SPEAKER_01: Sax, I am going to give you $1,000 each to the charity of your choice for every correct answer. Fuck it. 10,000. But you have to answer you have to answer in real time and you can't fuck around. Okay. No.
SPEAKER_03: This is this is to any charity chooses included Tucker Carlson 2024. Okay, let's go to give the answers right away. You cannot
SPEAKER_01: fucking think about this. Here we go. 321 first, middle and last name of your children and their birthdays go first time
SPEAKER_03: already. No already. Okay, go do you know you can beat these
SPEAKER_01: out Nick go ahead go. So is January No here. What's the
SPEAKER_00: 2008 is October 2010. And then little guy little man. You're
SPEAKER_03: trying to stop me with a little guy. He was born October of
SPEAKER_00: 2016.
SPEAKER_01: That was a struggle. I got it. I got there. He got there. That's
SPEAKER_03: all that matters is he got there. It is. So you're gonna
SPEAKER_00: give that you're gonna give 10 grand? Yeah, 10 grand each to
SPEAKER_03: 30 grand name Tucker Carlson for President DeSantis 2024.
SPEAKER_01: I said charity asshole. Rain Man David. Hey, everybody. Hey,
SPEAKER_03: everybody. Welcome to your favorite podcast, the all in podcast where we talk about the economy, technology, politics, and basically anything that's in the news with us today. Again, the queen of Kenwa himself, David Friedberg. How are you doing, David? I'm hanging in there today. All right, people are looking for the dog. Where's the dog? Monty? He's sitting here on the floor. Monty, come here. Come on. Come on. Monty. All
SPEAKER_03: right. And from a random palace somewhere in the world. The dictator himself, Chamath Palihapitiya. How you doing? See?
SPEAKER_01: I'm doing great. You know, I got another dog.
SPEAKER_03: While you were in Italy.
SPEAKER_01: I went to the breeder that I got Aki from and she had a three year old that was not really, you know, ever going to become a breeding dog or whatever. So I adopted the three year old. He has a parasite. So he's been pulling everywhere, everywhere. That's great information for the call over the all over the
SPEAKER_03: castle all over the castle. Fantastic. Liquid poop, by the
SPEAKER_01: way, but we finally diagnosed it today. And he's going to the to the vet to get some liquids and to get the parasite expunged from his body.
SPEAKER_03: Okay, thank you for that information. I don't know where you know, nobody cares how you were doing. I thought you were just gonna say great. I didn't know we were gonna go straight to diarrhea. We got a new dog too. You did. And it's also it's been kind of
SPEAKER_00: a disaster. The kids were like that we found this like, you know, golden. That is really calm. You know, like, she's just super low energy and calms like perfect for us. I'm like, I don't know. I think that's just like the puppies kind of asleep. You know, like, it's gonna wake up. They're like, I don't know what's going on. I'm gonna wake up. They're like, No, no, no, no, this is like a special dog. It's like really well behaved or so anyway, we get it. Sure enough, like a week later, the puppy wakes up. And she's eating everything in the house destroying everything. It's been Yeah, so now we're
SPEAKER_03: with that dog number two or three for you. It's dog to with
SPEAKER_00: the dog one was a rescue dog who's great. So dog number two
SPEAKER_03: is now getting trained. David Sacks is with us. Of course, the Rayman himself and I get up and I get up and I get up and I get up and I get up. I put all the girls to bed and then I hear screaming I get up I run outside. Literally the new Bulldog who's nine months old Maximus went on you know, one of his running fits. One of my daughters falls out of bed gets like a bruise on her like lower back and she's wailing. The other daughter feels terrible about it. And then the dog decides that he is going to projectile vomit everywhere all at the same time. Yeah, you guys utter chaos. It's chaos. Chaos. It's cat dogs plus kids equals chaos. So but would any of us have it any other way? I love
SPEAKER_01: the combo of dogs and kids. It's just the best pretty great. It's for dogs are amazing. Especially when you bring in a new dog or a
SPEAKER_01: puppy into the house. It's chaos, but it's a really beautiful chaos. Well, you know what I think also is like, think
SPEAKER_03: about how overrated everything in life is people like oh my god, this place with the pasta in Italy. It's the greatest life changing thing. And all this movie was incredible. It's the best movie ever made. And it's never the best movie ever made or the best pasta ever. It's great or whatever. But I think kids and dogs are underrated. universally have as
SPEAKER_01: many kids as you can possibly biologically have and can economically afford is my one opinion. And the more dogs the better. I love dogs. Yeah. All right. I think we should start
SPEAKER_03: with the COVID cases because this is impacting everything from the economy, to people's decisions touching on people's freedoms. And it's hard to know where to start here. But I think facts are always a good place to start. Here in the United States, we had gotten COVID cases, you know, to that 12,000 a day average was pretty amazing. And it looked like it was going to go straight down smooth sailing. And we had had deaths down at around. I saw some seven day averages, where we were at 150 200. Now the weekends are kind of weird in terms of reporting, but the seven day average today is at 248. In other words, it's been flat for a month when you do this, this is according to the New York Times statistics and Google, you can search for Google and you'll find these have some great data that they'll just put right in the search result. However, cases have gone from this 1215 k a day average, soaring in just 30 days to 62,000 a day and a seven day average of 40,000. So we're basically tripled the number of cases, cases trail traditionally debts by something in the neighborhood of 10 days, I think I'm correct, Friedberg. So what do you think is actually going to happen here? We're going to we're going to get up to 10 100,000 200,000 cases a day, and maybe double the number of deaths from the people who are not vaccinated. Yeah, you know, the current logic on this is
SPEAKER_02: that there will be because of the number of people that are generally infected, and are spreading what is now an even more infectious variant of COVID. The people that are not vaccinated are starting to get it at a higher rate. And that's where the deaths are starting to come from. So, yeah, we will see deaths climb. And I think like we talked about last time, we're starting to see even Gavin did an interview yesterday in California talking about how, you know, there it's on the table that we may go back to certain restrictions, behavioral restrictions, mask mandates, etc. So there's going to be a set of reactions. And I think as we talked about last time, we saw the market start to react to the potential of that on Monday. And then very interestingly, kind of reverse course on Tuesday, and everything came back when everyone was freaked out on Monday after they saw the weekend's data, which showed that cases are climbing like crazy in the US. But I think the conventional wisdom is not that many people are going to die, therefore, we're not going to see, you know, political leaders force restrictions that are kind of going to damage the economy. And we're going to start to walk what I think Israel is calling the golden line, which is balancing the economy with the the health of the citizenry. So so you know, we'll see, it's going to come down to policy. But I think from a desk perspective, there will absolutely be a rise in deaths now as unvaccinated people are the going to be the bulk of those deaths. And, and this thing is spreading again amongst people that haven't been vaccinated. Well, and then sacks, this becomes now a great raw shock
SPEAKER_03: test of what do you see in this data and in this moment, because it's a pandemic, as many people are saying now, I think this is becoming the meme or the catchphrase. It's a pandemic of the unvaccinated. So people have chosen to opt into this pandemic. And then a group of us have chosen to not be part of it, you were part of it even as a vaccinated person, but you're feeling great. You're back to 100%. So what do you think should happen in terms of closings or shutdowns, or mask mandates? What's your take on the pandemic of the unvaccinated vaccinated?
SPEAKER_00: Well, I think we need to differentiate between public policy and private behavior. So after last week's episode, where I said, you know, Delta variants real, there's gonna be a huge spike in cases. Unfortunately, I thought we had this thing whipped you know, a few weeks ago, now I think the data is showing something different. You know, everyone, there's a lot of commenters saying sacks, you've turned you've been blue pilled. No, it's, you know, I think there's a difference between acknowledging what's going on and then having the policy conversation around it. I think that the difference now from last year, I mean, there's a couple of things. One is that we do have vaccines. So I think for most people getting vaccinated, we'll take the worst risks off the table. The other is we know so much more about what works and what doesn't work. And so lockdowns don't work if you know if they ever did they they we now know looking at from what different states did last year, that they don't make a difference. So there's no reason to go back to that policy. But also, I mean, I would even say on mass, it should be we know that. I mean, it's that I think so. Are we sure of that?
SPEAKER_03: Yeah, I think so. Because the thing that the government
SPEAKER_00: planners never take into account is that private citizens are going to adjust their behavior in both directions. So in Florida, they didn't have mandates, but people who are at risk took, you know, extreme precautions, they would either lock themselves down or be very fastidious about wearing a high quality mask. By contrast, in California, we had the most severe lockdowns, but they were never really feasible. So there's 10 pages of exceptions, people didn't really abide by them. And then on top of it, you know, you have all these mass mandates, but if somebody wears like a sock, loosely affixed to their face, does that really protect them? You know, so, you know, people, if they're, if they're not interested in complying with these mandates, they do it in a halfhearted way. I'm not convinced that the mandates work in the first place. So the smart thing to do here is just to have recommendations and let private citizens decide what their response is going to be. We know now so much more about the risks that we all face than we did a year ago. And so just let private citizens decide. I mean, I'd even say on vaccines, I mean, look, I'm pro-vax, I don't really understand where the anti-vax people are coming from. But I'm kind of done wasting my breath trying to convince people to get vaccinated, you know, on this show, who don't want to get vaccinated, you know, if they don't want to send those doses to the developing world, where they're desperate for them. Let me ask you, Tromoff, do you agree with Sax's position that,
SPEAKER_03: listen, citizens are just going to have to make their own decision here, leave everything open. And let's not have the economy collapse again. And people, people are smart enough to make their own decision. And is this framing of this is a pandemic of the unvaccinated the correct framing?
SPEAKER_01: Wow, I'm really of two minds. There's, there's the part of me that says that you have to give people the right to make their own decision. The problem is that in this specific case, there's so much transmissibility. And as a result of that, how this thing can mutate, that I think that public health has to take a priority over any individual, individuals rights in this very specific narrow, narrow case, because the delta variant is so transmission transmissible,
SPEAKER_03: people are going to have to lose some freedoms is one of those showing a vaccine card when you go to an arena that you wouldn't
SPEAKER_01: need that if everybody was vaccinated, or you had to go through a lot of hoops to be unvaccinated as an example. I mean, and the reason is because the longer you allow this thing to float around in the petri dish of the unvaccinated, you're increasing everybody's risk. And this is where I think individual freedoms as long as there's a trample on collective freedom, then I think live and let live. But I think on this
SPEAKER_01: specific issue, I think that it's it's it's unconscionable to be in a situation where we are fighting basically a time function, where at a certain amount of time, you're going to have a variant that that is, you know, basically will overcome all the vaccines we have will kill enormous numbers of people including the vaccinated will literally shut the economy down. And that's a probabilistic event now. And I don't like the fact that I'm susceptible to that because of a bunch of people who frankly, aren't doing it for medical or religious reasons. They're just watching Fox News and just spouting off. I agree
SPEAKER_00: that we're at risk there. But we're also at risk from accident and vaccinated people in the rest of the world. So Delta variant came from India, the lambda variant, I think the wrong came from Peru. I mean, the fact that matter is unvaccinated people everywhere are a potential Petri dish for the virus. So I'd rather I mean, this is why we need to send those unused doses that by the way are at risk of expiring. We now I mean, there was a tweet about this recently, there's huge stockpiles of vaccine in the US are going to waste right now, we should ship those anywhere in the world that people are ready to get vaccinated specifically to Mexico and Canada and Canada's I think this
SPEAKER_03: month going to even though we got off to a massive head start going to eclipse us in terms of the percentage vaccinated, let me ask it more pointedly, should a T should teachers be public school teachers be forced to be vaccinated? Should you be forced to have a vaccine card to get on public transportation, airplanes or, you know, take buses, you know, long haul buses, long haul trains, and then third, should you be forced to show a vaccine card to get on to go to sporting events or concerts? Let's go through those three. So your personal freedom ends, you're going to be forced if you want to go to group behaviors, if you want to participate in a public
SPEAKER_01: construct, if you want to consume a public resource, or if you want to provide a publicly funded good, then it's the broader public's rights that are superior to your individual rights. Otherwise, work at a charter school where it's not required. Watch the fucking concert from home, or drive your car, use a bicycle or take an Uber.
SPEAKER_03: The end. What do you think and then freeburg?
SPEAKER_00: So I understand that argument, I would differentiate between public and private requirements, because I don't like the idea of giving government the power to forcibly stick a needle in your arm. So what you're not saying you could stay home or
SPEAKER_03: you could take your bicycle. Sure. So is that reasonable that you don't get to go to a Warriors game because you're unvaccinated? Yeah, I think you know, the Warrior Stadium is
SPEAKER_00: privately owned, the team is private. So I think that I think that private companies should be able to set up their own rules for the benefit of their employees and customers airlines, because that is, you know, a gate, it's, there's a
SPEAKER_03: limited number of them. Yeah, I think so airlines should be able
SPEAKER_03: to force it. Now. What about school teachers? Sure. They can't force it, but they can set the requirements
SPEAKER_00: for you to board their planes, you know, okay, now, what about
SPEAKER_03: public schools should, if let's do teachers and students, should teachers be forced to get a vaccine if they want to come in? Because you said if they don't come to work in the fall on a couple episodes back, you're fired. Why wouldn't they want to
SPEAKER_00: get a vaccine? The whole debate with teachers unions was that they wanted to be at the front of the line for vaccines, which isn't an issue anymore, because we have so many. So I don't think that's a serious issue now requiring the kids to get vaccinated is that that would be the real policy question. And well, let's tackle both should teachers be forced to get the
SPEAKER_03: vaccine? Yes or no, you just kind of brushed over. Yeah, you
SPEAKER_02: put force force. No, I mean, I think it's important to just to just, you know, pinpoint this like, forcing teachers to get vaccinated in order to, you know, work at the school. I just want to highlight the precedent it sets, right, which is, you know, you just said you don't want the government to tell people that they have to go get a shot in their arm. If someone has a personal choice, that they don't want to get that shot. Does that mean then that they, you know, should lose their job as a public servant? Well, no, I mean, no, I'm saying that.
SPEAKER_00: Look, I think that's not a big deal. But like, if there's one
SPEAKER_02: or two teachers that say, you know what, it is a big deal to me, I have a different I have a set of reasons why I don't want to get shot. I think those teachers, that's an assumption
SPEAKER_00: of risk. I mean, if they've decided they're going to assume the risk, then you know, don't come crying to us when they get sick. The vector of exposure, right? That they can potentially
SPEAKER_02: petri dishes as they could be that they could they could be the vector that gets kids sick. In all of these situations,
SPEAKER_01: there's an always a very obvious and justifiable exemption for religious and medical reasons to not be vaccinated, not just for this, but for anything else. So I struggle to understand why all of a sudden people who don't have a fucking clue about science are all of a sudden, these armchair scientists who can judge whether or not a vaccine is appropriate for them where they probably already gave vaccines of all other kinds to their kids and themselves. They probably take all other kinds of advice from doctors. But on this one specific issue, they narrowly say, you know what, I'm an expert enough because I'm watching this television show, I've made a decision that to me makes no sense.
SPEAKER_00: Yeah, look, I actually agree with you. I'm in the camp of that everybody barring some, you know, highly specific medical condition that renders you ineligible should be getting vaccinated. So I agree with you about what the right answer is. But I do think that when it comes to government, it's it's a more complicated question about how much power you give to government to force people to engage in, you know, behavior they don't want to engage in. Can you question private
SPEAKER_03: organizations are different? We'll agree on private organizations. But we do have to make some decisions on public transportation. And we do have to make decisions about teachers. And we're going to have to make decisions on students. So could you bench the teachers who or otherwise penalize them who are not vaccinated? You know, there are some times where you know, a cop or a teacher is put in a, you know, not in the classroom, not on the beat for whatever reasons, sometimes disciplinary, but for other reasons, could you just say, Listen, if you're not going to get vaccinated, you're going to not be in the classroom, you're not going to you'll be a remote teacher. And we're just going to create two classes here.
SPEAKER_00: I don't think I don't think there are many teachers who don't want to get vaccinated. But but I look, I think the virus is everywhere now. It's just endemic. And so to single out like one particular group and say you're going to lose your job. You're down on your opinion. So you're saying teachers should
SPEAKER_03: not be forced?
SPEAKER_00: I'm saying that. I mean, if they work in a private school, the private school could definitely require it. We're talking about public only now we all around private.
SPEAKER_03: I think it's a really can you down on it? Yeah, I think it's a
SPEAKER_00: really complicated question. Because I think there are clear public health benefits to everyone getting vaccinated by also don't really like empowering government to force you. Because, look, it's like everything else. The government may be right in this particular case, but what else is it going to do with that power? And you know, I don't like giving government that power. So look, it's a complicated question. I don't you know, it's not. I would I'd probably err on the side of not letting government force people to do it. But but look, I think it's a close call. I do think it's a close call.
SPEAKER_03: Chamath forced the teachers to get vaccinated or not?
SPEAKER_01: Yes. And the reason is because these kids are already being left behind, even when school is functioning normally. And you can see it in the test scores, you can see it in our readiness, you can see it in our ability to actually do the jobs that are required. We are not doing what we need to do as it is in the absence of a pandemic. And now you introduce a reason for folks to basically check out and not appear. What do you guys guess how many years were lost in these 15 months when kids were at home? I would say not 15 months. No, it's more two years, two and a half years, three years. Starting depending on what grade they are. What did the Did your
SPEAKER_03: kids miss graduation? Did they miss senior prom? Did they miss their SATs? I mean, what did they miss in terms of Yeah, I mean, to us, to us is a good point, which is that if
SPEAKER_00: that when government is the employer, requiring it on their employees, because it leads to better outcomes for that institution, that is a little different than government just mandating that you, Jason Calcanos, private citizen have to go get a shot in your arm, right? I mean, so there is a slight difference there, like military, for instance, right? The military probably wants to vaccinate everybody, so that if they need to be ready for a combat situation, they're not like, you know, incapacitated by an outbreak of COVID, right? So I can, I think there, you know, we're getting into shades of gray here from a policy perspective. You know, I don't
SPEAKER_00: want teachers missing school because, you know, for weeks at a time because they didn't do the obvious thing getting the COVID vaccine. So look, I think there are some really good policy arguments there. But I think, again, the one place where I'd say government is clearly overstepping is if they just said, Listen, you private citizen, not an employee of the government has to go get vaccinated. As much as I would like everyone to do get vaccinated. I don't want to give government that kind of power. President Biden could legally require military members to get
SPEAKER_03: vaccinated, but so far, he has declined to do so July 9, New York Times. Friedberg, where do you stand on this? Chammat says, he's all in your teacher, you get vaccinated at the end. And sacks is kind of close, but is a little concerned. What do you say free bird? I mean, another way to frame it is that
SPEAKER_02: there's a new qualification for a job. Like, you know, there's qualification to be in the military, you have to have certain physical capabilities. Jason, I don't know if you would qualify. I don't think I would. I can do like, for
SPEAKER_03: totally different reasons. Your inability to fight or throw a
SPEAKER_01: punch would be no, maybe J Cal could eat the enemy. I would be
SPEAKER_03: great in the military. He'd be like a men's they'd be cooking
SPEAKER_00: the meatballs or something. I think the reason there's
SPEAKER_02: sensitivity to it is because there are existing teachers in jobs. And then you're telling them that in order to keep your job, you have to go get a vaccine. Now, if we were to if we had zero teachers today, and we were starting a public school system from scratch, and you said, here's one of the qualifying criteria to be a school teacher, you have to have an education degree, you have to have maybe a master's degree in education, you have to have appropriate qualifications and training and certification. Oh, and by the way, you also have to have a vaccine. If that becomes a criteria, I think people find it less offensive. It's the fact that we are now saying that there are people that are being told that you have to go get a shot in order to keep your job. And that's the complicating thing that I think people are trying to wade through. I don't have I don't think that if you were to say like, look, it's obvious that the qualifying criteria to be in the military is you have to be able to run and do push ups or whatever the criteria might be. But if you impose that on people that were already in the military, and then you're going to kick a bunch of them out, people would be up in arms about it. If you had a BMI requirement, yeah. And that's the concern I think that arises with, you know, imposing these kind of, you know, personal body criteria upon, you know, specific jobs when people are already employed in that job. And it's there's there's absolutely no answer, right? Like, if you're gonna do it, you're gonna have incredible backlash and trouble and pain. And if you were to, and we're not in a circumstance where we can build these organizations and these institutions from scratch. Look, there's a lot of
SPEAKER_00: social issues where, you know, particularly on the liberal side, people do not want the government prohibiting them from getting certain medical procedures, right? Well, you know, I'd say it's even more invasive, talking about people
SPEAKER_03: transitioning, or, you know, or the issue of abortion, you know,
SPEAKER_00: very hot button social issues where people are saying the government should not have the right to legislate. What happens with what happens with what happens with my body, right? Well, force it, you know, giving government the power to forcibly inject you with something is, you know, that is that is invasive. And so I do think there are like rights implications to that. But I want to be very clear. If you
SPEAKER_01: want the services that are offered to you by the collective whole, if you want to consume and be a net drag on the resources that we share, then you need to sign up for the compact that we all sign up for. That's, that's my over arching argument. The thing with abortion, where I'm on the other side of the issue, just to be very clear is like, it is a woman's body. I don't think I have any right to dictate what she does. I don't understand what she goes through. I don't understand what situation she's in. I don't think I have the judgment to do that. It should have impact on the collective
SPEAKER_01: and her decision to carry or not carry a baby doesn't theoretically come with a probabilistic chance that I may die. It does not. Right. But when you choose to not get vaccinated to a highly transmissible respiratory disease that could kill me or mutate, yeah, I'm not saying
SPEAKER_01: that I have a say. But I do think I should have a say if you're then all of a sudden going to consume the same resources that I consume, where I've signed up to that compact for public health. Based on all this, here's where I come to
SPEAKER_03: what if we gave teachers an off ramp? Listen, if you you need to be vaccinated to be in the classroom. If not, you're going to get a one year buyout or whatever one month or two months for every year of service. Have you been with us for 20 years, you can get 20 months of pay. And or you could say if the virus is spreading at under this rate, in other words, you know, we've got under 1% of the population infected or whatever the the criteria is, then you can come to work in the classroom. But if this thing is spreading, you're out. And that's it. And there's an off ramp here, to David's point, unless there's a narrow like, look, I do think you can be a
SPEAKER_01: conscientious objector for legitimate reasons. Again, like we have these very specific definitions for religious, or for health specific reasons that you don't get vaccinated. I think those should be respected. It's not that cohort of people we're talking about. It's everybody else that right now wants to not think for themselves. And as a result, put everybody else and themselves in danger. Yeah, there I think the
SPEAKER_00: most compelling part of your argument, Jamal is that we're is the health externality, right? That that that each person's decision does have an impact on whether they could be transmitting, you know, multiplicative, contagious particles. And this is why I was in favor of a mass mandate at the beginning of the pandemic is, it's not just an individual decision. Your your choice actually does affect whether other people get sick. So you know, this is why I do think it also wasn't very invasive. Correct, sacks. I mean, was
SPEAKER_03: your other point? Yes, exactly. Potentially high benefit for
SPEAKER_00: very low cost. I think we're but but but the thing that maybe I didn't necessarily take into consideration is, you know, people complied in such a halfhearted way. I mean, I do think the mass makes a difference. If it's an N95 quality mask that you put on correctly, right? Right. But when people just strap a sock to their face is loosely fitting, and they don't give a shit. I mean, does that really make a difference? I mean, I'm very skeptical. Let me ask you a
SPEAKER_03: question, sacks, and then we'll go to freeburg. And then we'll flip to the next topic. If we were on our third pandemic, or let's God forbid, a second pandemic starts a totally different one, you know, Ebola type or something. And we're on the fifth variant and people are dying at a higher rate. Does your calculus change sacks? Because because the the the
SPEAKER_00: downsides that the costs of you know, not not imposing those more restrictive regulations goes up considerably. I mean, definitely my thinking today is highly influenced by the fact that that if you're vaccinated, you're call it 95% likely to be taking the most deadly or serious risk off the table. And so the people who are choosing not to get vaccinated are essentially assuming the risk. You know, it's like it's like smoking in a way where when I made the movie Think for Smoking, Christopher Buckley told me, you know, he's the author of the book. And he said, look, there's something uniquely American about defending people's right to do something that's manifestly harmful, right? You know, the main character in Thank You for Smoking is a spokesman for Big Tobacco, and he's engaging in political spin. But his argument is, look, people have the right to engage in this behavior, even if it is known to be harmful to them. Maybe America is the only place in the world where people buy into arguments like that. But I do. I you know, look, that is that is, that's freedom is letting people do stupid things, you know, and, and so we have to weigh the benefits of freedom against the against the costs. And by the way, sorry, can I just say something? Smoking is a
SPEAKER_01: perfect example. Because as you know, there is now a non trivial amount of law around the liability related to individuals that enabled secondhand smoke, both the smoker, but also other things, condo boards, other places where all of a sudden, you didn't choose to fucking have, you know, tar and nicotine, right bartenders, my dad worked in bars where people
SPEAKER_03: were smoking, it was a cloud of smoke for 30 years, 30 years,
SPEAKER_02: right? They told him he was essentially a smoker. It's not it's not just the detrimental activity at the time. Remember, we've socialized the cost of treatment for people through public health systems. And because of that, it's not just an individual's choice, if there is a socialized cost for everyone that's now got to pay the price, but the government is
SPEAKER_00: so omnipresent, all of our lives, there's always going to be a cost to any bad choice people make. And to Tomas point, I mean, everybody uses government services to some degree. So that alone can't be the reason I do agree that the no, but behavior, David, what about people speeding on
SPEAKER_03: highways at 125 miles an hour? Like, it's illegal. That's
SPEAKER_00: illegal. But but I think I think Jamatha is right that the smoking example is a good one. Because we do regulate secondhand smoke, because there's an externality, there's a health externality to everybody else. If you smoke in a public place, and so we restrict that, but we don't make smoking illegal, we don't stop you from doing it in your own homes, or in private places. And the argument is, listen, if you want to do something that's harmful, primarily to you, that's your choice as an American, you know, and I know people, a lot of people don't like that. Actually, this is the, this, I posted a tweet that I got just because an
SPEAKER_03: opinion is wrong doesn't mean it should be censored. Just because the behavior is harmful doesn't mean it should be prohibited. Just because something is beneficial doesn't mean it should be required. Right? It's a completely
SPEAKER_03: reasonable tweet. Yeah, I thought it was a pretty
SPEAKER_00: inoffensive anodyne tweet, just reminding people that just because, again, something is positive doesn't mean you force people to do it. And just because some behavior is harmful, you don't you don't ban it. I think smoking is a great example of that, right? We let people engage in behavior is harmful to them because freedom is a value in and of itself. For this, I was attacked as a selfish asshole by by this other pod. And I really care Swisher and professor cold takes. Professor what cold takes that literally made an
SPEAKER_03: index of all of Professor G's, you know, takes that Macy's would be incredible and Amazon will lose its money and yada yada. He's kind of obsessed with you too, Jamal prof G. Yeah, just got a show canceled on Bloomberg, but they were a little cars. Fisher was called sacks and asshole will trigger
SPEAKER_00: it. It was bizarre that they would get so triggered by this inoffensive tweet. But I think what you see here is an example of the way that the woke mind thinks which is well, hold on. I
SPEAKER_01: don't think Kara's woke. Are you kidding me? She's like she's
SPEAKER_00: like the Madame du Farge or the woke revolution. She's the middle Farge. Madame Madame Madame du Farge was this character in the French Revolution who had knit the names of the next person to be guillotined. And she was you know, one of the leaders of the sands Q lots. No, look, Kara is constantly ginning up the mob to try and you know, guillotine some non non woke person. I don't think that's true. That's
SPEAKER_01: true. I think she's kind of moderate. You're trying to
SPEAKER_00: you're trying to carry favor with her so you don't know. No, we're not. No, no, no, no, no. She I mean, she did get it
SPEAKER_03: right. You are an asshole. I mean, you are an asshole. She got that. But she's not old and failing. Well, you are kind of old. You look to you look, she's effectively saying we're
SPEAKER_00: all assholes because I think all of us have talked about that. We're assholes. I'm an asshole. Yeah, I love it. Own
SPEAKER_01: it. Okay. What? I'm not a whiner. What's your other choice? Being a whiner on the sidelines? What we've said on
SPEAKER_00: this show is that we have a moral imperative to get to get back to normal. Do we not? That is what we've said. And for that, you're basically saying that that is a let them eat COVID position, right? That we are basically we don't care if people get sick and die because of COVID. That's not true. You know, we just have a bad year. I think we should make people get
SPEAKER_01: vaccinated. Yeah, you're pretty close to getting people
SPEAKER_03: vaccinated. I asked you, Sax, if there were three more variants, and this was an acute situation, you said you would force Oh, look, if we if we had if we had a variant of COVID
SPEAKER_00: that was as deadly as Ebola and as transmissible as Delta variant, it 100% changes the game. There's no question about willing to change the government's ability to put a
SPEAKER_03: shot based on it's a benefit. It's a bit Yes, it's a benefit
SPEAKER_00: cost analysis. And that's reasonable. But look, I give freedom, a lot of weight. And part of my calculation is the fact that I can get vaccinated to take to most likely take the most serious risks off the table. So while I am impacted to some degree by other people's choices, I'm much less impacted now that we have, but you're thinking about this, yours, I
SPEAKER_01: still have a problem with the way you're thinking about this, because you're using you're viewing this as a linear problem. This thing is transmutating. And so I know tomorrow, but there's still billions of people all over the
SPEAKER_00: world who are unvaccinated, and we'd be better off focusing on getting them a Marshall Plan for the vaccines, all these unused doses, we're wasting our breath in the United States trying to get these vaccine hesitant or anti vax people to get vaccinated. Did you guys see that?
SPEAKER_02: Emmanuel Macron of France, you know, basically tightened all these restrictions around access to public places, going into bars and cafes, they basically put all these rules in place that you have to be vaccinated. And he did it in a public address on TV. 22 million people watched it. Yep. And then after he did this, suddenly the vaccination signups went up to like 20,000 a minute, they got 4 million people sign up to get vaccinated. Yeah. I mean, in France, what's the point of
SPEAKER_03: being alive? And then let me throw a wet blanket on the
SPEAKER_02: framing of this on whether all of this talk about forcing vaccinations even make sense or is possible. I have been to like three events over the last month or two, where I was required to be vaccinated. And I literally just took a photo of this index card that I got from this person and sent it to them, which I could go make a Kinkos or I could print at home. It's like, I don't my point is, I don't think that there's not a great digital system today, to enable the level of restriction that we're actually talking about. How are you actually going to know that people go into the Warriors game are actually vaccinated? How are you actually going to know they did it at Madison Square Garden, they literally had you pull out
SPEAKER_03: your ID, and they match your name to your VAX card. And I think printing out a VAX card and fake it, if I find could be a $10,000 fine. And so you would do it like anything else. So if you could, you could make a bogus driver's license. It's not
SPEAKER_02: digital, right? There's no, there's no kind of centralized system where we know who's actually been vaccinated, who's not. So so much of this is just this like analog paper trail thing of like, here's this piece of paper that says I'm vaccinated. I think that you're never going to really close the hole on this thing. Now, you certainly will see the sort of psychological behavior that they saw in France, which is, you just announced the restrictions, you announced these rules, everyone signs up, or some number of people will sign up. But I'm not sure this actually ends up becoming this truly enforceable mechanism of behavior in society over the next short while. Maybe over time, we digitize all this stuff, but we'll see. Yeah, I mean, the best the best the best case scenario is that
SPEAKER_00: because Delta is so transmissible, we get to herd immunity because all the people who didn't get vaccinated, just get it and get the natural antibodies. And hopefully this thing. Are we to that because we have 60% of adults in the United
SPEAKER_03: States have had one shot or more, which is why deaths probably aren't going up because that's like 75% in people over 60 I think. So freeburg in your estimation as our science guy, with what we have like 30 million people who've been vaccinated, that we know of, you got to triple that number, right? Because there's people who we don't know, and then you have 65, you have 60%. So we got to be in the range of 70% have been exposed or been vaccinated. So what when does it kick in? Or are we experiencing, you know, herd immunity right now with these low deaths?
SPEAKER_02: We talked about this before, but there are, you know, there's a spectrum of infection, right? You're you're you're you can see viral replication happening in your body, and then your body clears out the virus before you even know because you've got enough antibodies to that particular strain of a variant of a virus before your body even, you know, you start to feel symptoms. And there are cases where the virus kind of replicates in an uncontrolled way for a period of time, and you have incredibly bad symptoms, and you have inflammation and all the stuff that follows. And so, you know, in terms of how you measure this stuff, it's really difficult to say that you're going to stop all viral replication by getting a certain number of people to be to have been exposed, as we've seen, even when you have a broad and diverse antibody pool in your body, because you've been exposed to a vaccine, we are still seeing that some of these variants can break through for some period of time, because there's not enough of the antibodies that can actually bind to that specific variant. And so the rate of transmission slows, the rate of severe infection goes way down, and so on. So it's not as binary as, hey, we hit herd immunity, and now we're done. It seems this is, you know, as we talked about earlier, and as I think everyone is coming to terms with, this is going to be an endemic virus. And that means that it's going to be circulating in the population in a modest way causing sometimes severe, sometimes, you know, modest outbreaks, for likely a very long time, no matter how many people get it, no matter how many people get vaccinated, because you have different levels, should we ignore it? At
SPEAKER_03: what level should we just say, Listen, that is the steady state? How many cases a day? How many deaths a day? Do you think is the steady state that we should just say, we just go to work and ignore it? I am a brutal, cold hearted
SPEAKER_02: libertarian on this point. And I have been since we first talked about this last year, I've always been of the mind that we need to balance the the follow on life effect and from the economic fallout associated with making certain behavioral changes, and restrictions relative to the actual loss of life, right? So you can never go I really think this point about zeroism and this term about zeroism is an important one, you can never get to zero cases, what is the acceptable number of cases? And what is the cost to keep that caseload down? The balance of those two is a very difficult leadership decision, put a number on it. But it's about saving lives, right? So like, there are a certain number of people whose lives are going to be ruined, who are some of them will commit suicide, some of them won't be able to earn an income again, their businesses are gonna get shut down. What is the economic cost of that versus the economic cost of the loss of life versus the thing is, what is the number we had an average of 250 death
SPEAKER_03: 250,000 case known cases a day at the peak, we had a peak deaths of 4100 a day, we are now at 200 people dying a day. And you know, 30,000 cases, is there a number at which you say, let's just focus on getting back to work? And is that number where we are now? I'm trying to get in. So I Yeah, again, I
SPEAKER_02: wouldn't simplify it to those data points. What I would do is I do we simplify again, I would look at, you know, at what age are people dying? How many life years are we losing? And how can we address the acute populations that are at risk and the acute populations that are that are potentially going to be exposed, manage those populations differently than you manage the broader population that has a lower likelihood of risk of death and a lower likelihood of fatality. And the restrictions that you then impose to, you know, start to manage the risk and the exposure to different populations gets weighed against the saving of life and the loss of life in both circumstances. So it's not easy, right? It's, it's, and everyone wants to sum this whole thing up to like, how many deaths a day is appropriate? That's not the right answer, right? Because, well, you're saying how many that part of it is so obvious,
SPEAKER_00: right? That and we should have known this last summer, the obvious part being that what you want to do is focus your prevention on the part of the population that's the most at risk. And what do we do with lockdowns, we literally lock down the entire population, every business, it was completely insane. We should have focused it on protecting the most at risk populations isolating the sick, or the people at greatest risk, not everybody was just insane. And I mean, I can't believe we're still having that conversation a year later.
SPEAKER_01: Can I before we move on to the next topic, can I read the best? Can I read the best, best comment from Sax's tweet? So Sax's tweet, because an opinion is wrong doesn't mean it should be censored. Just because the behavior is harmful doesn't mean it should be prohibited. And just because something is beneficial doesn't mean it should be required. The best response goes to distantly social rumple, whose full name is at Wendell shirk, who said this message brought to you by the generic self serving platitude alert network, to your regularly scheduled episode of the bland soap opera with the Pablo sisters. Well, yeah, I look, there's an element of
SPEAKER_00: truth to that, which is I almost didn't tweet him as I thought it was too much of a platitude. But the fact that people on the other side got so triggered by it shows why it was actually useful to tweet it is they think that if you're calling for any modicum of freedom or return to normalcy, you're basically a selfish asshole. I mean, it's insane. I mean, they want to stay in this world of zeroest COVID restrictions forever, we got to move on, we're 45 minutes into
SPEAKER_03: COVID. So we got to move on. But I think if this is in the influenza, plus or minus 100%, zone, we got to pick a number where we decide we're moving forward as a society. And you know, local communities can make decisions if they have outbreaks. But I kind of think if this is within, you know, two acts of our yearly deaths from, you know, influenza and just the normal cold, I think we move forward as best we can do we want to go to China, Cuba, I think just real quick before we
SPEAKER_02: move away from this, I really want to just highlight the Deep Mind announcement from this morning, because I think it's actually quite relevant to the tracking of variants and what's been going on. Okay. So this morning, you know, Deep Mind,
SPEAKER_02: which published alpha fold, and we talked about this a few episodes ago by Google, it's their AI arm, it's an AI arm owned by Google. And they basically took protein structure and tried to predict what a protein looks like physically as a function of the DNA or RNA that codes the amino acids that make up the protein. And so again, like when you have a string of amino acids, they they combine and they fold into a wave, it's really hard to predict. And that's the shape of the molecule that we call the protein. And then it does something in the body. And historically, we've had very hard times understanding how genetic code translates into physical structure of protein, which would allow us to predict what that protein can then do in the body. So this morning, Deep Mind incredibly published a database with the predicted structure of every protein in the human body, and in 10 other species using this this capability that they now have, what does it mean in English. And so you know, what this means
SPEAKER_02: is we now have a physical model of every protein that human DNA can make. And that model would allow us to basically now predict what that protein does, how it does it, and how certain drugs can bind to those proteins, and how certain drugs can affect those proteins, and how we can alter human health by making new molecules or adjusting the genetic code to change the shape of those proteins in specific and targeted ways. So it's an incredible data set that was just published. It's almost like, you know, releasing the Rosetta Stone, in my opinion, in terms of we now have this ability to translate human genetic code into the physical form of the molecules that run our body and do things in our body. They did it for 10 other species. And they said that they're going to publish this proteome database and scale it for all other species of life that we have the sort of data set around, which they expect will achieve over 100 million unique proteins in this database over the coming months, freely available and searchable. And let me just explain, and I know I'm on a monologue here, so I'll win the monologue stat. It's a good one. It's a good one. But let me just explain why this is relevant. The Delta variant, what it is, is that, you know, the SARS-CoV-2 RNA sequence is about 30,000 base pairs long. 10% of those are about 3,000 base pairs make up the spike protein, which is the protein at the tip of the COVID virus, the coronavirus that gets into the cells. And, you know, for every 10 people that are infected with coronavirus, there's about one nucleoside mutation. One of those base pairs changes and the virus evolves. And we don't know how that change in that genetic code translates into a different structure of the protein. And so we suddenly discover empirically and, you know, by looking around, suddenly all these people are getting more infected than were getting infected before. We look at the genetic code and we're like, oh, here's the changes that happened. But we could have, with this capability from AlphaFold, predicted what changes make the spike protein do a better job binding to human ACE2 receptors on the cells and getting it to cells, and what other changes could be made in the whole genome of the SARS-CoV-2 virus that could cause this virus to be more transmissible, more deadly, all these sorts of factors, because we can now estimate the physical form of that protein by changing the base pair. And so this tool that was released today, I think highlights that over the next decade, these sorts of things that are going on with viruses, mutating, and variants occurring that are affecting our population can be better estimated and tracked digitally. And it gives us the ability to start to prepare tools and defense mechanisms against them with new drugs and new variant models and new vaccines, well ahead of the Oh my God, we just got hit with a nuclear bomb. Let's clean up the mess kind of in the future. So it's an exciting day and exciting moment. Would they have been released this, David, if it hadn't been
SPEAKER_03: for COVID coming out? Do you think DeepMind just pivoted their entire group up because they have about 1000 people I understand. And by the way, they pay something in the order of six or 700,000 a year on average. And there's many people there who are getting paid millions of dollars a year. So just think about the scale of what Google is spending on this. You guys know that they probably shifted a large number of people to work on this. You guys know that I have long deep roots at Google. And yes, I will tell you that
SPEAKER_02: the value system of people there, you know, the press and the public will think what they want. But I think that the value system of people there drove them to realize the importance of this work that they're doing with AlphaFold. And it is important for humanity. And it's important for the health broadly of people. They could have kept it all inside and used it to build therapeutic drug companies and make money from that. And I think the importance of this discovery and this capability was realized and is published for that very reason. There's a lot of work that DeepMind does to optimize ad targeting and ad spending and all this stuff. And they make tens of billions of dollars of incremental revenue for Google per year based on those capabilities. And then there are these things that benefit all of us. And by putting this out publicly, it's a great good for humanity. And they're making it freely available and searchable. And so I don't think that COVID kind of instigated this because they've been working on this for a very long time since before COVID. And this is a very hard biological problem that is key to understanding biology and how biology works. It's been going on for decades. They've unlocked it with software, and they're making it freely available. And you know, there will be hundreds of drug companies that will now start because of what's in that database. I mean, this is a this is a mitzvah to society to humanity.
SPEAKER_03: Does it change the fact that Google is spending well over a billion dollars a year in DeepMind and doing projects like this? Does this change any of your thinking about breaking them up from off or you know how we look at big tech?
SPEAKER_02: Good question. No. Because where do you afford it? Yeah, where does it where does
SPEAKER_03: this kind of we learned something very disturbing about big tech this
SPEAKER_00: week, actually. This is quite a bombshell that Jen Psaki dropped from the White House press briefing. We got to talk about this. She just sort of casually mentioned that Oh, yeah, by the way, the administration is flagging posts for social media company for big tech companies to take down to remove accounts, specific accounts and posts. Yeah. And she just kind of just casually mentions, Oh, yeah, the big tech companies are very, you know, eagerly cooperating with the administration to take down these accounts, accounts. She even said that when one of these companies takes down an account, the rest should do it to implying that the White House is providing the central coordinator role in the censorship global block list. Yeah. Okay, but let me let's let's take the most charitable
SPEAKER_03: view here. I know that it's very easy to make this a left versus right. They're censoring yada yada, Trump got banned. But if somebody was saying this was micro, this was an account that was claiming that microchips were in the vaccine, would it not be how would the end it was hitting scale? You know, what
SPEAKER_03: would be the way for the White House to inform social media that there was an account that was saying falsely that microchips were in there and that that was trending, the
SPEAKER_00: White House or its officials are free to put out their statements and their position. But this is different. This is the White House coordinating behind the scenes with big tech companies with that behind the scenes are saying they're doing it right
SPEAKER_03: here to everybody. Correct, correct. The behavior was behind
SPEAKER_00: the scenes, but to passaki just admitted it, which is why it's such a bombshell. Look, even the ACLU, if you were president,
SPEAKER_03: and there was an account on Facebook, YouTube, Twitter that was saying there was a microchip from Bill Gates. This is a this
SPEAKER_00: is a blatant violation of the people's first amendment. Tell them how would you you are allowed your the First Amendment gives you the right to say things that are untrue. It is not the business of government to declare what is true and what is false. Okay, even even hold on. Even the ACLU. I'm not done. Even the ACLU came out of retirement. We haven't we haven't heard from them for the last year during any of the years to be the ACLU. Yeah, we haven't heard from them during the past year during all this activity has been going on with accounts being blocked and ghosted. They finally came out of retirement to say that that this is a dangerous violation of people's First Amendment rights. You cannot have the government saying what is true and what is false and then denying people the right to express their opinions based on what the government thinks is the truth. And by the way, there's been a very subtle change here in the language
SPEAKER_00: that's being used. If you remember what the argument used to be that we have to stop disinformation. Now it's shifted to have to stop misinformation. So those two things are very different. It's kind of like the well, it's kind of like the difference in the term equality versus equity. They sound similar, but they actually mean very different things. So disinformation is actually a campaign of purposeful purposeful campaign of propaganda and lies usually put forward covertly. So it's the FSB, you're some intelligence agency, putting out whatever, putting out disinformation, usually under false accounts. So in that case, we can say no, you can't do that because you can't engage in deception around who you are, right. But misinformation is simply information that's being put out that frankly, you disagree with. Okay. And or it could be discernibly wrong, wait, you're
SPEAKER_03: you're kind of framing that right? It could be you're putting out information like there's a microchip in the vaccine that is known to be wrong. Look, the lab leak theory
SPEAKER_00: was considered misinformation by the same people three months ago. Okay, let's take this. There's a microchip. If the if
SPEAKER_03: it was the case that they said there's a microchip in the vaccine, would you be okay with the White House contacting social media company saying, hey, you got these accounts that are saying there's a microchip, you might want to look into it. They're not saying take it down. They're saying take a look into it. That's not the White House's business. Do I
SPEAKER_00: believe in the microchip theory? No, of course not. It's absolutely ridiculous. But it is not the business of to be telling social media who to ban and who to block list. I think
SPEAKER_03: they didn't tell him to ban it. I think they told him to be aware of it. Go ahead. Shemagh. I think you're framing is wrong sex. No, no. Masaki said that when one site takes it down,
SPEAKER_00: they should all take it down. And then Biden on top of it comes out and pours kerosene on the fire by saying that social media sites are literally killing people. Well, yeah, by allowing by allowing this misinformation. So here we have see now let's be honest. He's a president. This is the President of the United States using the bully pulpit to call social media sites mass murderers by virtue of allowing people to have free speech. Trump never used language that intemperate. I don't remember him ever calling American companies. Go ahead. You're not speak. Let's not speak. This is
SPEAKER_01: the exact reason you you can't have a stranglehold on distribution because it will get perverted. And then we either have people we like or people we don't like in these positions of power, or people we like or people we don't like regulating, and it's constantly flipping. And we're all just doomed and bound to get fucked over. So back to the thing that Friedberg brought up before I think Alpha Fold is incredible. I think Google has been an incredible company. They make money hand over fist. They waste an enormous amount of money and all kinds of trash. So it's good that they were actually able to do something useful here. I generally think that companies like Google and Facebook and Amazon, unfortunately do not allow the constructive form of capitalism that people want in today's society. They're just too big to make a great point, which is we got these big tech monopolies
SPEAKER_00: who've become gatekeepers over content, okay. And what the administration has done and their allies in Congress is hang a sword of Damocles over the heads of these big tech companies. They've appointed Lena Khan to be the enforcer at the FTC. They've got their six bills in Congress right now. They've held congressional hearings around taking away section 230 protection, which is very economically advantageous for these big tech companies. So they positioned the sword perfectly over the heads of these big tech companies, threatening to break them up and rein them in. And then Jen Psaki and the White House go to them and say, we want you to take down these accounts that we don't agree with. This is misinformation. Okay. That is a huge danger to free speech. It's basically like the administration saying to these big tech companies, nice little social network you got there, it'd be a real shame if anything happened to it. Look at what's going on. Don't you want them broken up? I do want them broken
SPEAKER_00: up. But what I don't know which is if you want them to hold the sword or do you not want them to hold the sword? I actually
SPEAKER_03: want the sword to come crashing. I actually want the
SPEAKER_00: sword swing the sword, hold it over and then use it for extortion. Yes. That's a great explanation then free verse. I'm
SPEAKER_03: trying to moderate here. freeburg. I've do you get your shift? We talked about spent all day on his phone. He is not
SPEAKER_01: dialed into this problem with you guys. I thought we just went
SPEAKER_03: over the alpha fold stuff way too fast. I mean, the arguing over freedom of speech is happening. And all of this debate freeburg at the same time that we are making incredible life changing moments for humanity. Two different companies went to space last week with civilians. And then we are basically defining the blueprint for the human and every other species on the planet. And we're fighting over people too stupid to take a goddamn vaccine that would save everybody's life and let us continue on and people are dunking on Bezos for not reading the room. I don't know if you saw this freeburg. But how do you think about the space race in relation to reading the room etc? progress, technologically, will only
SPEAKER_02: arise with capital. So you can assume that that progress you know, it's not like someone stumbled into a cave and discovered a rocket ship or stumbles into a cave and discovered alpha fold. There are years of toiling and labs like Edison did making the light bulb. It medicine had to raise a ton of money to get that light bulb project off the ground. If you guys haven't read, I'm trying to remember the biography, there's a wizards of something was it's got wizards in the title. It's a good biography of Edison. And, you know, and I feel like we're at this moment where the Wizard of Menlo Park. Yeah, I think that's the Wizard of Menlo Park. That's right. And the amount of capital that it takes to make these breakthroughs at alpha fold, or at Waymo, or what Bezos and Elon are doing is so extraordinary that you have to be in a position where you can fund this work, you're not going to get a bunch of kickstarters to fund a SpaceX like project or a, you know, Blue Origin like project. And so I think that the benefit of scale that comes out of some of these businesses is that we can do research and development, and we can progress our capabilities as a species forward in a way that would have never been possible if not for the capitalist system and the ability for these businesses to accumulate a large enough pool of capital to take on multiple billion dollar bets. And like Chamath said, waste a lot of money and lose on nine out of 10 of them. But if that $1 billion bet works, it's worth $500 billion. And that money continuously gets reinvested. And look at what Google did with Waymo, they put over a billion dollars in that project before everyone woke up and said, my god, self-driving is real, it's possible, and it kickstarted an industry. And I just feel like the amount of money and not to mention the fact that like, these are free markets. So these businesses, Google, you don't have to search on Google, you don't have to buy from Amazon, but everyone benefits from searching on Google, everyone benefits from buying on Amazon. And the capability of these businesses is rooted entirely on the fact that consumers are choosing to use their products and their services, because they are so good. And so I don't feel like these guys are screwing people over, you can consider the small business model as being like, you know, hey, maybe we shouldn't have had small business retailers for as long as we did, because at some point, distribution was going to be economically advantaged by being centralized. And therefore, all consumers are going to benefit by centralizing. Is there really a right to maintain local distribution sites that we call small businesses that should remain in business forever? Maybe there's a way to help them transition into a new business model or a new market. But same with what happened with the taxi industry. Technology will force these evolutions, the capital accumulates, and that capital can be invested in things that we would have never imagined on a smaller scale. But go ahead, Shammok. No, I do think sympathetic to what you were saying, I do think
SPEAKER_01: that if you look at every platform innovation that's ever happened, so whether it's, you know, we go from no print to print, you know, to newspapers, to radio, to television, you've always first started with a pendulum that was very much firmly in the camp of centralized monopolistic or oligopolistic kind of early outcomes. And either through legislation or through innovation, then the pendulum swings to decentralization. That's typically happened, right? And you can look at all of these industries that's gone through that. So it stands to reason that technology will be not dissimilar to those things. And everybody says the argument is, well, no, because technology has these specific features of network effects and lock in. But I think that betrays this idea that legislatively, you can come and just basically destroy the China and the China shop, and you have to just start all over. So it's likely that we're going to move to a place that's a healthier outcome for everybody. And obviously, we want things like AlphaFold to exist. And we want things like Waymo to exist. The question is, how should they exist? And if they come out of the goodwill of Google, it is just so easily as likely that some other person, let's say it wasn't Sundar and Ruth Porat. But to other people who didn't like it, these things could have been very different forms and shapes and not existed at all. And I think that's the arbitrary nature of it, which is not necessarily free market capitalism that doesn't benefit us. Should we chamath be upset
SPEAKER_03: that Bezos is going to space and spending 10s of billions of dollars that he made from Amazon? He like bad press
SPEAKER_01: conference, let's just be clear at the end of the day, we're at the end of the day, he has wanted to do this his entire life, he built an incredible company, he was able to take a lot of that capital and invested in it, he's invested billions of dollars and other things, 10 billion dollars in climate change, his ex wife has invested, you know, 6 billion dollars just last year alone and all kinds of good works. So those two individuals, because of their success, I think will generally do and have done the right thing. Let's not get that confused with a horrendous press conference, where he just put his foot in his mouth. Well, I think you said it, you know, the thing that he said around, you know, I just want to thank the customers and the employees for paying for this. It sounded flippant. And it didn't really acknowledge the incredible amount of heavy lifting and hard work that he did acknowledge in the clip from 2000 on Charlie Rose. Right. So if you if you actually played those two things back side by side, you'd be like, is this the same person? One was thoughtful, extremely respectful. The other one was now maybe he was just amped up. I mean, I could see how he could be on cloud nine,
SPEAKER_03: so to speak, you know, and so and so he just wasn't thinking
SPEAKER_01: about it. But you know, honestly, like, look, he is smart enough. And that team is smart enough to say, we're assuming you're coming back. So here's some fucking talking points. Why don't you just look at those on the way down as you float down to earth. And let's just make sure we nailed this and put our best foot forward. That is where I think he probably has regrets based on how people reacted. This Bezos spaceflight
SPEAKER_00: was a real Rorschach test because he took heat from both the right and the left. But the criticism was very different. You know, the critique I heard from the right was that he's having some sort of midlife crisis and the rocket looked too much like a phallus. Okay, fine, whatever. The criticism from the left was it had much more to do with a real contempt for private initiative and private enterprise. You almost see them being horrified and dismayed that, you know, why was he doing this with his own money? You know, if this had been a NASA flight, I don't think they would have had a problem with it. And so you see here that even though Bezos has been so much more effective using his own money to do this, the leftist reflexively hates that. And they kept saying, well, how dare he use this money? The money could have been used on something else so much better. Well, what do you think of that argument? Yeah, I think it's wrong in a couple of
SPEAKER_00: respects. It basically implies that the purveyors of these social programs are better distributors of societal resources than our greatest inventors. And I don't think that's true. You look at these social programs they want to keep doubling down on. They're not working. You know, these programs are our policies towards homelessness is not failing because of lack of funding. There's a tremendous amount of funding. In San Francisco, they're spending $60,000 per tent per year. They're spending $300,000 in social services per homeless person per year. Lack of funding is not the problem. The approach is the problem. We spent something like $25,000 per pupil in California schools. The test scores are going down. So, you know, these people who are criticizing Bezos don't know what to do with the money. They don't know how to spend it any better. They're not good at executing. However, Bezos or Elon, these are two of our greatest inventors, let them go, let them go because you know, they are pushing the boundaries. And I do believe there will be great engineering and scientific breakthroughs that come as a result of what they're doing with this new space race. It's also super uninformed, if correct me if
SPEAKER_03: I'm wrong here, but they were saying that the they should have been doing more initiatives on Earth, if you actually and they were kind of talking about climate change and the use of these fuels to get to space. And number one, the rocket ship fuel, my understanding in these is less than the what happens in a 747. So put that aside. And then second, Elon has done more for global warming with Tesla than anybody in the in the battery packs, I think in modern society, I can't think of somebody in the private sector who's done more. And then has there ever been a gift, there's never been a gift of $10 billion to one cause, let alone one cause which Bezos gave, which was climate change. Nobody, nobody has done more. So hasn't you would know, Chamath, I thought Richard Branson had done a lot for global warming. I thought he was very involved in the carbon credits space, I think that
SPEAKER_01: we're witnessing something that can best be described as people who have reached a point in their life where they've realized that they're impotent, getting incredibly angry at people who are willing to be wrong, but want to just have a chance to be on the field and try and have the freedom to do
SPEAKER_02: so. And that just literally infuriates a certain class of
SPEAKER_01: people, it proves itself up by what David said, we are not in a funding crisis, we are running 10 $20 trillion deficits, you know, or sorry, 10, you know, hundreds of billions of dollar deficits, 10 $20 trillion debt levels that are increasing every year, we have a surfeit of money, we print money whenever we want, we don't have a shortage of money, we have a shortage of capable people who know what to do with that money. And in the absence of people being able to do things, they would rather other people not do things not because it's not the right thing to do, but because it makes them feel impotent.
SPEAKER_00: Right. And then so what what is what is driving that I think you there is a real contempt for private initiative. And Jason, you're right, you see it in the hatred towards Elon, nobody has done more to actually reduce carbon emissions than Elon. I mean, even the best end of story period end of story. I mean, the Bezos gift to some philanthropy, I don't know if that's going to make a difference or not. You're right that he's putting his money where his mouth is on that issue. But it's indisputable that Elon, the electric car industry would not exist without Elon. And yet there is contempt and hatred for the fact that he did this through private initiative. If the government he does it in a way that is not checking the boxes for this
SPEAKER_01: cohort of people who feel incredibly insecure and fragile emotionally. They don't like that he says what he wants. They don't like that he does what he wants. They don't like that he dresses the way he does. They don't like any of it because it's not conformist enough. It's not about the look people. It's also about the money that it's the wealth that's been
SPEAKER_03: accumulated to Well, no, no, hold on. I don't think that's
SPEAKER_01: what it is at all. No, I actually think what it is is psychological. It is nothing about money. I think what we are witnessing and I think social media has just blown the cover off. It is a psychological awakening that people have, which is that they were comfortable knowing that there was a class of insiders and a huge cohort of outsiders and they just believe the world would function as it should. Now you see people migrating through this membrane, achieving enormous amounts of success, basically eclipsing every single insider possible by orders of magnitude and it breaks people's brains because they don't like it because now they think, why didn't it happen to me? Why not me and the thing
SPEAKER_01: is because you're not capable and at somewhere along the way and working, you're not dedicated. You didn't try or you didn't try that enough with agency. I mean, look, every day,
SPEAKER_01: every day that the greatest thing that I've learned about the public markets now having been, you know, purely on the early stage technology side building running than investing is I get a mark every day right now to do both businesses. I get a scorecard every day and some days I really think to myself, maybe I'm just not good enough today and I say to myself that is true today and then the the the difference is tomorrow I have a choice, which is I wake up and I decide am I going to go back at it or not and I'm not game and I'm not going to hate on other people who had a good day today just because I had a bad day. And that's what I think we're going through. We're
SPEAKER_01: going through and social media allows it to happen. And it allows you to put it out there. You can hide behind a screen name, you can basically say whatever you want to vent this pent up frustration. Why is journalists doing it? Of course,
SPEAKER_00: of course, because these journalists are doing it too,
SPEAKER_03: where they're just so bitter that they feel dunking on the greatest inventors of our time is a productive use the difference is journalists do it with a real screen name under
SPEAKER_01: the guise of journalism. Everybody else does it with a fake screen name and it's all just a bunch of trolling. In
SPEAKER_00: order to do something really great like Bezos or like Elon, you have to believe that you have agency over your own life. You have to believe that you can accomplish great things. You have to, you know, act with with purpose and is that really what we're teaching kids to do today in schools? What we're teaching them is they're either victims or oppressors at some intersectional framework. We're not teaching them about earned success. We're teaching them about privilege, which is, you know, is presumptively ill gotten. And it's all about a transference of privilege and and basically money from people who are oppressors in this framework to people who are victims. But no one's talking about how you actually create change and success. Abundance. It's all a negative sum. It's always a negative sum game. Freebird, go ahead. I dated all the heck to the Kim Kardashian sex tape. I think that there
SPEAKER_02: was this moment where someone who was didn't do anything, didn't have a career, wasn't doing anything work wise, but was kind of a pseudo celebrity for being a celebrity. It's like the Paris Hilton, Nicole Richie era, right? Like folks who don't really have much to talk about, except that they're the ones that people are talking about. And then that sex tape turned her into a superstar. And then she became a billionaire a few years later. And so, you know, there is this kind of poignant moment, I think, where folks are like, wait a second, you don't have to do anything to get really rich in this country. You don't have to do anything to achieve all this fame. Therefore, the kind of assumption is, hey, you know what, there are people that just get stuff and get to do what they want to do. And the rest of us don't. And I do think that social media is the magnifying glass that takes those those moments and makes them very big and kind of then that becomes the assumed standard, when the reality is, I mean, all four of us work really fucking hard. All four of us came from nothing. I don't know about sacks, but I mean, the rest of us, his dad
SPEAKER_03: was an immigrant doctor from South Africa, and he moved to the south as a Jew. I'm just doing the 80s. I mean, I think
SPEAKER_02: all of us graduated college deeply in debt. And then we all worked our way out of debt. And we all found ways to work really hard and find opportunities for ourselves in this incredible country, and to build value and to build businesses can be done to realize those returns. And we don't start out as elites. We were never elite. We were always the struggling, you know, immigrant entrepreneurs that got ourselves to where we are, because we clawed and we pushed and we fought and we had grit and we had determination and we had smarts and we had put in the effort. And I think that that's not really and so did Bezos, and so did Elon. And I don't think that there is any standard of elitism that endowed in them, like maybe in, you know, the British, the days of the British monarchy, these kind of inalienable rights to have the freedom that they have. And I think that that and I think that that's so important, because people miss that point. And they think that Kim Kardashian, or the random bolt of lightning or the elite is the kind of endowed upon people in a way that's unfair. They're misreading the situation. It's a great point. Everyone else is missing out. Yeah, they misread the
SPEAKER_03: situation. So a couple things. Kim Kardashian may have gotten
SPEAKER_01: some initial fame because of her sex tape. But fuck if she's not an incredible business person, because from there to now, that's execution. Totally. There's a lot of there's a lot of toiling, hard work, good decision making him she fucking nailed it. Was I lucky to have actually joined Facebook versus MySpace? Yes. But when I was there, did I fucking hit the cover off the ball? Goddamn, yes. You know, was I lucky to have started social capital and be able to raise capital? Sure. But then did I have to help find a team, coach that team, work with them make good investments? That's fucking hard. And I think what people forget is that this takes a lot of hard work, that there's all kinds of levels of success, that you can be proud of all kinds of different accomplishments. What I loved is when Friedberg used us and Elon and Bezos in the same sentence, because I catch myself where I'm ashamed sometimes where I'm like, I am not as good as those two guys. So how dare I use my name in the same sentence as their name? And then I think, wait a minute, what the fuck am I quibbling over? Like, this is insane in any way, shape or form. We've all made it sure there's different degrees, but it's beyond that it matters at this point. And this is what I think we're living in a society where it really distorts you. So if how do we change it,
SPEAKER_03: Shemagh, how do we change people from thinking that it's random and that you can't do it because people who are no it is random, but there are a group of people who believe the system is rigged. I cannot become Shemagh and I'm stuck in a rut and I can't get
SPEAKER_02: out. I can't get out. How do we change that belief? The whiners
SPEAKER_01: and the complainers and the haters are stuck in a massive rut. And I think the thing that happened that I said it last pot, I'll say it again, maybe I'll just say it every fucking pod. It is not about winning and losing. It is about trying and learning. And that is a huge thing. It's about a learning mindset. It's about this idea that things are changing so fucking fast. The only thing that I can do to stay safe is to learn how to learn because things will constantly be changing underfoot. But what do you say to the single mother
SPEAKER_02: with three kids who is in a town where the factory is shutting down and she's losing her job and she doesn't have the resources to move? She is not the person that hates Elon
SPEAKER_01: Musk or Jeff Bezos. I will fucking but what is she? Aren't there institutional ruts in the United States? Yeah, I
SPEAKER_01: understand. These are two completely different topics. My point is, if you go online, it is filled with Pete, a small cohort of people that are positive. And then a large cohort of people that are silently trying to just gain information out and a small vocal minority of bitter people who can't do shit. And all I'm talking about is people. Well, who knows if they're privileged, but I'm just saying they're getting paid 100,000 to work at the Atlantic. I just think that these people had been checkboxers their whole lives. They tried to play the team sports they were told to they went to the schools, they tried to do the CFA, the NBA, the this or the that nothing worked for them. They work in an environment where they don't feel any equity. Actually, this
SPEAKER_03:
SPEAKER_01: is where equity is important. They feel disenfranchised and they're angry. And as a result, they just want everything to be different so that nobody wins because they can't win. But if they were winning, they would be the first one to say shut the fucking door behind me. I'm convinced of it 100. Yeah, the
SPEAKER_00: irony is that the people you're talking about all went to these elite institutions. And they imbibed these ideologies and philosophies. And I think the people who have been successful, went to those not in all cases, but they went to those places and then rebelled against it or just shut it out. Here's what we
SPEAKER_01: should do. Here's what we should do. We should all contribute five or 10 million bucks into into an LLC. We should call Pegasus, we should use Pegasus to infiltrate all the fake screen names on Twitter, and then index that to LinkedIn to figure out where they all went to school and what they do and just publish a database of all the haters. Well, I mean, it's how funny would that be? I it's very
SPEAKER_03: interesting, because I'm watching a group of these complainers leave traditional mainstream media, because I'm focused on journalists, because I was one. And I'm watching them leave journalism, a small group of them, and become entrepreneurs on substack or their own products. And I feel like there's a little group of them who are realizing, holy shit, I can make a million dollars if I apply myself and I quit the New York Times, and I go start my own publication. Right. And I actually say something interesting and
SPEAKER_00: differentiated, not just towing the party line at the New York Times. Exactly. There's a whole little there's a little crack here in
SPEAKER_03: this. Like, I'll say I'll say they are just as successful as
SPEAKER_01: Elon Musk, and Jeff Bezos. The the financial quantum may be different. But I bet you the personal fucking satisfaction quantum is the same. And this is the key. This is the key, you could be running a $500,000 a year business, and you could feel like a million fucking bucks. You have a nice house, you have a nice house, no nice family, you know, you employ a couple people, you provide a good life, you do what you want to do when you want to do it. The sense of freedom that comes with that and agency and agency is the same as them. And maybe in some ways, the super richest guys in the world actually have less agency than these guys would, because they're so, you know, scheduled and people are coming after them all the time. One of my big takeaways from being in the tech industry for
SPEAKER_00: 20 years is that if you're smart, hard working and don't have behaviors that sabotage yourself, you will be successful in this industry. You know, over two decades, I mean, I've just seen it. How could you not you have such tailwinds at your back. There's so much value being created. We saw over the past year, more money, more LP dollars have gone into venture capital by far than any other year and more money, more returns is coming out. That's why more money is going down. I'm on the call when you say anybody could be successful just
SPEAKER_03: by showing right. And you said that but the first part is the
SPEAKER_01: critical part. You just said who are not prone to self sabotage. There is an enormous number of people who are prone to self I was one I am still one. But I want to self sabotage yourself your ego. He blew up his firm.
SPEAKER_03: That's true. But I think he blew it up. There was creative destruction. I think he wasn't enjoying it. And he needed to start out he's talked about it publicly said it. But the blowing up of when how do you reconcile the blowing up of the firm chum off, whatever number of years later, I'm rebooting. This is all old news. It's like, you know, the amount
SPEAKER_01: of success and capital and money that we've made is undisputable. And I've made it under all kinds of weather conditions. So you know, it all kind of speaks for itself. But the problem is, again, if you ask an average person, I don't think they care. I don't think they know. I don't think they have an opinion. If you ask some, you know, interested in how you reconcile
SPEAKER_03: or look back on it now it's so much distance, I'll tell you
SPEAKER_00: from an outside perspective, how I reconcile to moths decision there is I think that as you become more successful, your tolerance for doing stuff you don't want to do really goes down totally goes to zero. To what has got to a point where he didn't want to be doing any blew it up zero. By the way, that that is a characterization
SPEAKER_02: as well that you know, sometimes in in your career, you have to make it in your personal life, you have to make a tough decision. And there is no good outcome, there is no good way to frame a way to do it. But there are these moments where you got a rock falling on you from one side and a rock falling on you from the other side. And you're gonna have to make a tough decision to get out of the way I said to myself a long time ago,
SPEAKER_01: that if I was ever lucky to actually be wealthy enough where my wealth would change by meaningful amounts, every order of magnitude, I would do something different. And so, you know, you can do the fucking math. So there it is. It's interesting being friends with you and watching it. And
SPEAKER_03: then also, I hate to give any credit there it is, but being friends with Phil Hellmuth, and watching him set outrageous goals for himself in poker. I just thought, you know what, you got to set some outrageous goals for yourself. And that's how I sort of broke through as I just said, the minute I realized one at everything I do, I want to be the largest syndicate, the most Jason prolific investor, the end, I realized that I was
SPEAKER_01: basically going to become, you know, a billionaire because of my Facebook stock, I fucking quit. And the craziest thing about it is I left so much stock on the table. It's like two, $3 billion of fucking stock, I couldn't care less. And then and then, you know, once I figured out that there was something that you can do with capital, that's even more meaningful than just investing in companies at a small scale. But now you can, you know, control companies and really allocate and shape how economy flows. I made a different set of decisions. And now I'm here. And if I increase it by another order of magnitude, I'll make a different set of decisions. And that's poorly understood by folks, because again, it doesn't map into a worldview. But the point is, it maps into something that keeps me whole and sane. And it allows me to not be zero. And that's what I think we need to teach people try stuff. It's okay to fail. Because that's as long as you're not self-sabotaging yourself. David said it so well, you will eventually be successful. What have you learned, David? You're
SPEAKER_03: in this next chapter being an investor capital allocator.
SPEAKER_00: That me? Yeah, David, you? Well, that's what I just Yeah, no,
SPEAKER_00: it's what I said. I mean, just well, I mean, the thing that's happening now is just the tech economy keeps getting bigger and bigger. It's just an explosion. There's an explosion in the number of unicorns, explosion in the amount of funding that's available, explosion in the amount of returns being generated. There are now so many VCs that VCs are literally throwing money at people. I mean, any half-decent idea now gets funded. The idea that somehow this ecosystem is elitist or exclusionary, it's absurd, right? I mean, you've got micro VCs now who no one has to go to Sand Hill Road anymore, right? I mean, there are so many ways to nobody on
SPEAKER_03: Sand Hill Road. It's a ghost town. Remember traffic jam? I went I went down there the other day and there was no traffic jam. I was speaking at Stanford. And literally I was like, I gotta put 15 minutes into my drive to get through that Sand Hill Road because it was at 830. Right? I zipped down Sand Hill Road to Stanford. There was two cars. The tech ecosystem is
SPEAKER_00: so osmotic. It's so permeable in terms of allowing new people to get into the industry. And the fact that sucking in all the talent they can find because it can't hire enough people even in the worst economic conditions. And yet, when it comes to talking about social and political, talking about opportunity and social and political terms, the only thing you ever hear is that you know, the ecosystem is somehow elitist or exclusionary. And that's old. That's old news
SPEAKER_03: that that might have been valid 1520 years ago, I know when I first times 1520 years ago, it was a bunch of white partners who went to Stanford or had a MBAs from, you know, Harvard, but that's not the case. Now. It's a bunch of people with rolling funds and micro VCs and syndicates totally, and everything in between. If you're so wrapped up in in being a
SPEAKER_00: social justice warrior, that you've just missed, that there is like basically infinite opportunity, you know, then it's on you, you're sabotaging yourself. And then 510 years later, you're still stuck in that role. And then you become better. And then you become better to Jamal's point, freebrik. How hard was it for you to leave Google? And what
SPEAKER_01: was that? Like, I was at Google for two and a half years. I had
SPEAKER_02: gone through I joined before the IPO, I was like, a couple hundred employees, just under 1000 employees, and then we went public. I got this huge bonus from Sergei to stick around. When I was thinking about leaving. I mean, for me, it was like, seven figures. It was. Yeah, it was a couple
SPEAKER_02: 1000 shares of stock, and like $250,000 of cash. And I gave it up, you know, be worth a lot of money. But I just felt like I learned so much at Google. And I had such an appreciation for the team there in the company. And by the way, I worked at Google, and all of a sudden, the company went public, and I could buy a house. I mean, it was an incredible moment for me. And, and I suddenly felt what Jamal talked about, which is this freedom in my life, suddenly, I had hit that that next plateau of wealth, where I now had a couple $100,000 of net worth. And I could leave, or I guess I had over a million dollars of net worth, and I could now leave and go do something I wanted to go do with my no, I had a couple $100,000. And I could go leave and do what I wanted to do, which was to build my own business and have the freedom to make decisions. And and so, I honestly felt like really fine, just leaving all that money behind, I left, I left millions of dollars behind. For when I left Google after being there for two and a half years to start my company. And, you know, it was a struggle, right? Like, I mean, as you guys know, building a business, which I did from 2006 to 2013, was a nightmare. Every day was a nightmare. I say, in entrepreneurism, I said this publicly before, but it feels like every day, you're taking a step backwards. And one out of five days, you take a five step leap forward. So at the end of a week, you're one step ahead of where you started. But your existential memory is that you're failing every day, every day, and suddenly you wake up
SPEAKER_02: and seven years have gone by and you're like, Oh, shit, we've got an amazing business. And someone wants to buy it for a billion dollars. And if you don't have the grit and the guts, and the determination to push through those those daily battles and deal with that that hardship, you know, and I don't think that being in the comfort of the big system of Google felt right for me. I think being in the playing field and battling it out every day is right for me. And so it was the right it was the right call for me, obviously, it worked out. But you know, still, I make choices in my life in terms of what do I want to do? Do I want to go live on a yacht or have some luxury or do whatever, and I prefer to just make great businesses and turn science into commercial opportunity. And that's how I choose to spend my time.
SPEAKER_03: And I just wanted to send this out to the whole panel. Do you ever think, you know, having hit the home runs, and having the cash to literally retire at this age, and then just, you know, kiteboard or do whatever? Do you ever think about retirement and not going into work? Fuck no. Okay. Yeah. You want to do you
SPEAKER_03: feel you want to work harder yesterday? Yesterday, as an
SPEAKER_01: example, was an incredible day, because I was able to bicycle with Nat and the youngest to go get a gelato. I had a kickoff meeting for I had a kickoff meeting for a startup that's doing something incredible in batteries. Where, you know, starting from scratch series a co founders me and the other in the other director. And we're starting literally starting and I remember the feeling of having done this now 30 or 40 times and it's the best feeling. La doce vita. And then I and then I had a call because I'm trying to put a you know, more than a billion dollars to work in a different battery idea. And I thought to myself, God, I'm so fucking lucky. And it's it was a grindy long day and I had never felt more thankful. So why would I, you know, you could I don't know, I feel just so blessed. sacks you ever think about hanging up? Or are you more
SPEAKER_03: motivated to go to work every day? Are you annoyed? Yeah, I mean, the thing that's given me the most energy right
SPEAKER_00: now is we're in a private beta on call in near this app that we incubated. And I mean, it's better. It's it's good. It's getting better every day. And I'm really enjoying tinkering on it. And I feel like you know, I you know, it's kind of like a good tinker, by the way, you're a good product. You're good at
SPEAKER_01: tickling. We you know, we tried to hire sacks as VP of product at Facebook. What? Yeah. What would that have paid him? I use
SPEAKER_03: 2000 sacks probably right seven billions probably 2007. Not
SPEAKER_01: taking that game. No, no, because I did the hammer instead.
SPEAKER_00: And you know, Yammer was successful. And I got to be my own boss. And that was better, you know, so I don't know if I probably wouldn't have made as much money. But look, I've done like you guys, I've done made lots of decisions that made me less money. If I just say that PayPal for 20 years, my stock would have been worth many, many billions, right? That's why I tell people don't sell everything. Let your winners ride at least partially. Yeah, I mean, look, my I was an investor in Facebook, if I just kept all of that stock, that'd
SPEAKER_00: be worth a billion dollars today. So it's pretty crazy. Well, sell some just don't sell everything. That's my new philosophy. Yeah. So your point about the the the the the the
SPEAKER_03: about to your point about what gives me enjoyment. I mean, I'm
SPEAKER_00: really having fun tinkering with this app. And you know what it's like, it's like, it's like a new season, if you were in like the NBA or something, it's like, can we make a championship run? Can we get one more ring? You know, and so you're like, you know, it'd be like saying to somebody, hey, you already got, you know, to NBA, an NBA champion, hey, you got three rings, why do you want a fourth, you know? And it's like, are you kidding me while I'm still in this league? Well, I'm young enough and healthy enough to make a run. One more ring. How could you not want to do that? You know, you got to go for it. I can see you are you're engaged, which is
SPEAKER_03: great to see. Right. Listen, there's been an amazing episode. We will see you all next week. If you like the show. Thanks. The end we're not gonna everybody go do something. Anything possible. Try and fail. Read a book outside your comfort zone. Read something
SPEAKER_02: that you wouldn't have otherwise read. Love you guys. But I love
SPEAKER_03: you guys. Love you better. See you soon. Love everybody
SPEAKER_01: listening to everybody. I mean, literally, if you're listening
SPEAKER_03: to this, and you are buying into this that the system is ready troll, don't be a troll. Don't be a douche. Like the system is not rigged. If anything, the system is rigged for you to participate and succeed. Join the party, the system is
SPEAKER_00: malleable. The system is not this. If you want to change the world, the system is malleable enough that if you pursue it in the right way, you can make it you can make a dent. You can.
SPEAKER_03: Who is this? Who is this? Hey, look, who's the best dad? We should dad. All right. We'll see you all next time on the podcast. Bye bye. Let your winners ride. Rain Man David. Sad. We open source it to the fans and they've just gone crazy
SPEAKER_00: with it. Love us.
SPEAKER_00: besties are gone. That's my dog taking a notice in your driveway. We should all just get a room and just have one big huge or because it's like this like sexual tension but we just need to release what you're the B we need to get
SPEAKER_03: thinkers are going all
