

1:01:13

been liberating. I was a slave to

1:01:15

that app. I couldn't believe how

1:01:18

much TikTok I was consuming after

1:01:20

it was gone because I couldn't find anything

1:01:22

to replace it. And then I stumbled

1:01:24

into the fact that YouTube has YouTube shorts and

1:01:27

there is a lot of that content, but it's

1:01:29

terrible and the algorithm is really bad. And

1:01:32

so fortunately I just stopped using YouTube.

1:01:35

It just shows you how the algorithm is

1:01:37

such a key component of that TikTok experience

1:01:39

because I had the same experience. Shorts

1:01:43

serves up garbage. Instagram

1:01:45

serves up garbage. And then TikTok

1:01:48

is just like right into your brain. It

1:01:50

kicks ass. It kicks ass. By the way, I want to

1:01:52

give another shout out to a book. I miss TikTok. TikTok,

1:01:54

I miss you. Yeah, whatever. It's just going

1:01:57

away. Another incredible book. I think

1:01:59

we should. The speaker for

1:02:01

All in Summit Bad therapy. Why

1:02:03

the kids aren't growing up? Abigail

1:02:06

Schreier. This book is

1:02:08

incredible and if you read these two but

1:02:10

every parent. Read. These two bucks

1:02:12

and we need have a conversation on it as

1:02:14

parents year. Everybody reads two bucks.

1:02:17

Beast. These are my two top choices for the

1:02:19

all. in some it's. I think it's like

1:02:21

they're gonna be the the topic of our time.

1:02:24

Wireless. Keep going down this incredible docket. Very

1:02:26

important issue for us to talk about. Silicon.

1:02:29

Valley Startup seven a bit of that

1:02:31

are indeed tax problem that's putting on

1:02:33

the docket. You're free bird. Said.

1:02:35

Bit inside baseball but very important topic.

1:02:38

Let's say company like Acme Cooperation generate a

1:02:40

million bucks revenue and they spend a million

1:02:42

bucks on their software developers. Last you a

1:02:44

said add. An hour five developers can

1:02:47

pay two hundred grand each. While tradition as

1:02:49

company would paid nothing in income tax right

1:02:51

to spend a million. they deduct that million

1:02:53

from the million dollars in revenue that came

1:02:55

in. And. Everything's.

1:02:57

Good, but. Due. To The

1:02:59

Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of

1:03:01

Twenty Seven Team. Starting.

1:03:03

Last year a provision kicked in forcing companies

1:03:05

to advertise the are the expense. Over five

1:03:07

years. So. In this. Hypothetical.

1:03:10

Situation: The Acme Corporation. With

1:03:12

amortize two hundred a year. And. Pay

1:03:15

income tax on the hundred came profits. This

1:03:18

is brutal, offers offer start votes,

1:03:20

profit circled Sarcos profits corridor and

1:03:22

this is absolutely Brutal. And.

1:03:25

A lot of companies took a wait and see

1:03:27

approach is hoping Congress or fix the issue. In January

1:03:30

a bipartisan tax bill. That. Would vs

1:03:32

changes pass in the house? But. The

1:03:34

bill has stalled in the senate. And we gotta

1:03:36

get this thing sex because is gonna sink a lot of start

1:03:38

ups. Maybe. People will start putting

1:03:40

their companies and other countries. But.

1:03:43

I it's attached to this child tax credit

1:03:45

which republicans don't wanna pass. Sir. No

1:03:48

reversal has happened. Freiburg, you highlighted this for

1:03:50

us. Very important topic. Thank you for doing

1:03:52

so. As. Our

1:03:54

our. Great. Contributor:

1:03:57

Hear what are your thoughts on? This became

1:03:59

law. in the 2017 Jobs

1:04:02

Act as you highlighted. And

1:04:05

basically it means that companies, not

1:04:07

just like tech companies, but life

1:04:09

sciences companies, defense companies are

1:04:12

pushing Congress to change this law because

1:04:15

you can't actually deduct the

1:04:17

expenses that you use to run your

1:04:19

business. You have to only

1:04:21

deduct them over five years, 20% a year. So

1:04:24

like you pointed out, if you're making a million dollars but

1:04:26

you're spending a million dollars, you made no profit. But

1:04:29

you got to pay taxes if you made 800 grand in

1:04:31

profit. And a lot of these small

1:04:33

companies don't have that cash. So

1:04:35

venture capital backed companies and public companies

1:04:37

that are profitable, they can afford to

1:04:39

do this because they have large balance sheets. So it doesn't

1:04:41

affect them as much as it does. The

1:04:44

literally hundreds of thousands of

1:04:46

small businesses that work in the life sciences

1:04:49

sector, the defense sector, the tech sector, that

1:04:51

are struggling this year to make

1:04:53

the tax payments that are required under

1:04:56

this law that went into effect last

1:04:58

year. And Congress promised that they were gonna

1:05:00

repeal this law leading up

1:05:03

to April 15th, which happens obviously a

1:05:05

few days ago and make it retroactive to

1:05:07

2023, but they didn't. But

1:05:09

they know basic math, Congress knows basic

1:05:11

math. How do they, what do they

1:05:14

think they're close to? Yeah,

1:05:16

so the original intent was that this was

1:05:18

one of the ways, you guys know whenever

1:05:20

you pass a bill, it gets run through

1:05:22

the OMB and the CDF that

1:05:25

figures out what's the budgetary cost of the bill. And

1:05:28

one of the ways that they made this work, this

1:05:30

bill, the 2017 Trump Tax and Jobs Act, you guys

1:05:32

may remember in that bill, they also

1:05:34

made it impossible to deduct entertainment and dining expenses

1:05:36

when you take people out to dinner anymore. That

1:05:38

sucks. And they did all those things to make

1:05:40

up some of the money they were using

1:05:43

for basic general tax breaks for companies. So

1:05:45

they used this as a way to say

1:05:47

like, look, in a couple of years, we're

1:05:49

gonna kick in this R&D expenditure thing, and

1:05:51

it'll trigger a lot more revenue for the

1:05:53

federal government. It'll create a lot more taxes

1:05:56

and a lot more revenue. So

1:05:58

that was the idea. And everyone was like, yeah, okay. sure, we'll

1:06:00

do that. Great. It makes the accounting work. And then in

1:06:02

a couple years, you know, nudge, nudge, wink, wink, we're going

1:06:04

to come back and repeal it. Except

1:06:06

Congress has stalled out. There's this

1:06:08

ineptitude, where anytime someone tries to pass

1:06:11

a bill in Congress, someone

1:06:13

else says, I want to get money. And

1:06:15

so the Democrats showed up and said, we want this

1:06:17

child tax credit thing to show up, which

1:06:20

basically was

1:06:22

passed during COVID. And they

1:06:24

want to extend it going forward. And the child

1:06:26

tax credit says that you can get a check

1:06:28

for 1800 a year in 2023, 1900, in 2024, and $2,000 in 2025, for having for each child

1:06:30

you have. And the

1:06:37

Republicans in the Senate are saying, wait a second,

1:06:39

for people to get this thing, we want to make sure

1:06:41

they're working, we want to make sure it's not as retroactive.

1:06:44

So now there's this big debate about how big the child

1:06:46

tax credit should be. And that's

1:06:48

keeping this R&D thing from

1:06:50

going through. And meanwhile, I've gotten tons of

1:06:52

emails from CEOs of tech companies that

1:06:55

are breaking even either not tech companies that are

1:06:57

making a ton of profit, they're not public, they're

1:06:59

not venture backed. They're just people running

1:07:01

running their, their business. And

1:07:03

now they're going to have this huge tax bill, even though they

1:07:05

didn't make any money this year. And

1:07:07

it's crippling businesses around the country.

1:07:09

And what do they do? They're

1:07:12

going to write a check, they're going to borrow money, they're going

1:07:14

to go to the bank, borrow money, or they're going to incur

1:07:16

penalties at the IRS, because they don't have the cash to

1:07:18

pay the tax bill, because they don't have any profit, they didn't

1:07:20

make any money. If they just ran the

1:07:22

business break even, which a lot of these companies do is

1:07:24

just make a little bit of money or break even. And

1:07:26

then they've got this huge tax bill and profits they

1:07:28

didn't actually have, they got to go figure

1:07:31

out how to write a check. And also, how do

1:07:33

you define R&D? I was talking to an accountant, he's

1:07:35

like, Yeah, I don't know if that's R&D. I'm like,

1:07:37

you don't know it's R&D. Like, okay, so if

1:07:39

I make some piece of software, yeah, yeah, there's all

1:07:42

this writing in the, if you get audited by the

1:07:44

IRS, they have the ability to

1:07:46

basically capture everything. So like, let's say you're

1:07:48

a mobile app developer, and you

1:07:50

make a million dollars a year, but you spend

1:07:52

a million dollars a year on your developers, okay,

1:07:55

they're gonna count that they have the ability to count that

1:07:57

as an R&D. So that the accountants the tax accountants

1:08:00

tell you book it all as R&D

1:08:02

because otherwise you could get audited and actually get in trouble.

1:08:04

Because anything that involves the development of

1:08:07

technology now is considered R&D. Again,

1:08:09

a company working in life sciences as a

1:08:11

research company doing lab work can

1:08:13

get it fixes is a bug fix

1:08:16

R&D. If I make a new feature

1:08:18

in an application this year, does it

1:08:20

have to be amortized over five years or

1:08:22

I put a new filter on my photo?

1:08:24

My understanding is most most of this stuff

1:08:26

is getting captured. And that's why it's hurting

1:08:29

everything from defense to life sciences, to lab

1:08:31

equipment to startups, and software

1:08:33

to everything. And

1:08:35

Congress can't get out of its own way where this this

1:08:38

bill passed, by the way, bipartisan in

1:08:40

the house, then it went to the Senate. And

1:08:42

now it's getting taken apart in the Senate. Now it's stalled out

1:08:45

and everyone's freaking out that it's stalled out past April 15. And

1:08:47

it's actually going to

1:08:49

hurt a lot of small businesses in this country. And

1:08:51

here's the other problem is it actually

1:08:53

limits our ability to invest in innovation in

1:08:56

this country. Because now you're better

1:08:58

off, there's no other country in the world

1:09:00

that does this. Every other country in the

1:09:02

world tries to incentivize investment in innovation. And

1:09:05

here in the US, we're basically saying

1:09:07

no, we're going to tax you for

1:09:09

investing in technology development and innovation. And

1:09:11

the other thing that's, that's actually not

1:09:13

being talked about is even in

1:09:16

this bill where they're repealing this, they're

1:09:18

leaving in the fact that

1:09:21

if you invest in R&D outside the US,

1:09:23

you have to amortize it over 15 years.

1:09:26

So let's say that you're a US developer

1:09:28

and you hire people offshore. Yeah, you

1:09:31

got to basically amortize the offshore stuff over

1:09:33

15 years, which means you'll never

1:09:35

make a profit, you're always gonna have to pay

1:09:37

tax. I mean, how we're trying to kill innovation

1:09:39

in this country. And the two things they got

1:09:41

to solve is this one. And then M&A, we got

1:09:45

to have a better solution

1:09:47

for allowing companies to be bought and sold

1:09:50

in this or merge in this country. These

1:09:53

two things are putting a lot of

1:09:55

headwinds on the startup ecosystem

1:09:57

and on the venture and the

1:09:59

risk taking capital. ecosystems. If you're in

1:10:03

Washington, D.C., or involved in our government,

1:10:06

please solve these two issues. You got to figure out a

1:10:08

way to allow companies to be bought and sold. You got

1:10:10

to figure out a way to fix

1:10:14

this tax issue or else we're going to kill a

1:10:16

lot of startups. And these are the companies that

1:10:19

pay a lot of taxes. And these are

1:10:21

the capital gains that fund a lot of

1:10:23

states treasuries. Well, it's also an illustration of

1:10:25

just how hungry we are for tax revenue

1:10:28

in this country. It's

1:10:30

only going to grow. And I'm not sitting here complaining

1:10:32

about taxes. The Trump tax cut that he put in

1:10:34

place in 2017 added $1.5 trillion to the federal deficit.

1:10:37

So tax cuts in general

1:10:41

are not great when you're spending a lot, but

1:10:44

it does highlight just how much we are spending

1:10:46

at the federal level and the demand for tax

1:10:48

revenue. And that demand causes this

1:10:50

countercyclical problem, which is now we're going

1:10:52

to eat into innovation, which is supposed

1:10:54

to drive get us out of the

1:10:56

problem, the spiral that results from this debt.

1:10:59

So it really highlights like just

1:11:01

the challenges that are going to emerge, particularly

1:11:03

in a decade ahead, because we have all

1:11:05

of the spending that's coming in front of

1:11:07

us over the next decade, and how we're

1:11:09

going to start to demand more and more

1:11:11

tax and all these weird ways that can

1:11:13

really hurt industry. Unintended consequences are very real.

1:11:17

Chamappi, we're gonna say something? Well,

1:11:19

doesn't it mean, though, that if you run it at break

1:11:21

even, and without

1:11:24

a lot of growth, by year five, you'll be

1:11:26

back to where you were. So you really have

1:11:28

to cover the taxes in years one through four.

1:11:30

That's right. If the business but if the business is

1:11:32

growing, you're always going to be in a hole. Right.

1:11:36

Right. So if your revenue is growing, and your OpEx

1:11:38

is growing, you're always going to be in a hole.

1:11:40

I think Jason mentioned it earlier. And I think it's

1:11:43

the key thing, which is what is R&D then? Yeah.

1:11:45

And maybe you just move things

1:11:47

to cogs and just be

1:11:49

done with it. I mean, remember, remember

1:11:51

businesses. And you guys know this, like

1:11:54

when you look at a public company's

1:11:56

financials, what you're seeing is their gap

1:11:58

financials, generally accepted accounting. principles. And

1:12:01

that's the way that you present the financials of

1:12:03

a business. That's different than the way you present

1:12:05

financials to the IRS. You don't

1:12:07

have a lot of discretion in your

1:12:09

tax financials. Your tax financials are actually

1:12:11

quite different than your gap financials.

1:12:14

Yes. So when you file your taxes,

1:12:16

there's a lot of rules on what you are allowed

1:12:18

to deduct and aren't allowed to deduct. It's quite different than

1:12:20

how you present your corporate financials to investors. And

1:12:23

that's really where people get screwed. You don't have that

1:12:25

sort of discretion that you do in kind of

1:12:28

sharing your financials with investors. This

1:12:31

is not financial or accounting advice. Get great

1:12:33

representation. I just hope Congress resolves this because

1:12:35

it's... Yes. Quite. Super important. All right. Sports

1:12:37

betting has gone mainstream, if you don't know.

1:12:40

Two out of three colleges have placed a

1:12:42

bet in the last year. Since

1:12:44

the Supreme Court stripped down the

1:12:46

Amateur Sports Protection Act, 38 states

1:12:48

have legalized sports betting. I think

1:12:50

that's a great thing, but we're starting to see some

1:12:53

weird behavior because of it. Tons

1:12:55

of sites like DraftKings, FanDuel, ESPN,

1:12:57

Bet, BetMGM, all of these have

1:12:59

broken out. But this week,

1:13:02

we started to see some weird behavior.

1:13:04

The NBA banned a 24-year-old player, John

1:13:07

T. Porter, for life

1:13:10

after a scandal. This one

1:13:12

is bizarre and interesting. Porter was

1:13:14

the bench player for the Toronto Raptors, averaging

1:13:16

about 14 minutes per game. It's important.

1:13:19

On these gambling apps, you can do all kinds

1:13:21

of prop bets. For those of you who don't know, prop

1:13:23

bets could be things like, Steph

1:13:26

is going to hit five threes

1:13:28

in a game, or LeBron's going to score

1:13:30

under 30 points. You're just betting on unique

1:13:32

things that could happen, and then you can

1:13:34

parlay them together. You can put multiple bets

1:13:36

together, and it automatically gives you a price,

1:13:38

and you can do really deep

1:13:42

wagers doing this. The

1:13:44

NBA found out that Porter was telling people

1:13:46

to bet his unders for points and rebounds

1:13:49

during certain games. During those games, he'd play

1:13:51

a few minutes, then check himself

1:13:53

out of the game with an illness,

1:13:55

quote-unquote. Technically, the bet would

1:13:57

still count since he played the game. everybody

1:14:00

who bet his unders would win. Normally

1:14:02

nobody would notice this, of course, because

1:14:04

he doesn't play that much. He's a bench player, but

1:14:06

draft Kings, because they have all the data,

1:14:10

tipped everyone off because

1:14:13

Porter was the biggest money maker on

1:14:15

March 20th. This led to

1:14:17

an NBA investigation. Draft Kings will give you a

1:14:19

leaderboard of the biggest bets. And they

1:14:22

saw that somebody placed an $80,000 bet that Porter

1:14:24

would hit the unders on a bunch of different

1:14:26

categories. Crazy outlier bet. Draft

1:14:28

Kings canceled the bet. The

1:14:30

NBA found that Porter separately placed dozens

1:14:33

of bets on NBA games, using his

1:14:35

friends accounts, winning a whopping $22,000.

1:14:40

And this idiot now is

1:14:42

banned from the NBA, allegedly,

1:14:44

allegedly, allegedly, but obviously the

1:14:47

NBA has the receipts with

1:14:49

Draft Kings. Tommas, you owned a

1:14:51

NBA team for a little while and

1:14:53

you watched as David Stern. For

1:14:56

a decade, you watched as David Stern, who was absolutely

1:14:59

opposed to gambling. And

1:15:02

then Adam Silver embraced it. Tell us

1:15:04

from your front row seat, your thoughts

1:15:06

on wagering in the NBA. Wagering

1:15:09

writ large. Okay.

1:15:11

Look, I

1:15:14

remember when I joined

1:15:18

the ownership group of the Warriors, I had

1:15:20

to file this enormous document. And

1:15:23

one of the things that they really dig into

1:15:25

is whether you've bet

1:15:27

before. And

1:15:30

they make it really, really clear that

1:15:33

it is completely not allowed

1:15:35

to bet. And the only way that you

1:15:37

can bet is if you're betting on non-basketball. And if

1:15:40

you were in Vegas and you go to a casino

1:15:42

and a troop sports book, that's the only

1:15:44

time it's tolerated. The thing

1:15:46

with all of these sites, FanDuel and

1:15:48

Draft Kings is they did deals with

1:15:50

the leagues, where part

1:15:52

of the feature is that when

1:15:55

there is really crazy asymmetric betting

1:15:57

on something that's obscure, they

1:15:59

reported to the leagues, so the leagues know how

1:16:01

to look at it. Because typically what happens is, if

1:16:04

you're talking like a very

1:16:07

well contested basketball, Jason, you

1:16:09

have a relatively balanced book, right?

1:16:12

And what the goal is, is to figure out

1:16:14

where are the sharps betting, meaning the really smart

1:16:16

money guys, and everybody else is a

1:16:18

square, and most of retail is a square, okay, they're

1:16:20

going to lose their money. And so

1:16:22

the goal is to always find out where the sharps are going. But

1:16:24

there are some of these bets, and in this case,

1:16:27

this is why they found out, when

1:16:29

you have something being bet that's very

1:16:31

obscure in size, these

1:16:34

apps immediately go back to the league and

1:16:36

say this just happened. So

1:16:38

compare that to Trimoth, what would happen

1:16:40

previously, before sports betting was legal in

1:16:42

the US. Before what would

1:16:44

happen is like, all of

1:16:46

these bookies would be able to have relationships with

1:16:48

some of these players. Sometimes they would

1:16:51

also have relationships with some of the

1:16:53

refs, and it has spilled over. So

1:16:55

the NBA has had to deal with an

1:16:57

example where one of the refs were, I

1:17:00

think he was betting on some Tim Donahue,

1:17:02

and then he was point shaving. So this

1:17:04

has been going on for a long time,

1:17:06

it moved into the realm of it

1:17:09

being automated with algorithms looking out.

1:17:12

The fact that this kid didn't have

1:17:15

anybody on his team that explained that

1:17:18

DraftKings and FanDuel are going to send this

1:17:20

data to the NBA is

1:17:22

inexcusable, because maybe the kid would not have done

1:17:25

it. Do you agree with

1:17:27

the lifetime ban? Or do you think they should be? Yeah, it

1:17:29

has to be lifetime. It has to be

1:17:31

for the NBA to have integrity. Yeah,

1:17:34

it's really, and

1:17:36

what do we think about this becoming

1:17:39

legal in the US and people? Well,

1:17:42

the other thing I'll say, and I mentioned this a few weeks ago,

1:17:46

everything is being gamified. You

1:17:48

have an entire population that seemingly in

1:17:50

America, consumer

1:17:53

spending still goes up, folks

1:17:55

are relatively still flush with cash. There's

1:17:57

lots of free cash flows. There

1:18:01

are new and more aggressive

1:18:03

forms of stimulus constantly coming down

1:18:05

the pike, whether it's

1:18:08

student loan forgiveness or something else, right? Governments are

1:18:10

inventing new and new ways of buying votes. That's

1:18:13

going to put more and more money in people's hands. That

1:18:16

means a larger and larger percentage of it will bleed

1:18:18

into these kinds of things. And it's not just sports

1:18:20

gambling. There was an article in the Wall Street Journal

1:18:23

about this woman who's a well-respected

1:18:25

lawyer who became totally addicted playing

1:18:28

like a bingo app, right,

1:18:30

and lost her entire life. So these

1:18:32

forms of gambling and addiction are just going

1:18:34

to skyrocket, I think, because you

1:18:37

have these apps that are really

1:18:39

incredibly well-engineered to

1:18:41

get you super hooked. And

1:18:43

then the adrenaline rush and the dopamine rush

1:18:46

of actually winning money is a thing that

1:18:48

for some people, they can't turn off

1:18:50

once they feel it for the person. We know some

1:18:52

of those people, and you know, it's hard for them

1:18:54

to control their sports betting, blackjack playing, other

1:18:56

things. They just, they get too into

1:18:59

it. They get too into it. They

1:19:01

get just, you know, but other societies,

1:19:04

other geos, Australia, New Zealand, and the UK, they've had

1:19:06

this for a while, so they figured out how to

1:19:08

deal with this. This is what I'm going to tell

1:19:10

you. The last thing I'll say on this is when

1:19:12

I was in high school, so in the early 90s

1:19:14

in Ontario and Canada, they introduced

1:19:16

sports betting as a way of generating revenue

1:19:19

for the government. What

1:19:21

I will tell you is that my entire

1:19:23

high school, all the boys, not the girls,

1:19:26

we became instant gambling addicts.

1:19:30

We were figuring out how to put bets on. Most

1:19:32

of it was betting in hockey, because that's the sport

1:19:34

that we all knew the best growing up in

1:19:37

Ottawa. But

1:19:39

it was all day, every day. It consumed

1:19:41

us. And I think when you look

1:19:44

inside of these apps, you're seeing a lot of young men

1:19:46

with a lot of free cash and a lot of time

1:19:48

getting sucked into the gamification of this thing. I

1:19:51

think it's going to be a big problem. I

1:19:53

will tell you, Sacks, I'm interested in your position

1:19:55

on this, because there is a whole system, an

1:19:57

ecosystem emerging here. The states are getting massive amounts

1:19:59

of revenue. revenue. $11 billion generated

1:20:01

last year, up 44.5% from

1:20:04

2022. The league is printing money

1:20:08

from this, all the leagues. The NBA will generate $167 million from

1:20:10

betting this season

1:20:13

up 11% year over year. The sports books, obviously

1:20:15

Killing the Draft King's got a $20 billion

1:20:18

market cap and betters obviously love it. It's

1:20:20

more fun, it's making the games more engaging

1:20:22

and the media is

1:20:26

loving this. All of the

1:20:28

podcasts, Bill Simmons, ESPN, you

1:20:30

can't watch a game, you can't hear

1:20:32

sports commentary without this being integrated. And

1:20:34

it's being integrated at a very fundamental

1:20:36

editorial level. They're asking the host of

1:20:39

the show their spend and

1:20:41

what they're betting on. And they're

1:20:43

doing something very smart, which is they're paying huge

1:20:45

endorsement deals to the players as well. Yes, I

1:20:47

think Draft King's did something with LeBron. This is

1:20:49

genius because when you get that ingratiated, you'll never

1:20:51

get ripped out. Because if they

1:20:54

become a huge part of the off

1:20:56

court revenue model for these players. We're

1:20:59

locked in. It's like the new, it's like the

1:21:01

new Eric Jordans. What do you

1:21:03

think about this just in terms of on a societal

1:21:05

basis, and the United States? You

1:21:08

know, it's sort of like cannabis, you know,

1:21:10

if this is a new thing for Americans

1:21:12

to have access to, there's a lot of

1:21:14

weird behaviors going on edge cases. But what do

1:21:17

you think net net has a society take

1:21:19

away from the emergence of sports betting, and

1:21:22

this next generation being so addicted to it?

1:21:25

Well, I think cannabis is the right analogy. I think

1:21:28

adults should be allowed to bet on

1:21:30

sporting events, or just like they're allowed

1:21:32

to drink or, you know,

1:21:35

smoke pot or engage in other mild vices. Some

1:21:38

people handle it responsibly and some don't. It's

1:21:40

probably on a societal basis, it's probably not

1:21:42

a great thing. But it's something you allow

1:21:44

to happen as

1:21:47

a personal freedom and hopefully people use

1:21:49

it responsibly. on

1:22:00

sports, but I love playing cards because it's

1:22:02

social. So, you do any sports betting now

1:22:04

and again? Maybe on the Super Bowl you get

1:22:07

once in a while you play a bet, a

1:22:09

wager? When I got admitted to the ownership group

1:22:11

of the NBA, I stopped and I probably made

1:22:14

three bets since then. All three

1:22:16

were like on the Super Bowl at

1:22:19

a casino, so it was legal when I

1:22:21

was still an owner and I've

1:22:23

not done it since. I've refused to download these

1:22:25

apps because I love

1:22:28

sports and I think that if I added

1:22:31

this to it, I just

1:22:33

don't think it would be good for me, so I don't want to do it. That

1:22:36

was my exact take too. Sacks, you ever play any

1:22:38

stats? You're not a wager on the stuff either, right?

1:22:41

I'm not a sports better. Yeah. You ever bet on chess? Is

1:22:44

there any game on that? No one bets on

1:22:46

chess because it's so obvious who's going to win.

1:22:48

There's a very precise rating system. Correct. So in

1:22:50

poker, poker is very

1:22:52

different because you can have players at

1:22:55

the same table and you know who are the

1:22:57

great players and who are not great players, but

1:22:59

still in any given hand the

1:23:01

underdog can win because you can basically

1:23:03

suck out or whatever. There's a significant

1:23:05

luck component on every single hand. Over

1:23:08

the long term, you believe that

1:23:10

the luck kind of evens out and you

1:23:12

reach your expected value, but on any given

1:23:14

hand, you can believe that you're the winner.

1:23:16

So there's a lot of gambling in

1:23:18

poker even though it is a skill game. In

1:23:21

chess, like that just doesn't work. I

1:23:23

mean, if I play Magnus

1:23:25

Carlsen or any 2000 rated

1:23:27

player, I'm just never going to win. So

1:23:29

yeah, there's no point in betting. Sacks, what's

1:23:31

your rating? 1400. I'm

1:23:35

a little better than that. I'm like, um, I'm

1:23:37

probably more like 1600. Last time

1:23:39

at 1400 I stopped playing him because he would just, I would

1:23:42

get to the middle game with Sacks. I get like 30 moves

1:23:44

in and then he would just smash me. I'm like 800 or

1:23:46

something. How do you get better at

1:23:48

chess? Freebird never rating. I don't

1:23:50

want to talk about it. He doesn't want to

1:23:52

talk. Freebird never rating. Are you still

1:23:54

upset about the octopus stuff? No.

1:23:58

Oh, okay. But what's your rating? Do

1:24:00

you have a question? It's

1:24:02

too personal a question. Do you do

1:24:04

you never share information where people can

1:24:06

actually like get to know you? Yeah

1:24:08

people dude, come on I'm

1:24:11

asking me other questions Just

1:24:13

don't have my reading don't ask me about

1:24:15

my chest reading. What

1:24:17

is the lowest way to get better? Should I get a

1:24:19

coach or something facts? What's the best? I'll

1:24:21

call map has very good lessons on it, too. It's

1:24:24

actually quite good. Yeah, you could get a

1:24:26

coach and that would definitely help There's also these exercise

1:24:29

you can do called puzzle rushes that teach

1:24:31

you how to spot tactics. Well, that's all

1:24:33

tactics Yeah, probably half the game. Yeah,

1:24:35

huh? Like you learn how to

1:24:37

do a night fork or something like that how to

1:24:39

do pins you see to spot tactics quickly is really

1:24:42

my Puzzle rush scores are pretty good Yeah

1:24:44

over a thousand No, no

1:24:46

you play it's like how many you can get

1:24:48

in a certain period of time I mean and

1:24:50

it gets it gets sequentially harder as you complete

1:24:52

the puzzles and you have like a limited period

1:24:54

to do it So yet you

1:24:57

feel shame you feel shame if you want

1:24:59

to get better. Yes I've watched a lot

1:25:01

of chess videos on YouTube and there's a

1:25:03

very good series by John

1:25:05

Bartholomew call climbing the ratings ladder.

1:25:07

Ah and For each

1:25:10

level of elo ratings. He has a series of

1:25:12

videos So like I don't know if you're like

1:25:14

at 1200 There's a whole series

1:25:16

for 1200 and he'll play

1:25:18

a bunch of games against 1200s

1:25:21

showing what they typically do wrong And

1:25:23

you can learn from it. It's actually Have

1:25:26

you spent time sacks like studying

1:25:29

like openings and like

1:25:31

studying Like specific lines. I

1:25:33

don't even know if I'm using the right language. You're like Opening

1:25:37

right? I haven't spent a ton

1:25:39

of time studying them, but I'm certainly familiar

1:25:41

with a number of the most common openings

1:25:45

So I guess yes, I guess on some level I

1:25:47

studied them I would say that depending

1:25:49

on where you are in your Development

1:25:52

that may not be the most pressing thing for you

1:25:54

to do You

1:25:57

know, I think you probably do want

1:25:59

to just know a few basics of

1:26:01

a few of the most common openings.

1:26:03

But there's probably other things

1:26:05

for you to learn first. You don't need to memorize a

1:26:07

bunch of complicated lines. I think it's

1:26:09

really cool that kids are learning this, I

1:26:11

know this may be a counter or a

1:26:14

contrarian view, but I think kids having access,

1:26:18

or young adults having access to sports betting

1:26:20

poker, it's kind of

1:26:22

a good thing because if controlled,

1:26:24

because they're learning about odds and

1:26:26

gambling and framing it, I, with

1:26:28

my 14 year old, are doing

1:26:31

an allowance, and then I

1:26:33

decided to do an investment club, and so I'm

1:26:35

putting $100 every month into

1:26:37

like a Robinhood account, and

1:26:39

we're gonna do like two meetings every month, one

1:26:41

to buy a new stock and one to examine

1:26:44

our existing stocks, and I'm just starting

1:26:46

an investment club. So if anybody's kids are in that age group

1:26:48

and they wanna join it, let me know, because

1:26:51

I'm gonna do like a, with a cousin's

1:26:53

like a Zoom call every month, where we just talk

1:26:55

about stocks, and then I'm

1:26:57

gonna have them actually buy it, so

1:27:00

that they can be prepared for the real world and how

1:27:02

companies are going, but how do you

1:27:04

think about your kids, Chamath, because you got to

1:27:06

do this gambling when you were young, didn't that

1:27:08

help you ultimately as an adult? I

1:27:10

mean, I ran a casino in my high school. Was

1:27:15

that the? Yeah, I mean, I

1:27:17

ran a little block check game, where the

1:27:19

rich kids could play and I was the

1:27:21

house, and I would make a few extra

1:27:23

hundred bucks a week. Nice. And

1:27:27

that was great, because like, you know, between that and

1:27:29

my job at Burger King, it really helped. And

1:27:33

then I would go and take that, and I actually came pretty decent

1:27:35

at block check, and I would go, there would be these, what's

1:27:38

called charity casinos, so casinos in Ottawa, Ontario

1:27:40

were illegal, but if they were

1:27:42

to raise charity for various

1:27:44

charities, they were allowed, and so my

1:27:46

friend and I would show up at these

1:27:48

things and just run them over. Anybody

1:27:51

else run an illegal business as a kid? I'll

1:27:53

tell you about mine. Sacks, you

1:27:55

run any illegal business as a kid? No comment.

1:27:58

Come on, it's statute of limitations. What did you

1:28:00

do? You must have been running some scams. Come on, tell us.

1:28:02

I'll tell you my two scams after you tell us yours. Well,

1:28:04

by the way, I'll tell you I had a bad debt situation

1:28:07

in my in my lunch game. You know,

1:28:09

I used it I used to let people bet up to

1:28:11

a buck. Okay, so four or five

1:28:13

guys up, you know, 25 cents, 50 cents

1:28:15

or a dollar and one guy He

1:28:17

like demanded an expanded credit line and that

1:28:20

gave him up to two bucks And

1:28:22

how many boxes of ziti did he go down and

1:28:24

one lunch? He lost 80 bucks and it took me

1:28:26

three months to get paid. It was the worst experience.

1:28:29

80 boxes of ziti? I had no 80 dollars. I

1:28:31

had no, I know I'm just doing a soprano. I

1:28:33

had to I had to sweat this guy for three

1:28:35

months To get my 80 dollars He

1:28:38

was rich too. His parents were rich. What

1:28:40

did he do? Did he have to do your term papers

1:28:42

or something? Did he have to do your essays? Clean your

1:28:44

bike? I wouldn't have gotten this money. Come on, Sacks. Give

1:28:46

it up What was your scam you were running? Let's move

1:28:48

on. I

1:28:51

had two scams. Freiburg, you have a scam when you were

1:28:53

running? When you were a kid? Any

1:28:56

scams? I used to go to the recycler

1:28:58

newspaper. Do you guys remember that? Yeah,

1:29:01

the recycler and I would buy used

1:29:03

like electronics equipment, computer equipment And

1:29:06

then I would like sell it So

1:29:08

I would then like post other ads I basically did

1:29:10

ad arbitrage as a way to think about it So

1:29:13

I would go and find people selling stuff that I

1:29:15

thought was like underpriced And then I would buy it

1:29:17

And there was nothing to fix you would just it

1:29:19

was under priced and then I knew like the

1:29:21

better market to go sell it I'd make more

1:29:23

money So then I'd buy like all these like

1:29:25

old like like a broken receiver Distiffment and a

1:29:27

receiver good speakers that I knew were good, but

1:29:29

they were like deeply discounted I'd drive around in

1:29:32

my white van. I'd pay people cash I'd load

1:29:34

it up and then I'd go sell it to

1:29:36

like other people by putting ads and No

1:29:39

wonder you wound up at google I

1:29:41

had I had two really good scams when I was a kid

1:29:44

The first was this guy owed my dad some

1:29:46

money for backgammon My dad was a backgammon shark

1:29:48

and he would play in his bar When

1:29:51

I would show up at six in the morning, my dad would be playing

1:29:53

blackjack with guys. They would get you know In

1:29:56

deep with him. And so this guy who

1:29:58

was in the mob. Oh my dad some

1:30:00

money and for the vig he gave him

1:30:02

a copy of The Empire Strikes Back on

1:30:04

VHS. And I

1:30:06

was like, what? This is

1:30:08

before it was out. They had recorded it in

1:30:11

the movie theaters in 1984 or something, whenever that

1:30:13

came out. And it was a

1:30:15

really bad copy. So my

1:30:17

dad comes home, he gives me the copy. We watch it, it

1:30:19

was incredible. He's like, thanks, Dad. And I

1:30:21

got my friend to bring over his VHS. I made 10

1:30:24

copies of it. I go to school in McKinley

1:30:26

Junior High School in Brooklyn and I sell them

1:30:28

for 30 bucks a pop. I

1:30:30

sell them like hotcakes. And

1:30:32

then I get pinched. Math

1:30:35

teacher says, what's going on with these Empire Strikes Back?

1:30:38

And I said, what do you mean? I don't know what you're

1:30:40

talking about. It's like, I heard you got Empire Strikes Back. He

1:30:43

gave me a mouth shut. I looked him dead

1:30:45

in the eye and I said, are you

1:30:47

interested? And

1:30:49

he goes, yeah, how much are we? I

1:30:51

said 30 bucks, but I'll give you one

1:30:53

for 10. And

1:30:55

he said, okay, pull that 10 bucks. I sold my

1:30:58

math teacher. I kid you're not the Empire Strikes Back

1:31:00

for 10 bucks. Can you do this whole thing again

1:31:02

but in the Christopher Walken voice? I'm not going to.

1:31:04

Well, give me the other one I did. No,

1:31:07

it's the Joe Pesci voice. Do this one in the Christopher

1:31:09

Walken voice. And so the name of it was Jason's Hot

1:31:11

Tapes. And so I made a business card

1:31:13

and laminated Jason's Hot Tapes and I would hand it to

1:31:15

people and I'd hand them the Jason's Hot Tape card.

1:31:18

And they'd say, give me my card back. But I would just show

1:31:20

them that I had a card. I was

1:31:22

also in the fake ID business. Oh,

1:31:24

say more. I granted out fake

1:31:27

IDs with a buddy of mine. All right, that

1:31:29

was mine. That was mine. Oh,

1:31:31

Zach, this is the fake ID business too. We

1:31:34

used Harvard graphics. Zach, what were you using? I was

1:31:36

using Harvard graphics. Well, this is

1:31:38

the day before holograms and it just

1:31:40

wasn't that hard to, you know, copy.

1:31:42

So we just made like boards or

1:31:44

whatever and Polaroids. So we did it

1:31:46

for ourselves and we did it for friends. Yeah, same. Here's

1:31:49

the thing about the fake ID business. The

1:31:51

bouncers were like, if

1:31:53

you've got money, show us any piece of

1:31:56

paper. They knew. We have plausible.

1:31:58

We have plausible deniability. One

1:32:00

of plausible deniability. Exactly. That was the, that's

1:32:02

the key to the rack. Did

1:32:05

you put McLovin in university Hawaii? Yeah.

1:32:09

Actually, well, it's kind of funny if sometimes

1:32:11

the bouncers would go, what's your name and

1:32:14

it'd be like, you'd be because you didn't

1:32:16

remember what he's on the ground, you know what

1:32:18

he's remember? Like,

1:32:20

I, my man, mine was like, oh, mine was like

1:32:22

Raj Patel. Mad

1:32:27

was Raj, Raj is a Patel.

1:32:30

Or they'd ask you, what was your birthday? And you don't

1:32:32

remember what's on your ID. Yeah. You don't

1:32:34

know what's on your ID. I don't remember.

1:32:36

I don't remember. How about the key? I

1:32:38

had one drink. Now the key

1:32:40

in the fake ID game is to use your,

1:32:43

your month and day. That's

1:32:45

yours. Yeah. And then change the year. Yeah.

1:32:47

That's the key. That's the key. All right.

1:32:49

So I'll give you the second one. Do

1:32:51

it in the principle of walk-in voice. So

1:32:54

my friend, his brother

1:32:57

had a DeLorean. He,

1:33:00

I can't do it. I can't sustain

1:33:02

it. Anyway, this kid, who

1:33:04

I grew up with, well, I shouldn't

1:33:06

say, anyways, they would beep

1:33:09

that out. He lived up on 13th Avenue. I

1:33:11

go to his house. His brother's got a DeLorean.

1:33:14

It was incredible. And we're in

1:33:16

junior high school and I'm talking to

1:33:18

his brother and I go into the garage

1:33:20

and there's all DeLorean parts on

1:33:22

the wall. And I said, why

1:33:25

do you have all these parts? And he

1:33:27

said, Oh, you know, uh, there was

1:33:29

a DeLorean that, um, you know,

1:33:31

fell apart and we picked up the pieces.

1:33:34

They had stolen another DeLorean cause DeLorean stopped producing and they

1:33:36

just chopped it up, but he had it in his

1:33:38

garage. So anyway, uh, we're playing chess

1:33:40

master at the time and I had hacked a copy of

1:33:42

chess master. It was very easy to do. And

1:33:45

the guy said, you got chess master. Can you get me more

1:33:47

copies of that? I said, sure. How many copies you want? He's

1:33:49

like, how many can you make? I was like,

1:33:51

well, floppy disc costs four bucks. He's

1:33:53

like, I'll give you 10 bucks to copy a chess master. I

1:33:55

said, fine. I go, my friend, we

1:33:58

go steal floppy discs. from

1:34:00

the store. So we don't want to pay them

1:34:02

four bucks for them. Not the three and a

1:34:04

halfs, the five and a quarters. These are five and a

1:34:07

quarters. And we go into the store and

1:34:09

we take the flyer and

1:34:11

I hold the flyer open and I hold it

1:34:13

behind my back and my friend takes the discs

1:34:15

out of the sleeve at Staples, whatever, jumps in

1:34:18

there. We made copies of it. And then we

1:34:20

were selling Chess Master for 10 bucks a pop

1:34:22

at scale and giving them to the guys on

1:34:24

13th Avenue who were then reselling them for 20

1:34:26

bucks. This is when Chess Master was like a

1:34:29

hundred dollar product. Shout out to Chess Master. That

1:34:31

was my second scam. This

1:34:33

is some degenerate. Yeah. And

1:34:36

that's not even the best one. I'll give you the

1:34:38

best one. This is the best and I'll give you the last scam we

1:34:40

ran. There

1:34:42

were parking permits in the late 80s in

1:34:45

Manhattan. They were hard to get, but

1:34:47

they were legit. If you had a parking permit

1:34:49

in your window for the fire

1:34:51

department police, yeah, you

1:34:54

could park in Manhattan in a lot of different areas.

1:34:57

And so we went and we took

1:34:59

a picture of these. Then we got

1:35:01

on PageMaker or whatever and

1:35:03

I went down to Canal Street and I

1:35:05

bought at Pearl Paints like the same color

1:35:08

orange and that lamination kit.

1:35:11

And we got on Photoshop, I kid you not, we held the

1:35:13

picture up and we tried to figure out the fonts they

1:35:15

used. And we made a copy of

1:35:18

the placards to park. And

1:35:21

then we sold those for like 50 bucks and people

1:35:23

used them and they wouldn't get tickets. They worked. So

1:35:26

we sold police placards that had to be

1:35:28

super illegal in 1988. All

1:35:30

right, everybody. Four, you're a

1:35:32

Sultan of science. The exception, David

1:35:34

Freiburg. Your chairman, Dick Kater, from

1:35:36

Off-5, Apatia. The Rain

1:35:39

Man, yeah. David Sacks, I am your

1:35:42

world's greatest moderator. J. Kyle, we'll

1:35:44

see you on episode 176 and

1:35:47

hopefully in September at the All-In

1:35:49

Summit. Bye-bye. Bye-bye.

1:35:52

I like your winner all. Rain

1:35:56

Man Belvis Sacks, We

1:36:01

open sourced hands and they just come and read.

1:36:03

Do you want me to ask you a question?

1:36:06

We do. We

1:36:12

are talking about a dog. Hey,

1:36:15

uh, dog, are you gonna go sit right with you? I'm

1:36:18

gonna get a hug. Oh,

1:36:20

man. You should

1:36:22

have asked me to meet you at one of your shows.

1:36:24

You should all just get a room and just have one

1:36:26

big huge order because they're all like sexual. You

1:36:29

should just meet the police somehow.

1:36:31

You're about to meet the rest

1:36:33

of your family. You're gonna

1:36:35

meet me at a feast. You're gonna meet

1:36:37

me at a feast.