00:00:00
as you guys know i get panic attacks at
00:00:01
the dentist but she was able to navigate
00:00:03
me through where i didn't
00:00:05
i only sweat through half my shirt
00:00:08
you have panic attacks at the dentist no
00:00:10
but i sweat profusely and i get very
00:00:12
nervous
00:00:13
why what is that about we all have
00:00:15
weaknesses jason
00:00:16
we all have weaknesses this is my
00:00:18
achilles heel my achilles heel is a
00:00:20
dentist
00:00:20
really yeah i don't like going to the
00:00:22
dentist either no
00:00:23
the dentist really freaks i don't know
00:00:25
why it freaks me out sex
00:00:27
have you thought about i had a really
00:00:28
bad experience when i was a kid you know
00:00:30
tell us more about your childhood drama
00:00:32
have you ever seen the movie marathon
00:00:33
man it was kind of like that
00:00:34
[Music]
00:00:36
is it safe is it safe all right here we
00:00:39
[Music]
00:00:42
go
00:00:44
[Music]
00:00:51
[Music]
00:00:55
hey everybody hey everybody welcome
00:00:57
again to another episode of the all
00:01:00
in podcast episode 37 with us today
00:01:04
on his noble crusade conquering europe
00:01:06
chamath
00:01:07
pali hapatia calls us from
00:01:10
uh a castle somewhere i don't know i can
00:01:12
tell by the light switches you're in
00:01:13
europe
00:01:14
and joining us again the two ais ai
00:01:17
number one
00:01:18
david sachs and ai number two david
00:01:21
friedberg are here
00:01:22
uh and of course i'm j cal do we wanna
00:01:25
get right into the show
00:01:26
or i don't know jeremiah if you want to
00:01:27
talk about the the dueling ai's in the
00:01:29
group chat
00:01:31
debating the nature of the pod i mean
00:01:34
one guy told the other guy or one robot
00:01:36
told the other robot to [ __ ]
00:01:39
this is what we know it's the
00:01:41
singularity but it's when the robots
00:01:42
are arguing with each other see you
00:01:45
don't even know because you don't have
00:01:46
any emotions you told free bird to [ __ ]
00:01:49
off oh that's kind of true
00:01:56
alcohol content no no no i just think
00:01:59
that
00:02:00
um we i think the format of the pod is
00:02:02
working and i don't think we need to
00:02:03
turn it on its head
00:02:04
that's all i think my so
00:02:08
just gonna do this
00:02:11
i'm so tired and out of it right now but
00:02:12
but let's do it um
00:02:15
our just for the listeners um benefit on
00:02:18
our little group text where we
00:02:20
do our incredibly well prepped rehearsal
00:02:23
for this show by texting each other
00:02:25
maybe for four minutes a week but the
00:02:27
day the night before she told each other
00:02:28
for three hours
00:02:31
mostly other stuff is covered over the
00:02:32
group chat but we were um
00:02:34
kind of debating maybe throwing in a
00:02:37
spin and you know doing a little group q
00:02:39
and a
00:02:39
kind of format sax doesn't like it and
00:02:42
we were kind of joking with sax that he
00:02:44
loves
00:02:45
getting his sound bites in and then
00:02:47
turning them into little
00:02:48
short sound bite video clips with his
00:02:50
bff henry belcaster and putting him on
00:02:52
twitter
00:02:53
and promoting him around the internet
00:02:55
and my point of view was i don't think
00:02:57
that this show
00:02:59
should be about getting to the sound
00:03:00
bite that this show should be
00:03:02
about something very different which is
00:03:04
elevating a conversation
00:03:06
and creating the context for people to
00:03:08
make decisions on their own
00:03:10
and that is to give people multiple
00:03:12
points of view and all of the data and
00:03:14
consideration when there's a big topic
00:03:16
or a big debate underway
00:03:18
and it's too easy
00:03:21
for us to take a sound bite and then use
00:03:23
that as the narrative to try and
00:03:25
influence people to do things or to have
00:03:27
a point of view and i think that is
00:03:28
largely the problem we've broadly had
00:03:30
in the twitter social media era is we
00:03:33
are very reductionist we bring things
00:03:34
down to kind of a one sentence or 140
00:03:37
character statement
00:03:38
and then we use that as an emotional
00:03:40
pivot point for people
00:03:41
to get them to go on one side or the
00:03:43
other side as opposed to recognizing
00:03:45
that many of the
00:03:46
topics we we address are called that is
00:03:47
the way things are done i get it
00:03:49
and here and here is saks's response
00:03:51
that is a valid point
00:03:52
freedom however humans all need to be
00:03:55
led
00:03:55
they are sheeple we need to tell the
00:03:58
sheeple what to think
00:03:59
and to get into office jason i would
00:04:02
like to cut
00:04:03
to uh a segment the new segment that i
00:04:05
call chamoth does a dramatic
00:04:07
reading
00:04:08
[Music]
00:04:12
so freebird did say this now a dramatic
00:04:15
reading
00:04:16
from the group chat i will be playing
00:04:17
all characters starting with
00:04:19
myself freeburg free burke rants
00:04:22
up to which i say i'm down with that
00:04:26
david sacks you keep trying to [ __ ] with
00:04:30
the format of the show
00:04:32
if it ain't broke don't fix it [ __ ] off
00:04:35
[ __ ] you [ __ ] yourself
00:04:42
my response i'm down with that
00:04:47
oh no am i going to be able to respond
00:04:49
here yes
00:04:50
okay exactly your defense okay you're
00:04:53
running for office we know
00:04:54
no no look i think that um the
00:04:57
the friberg position on many issues
00:05:00
often comes down to the idea that
00:05:04
this this issue is so complicated it's
00:05:06
so nuanced we can't have a definitive
00:05:08
take
00:05:09
and i just reject that i think it's true
00:05:11
for some issues i think it's great to
00:05:12
have the conversation
00:05:14
but i think there are many issues where
00:05:17
it is possible to have a definitive take
00:05:19
to come down strongly on one side of it
00:05:21
and i think the audience wants us to do
00:05:23
that
00:05:23
i think it's a little bit of a cop-out
00:05:25
to say oh we're just going to table all
00:05:26
the issues
00:05:27
so the audience can say no the audience
00:05:29
wants to hear us
00:05:30
give our point of view and i didn't like
00:05:33
seek
00:05:33
harry uh henry belcaster out he found
00:05:37
no he's you just talk to him seven times
00:05:39
a day and direct
00:05:41
every frame of the animation let him go
00:05:44
let him go no henry henry
00:05:47
you know is one of our super fans
00:05:48
started making these videos okay i
00:05:50
ignored like the first ten
00:05:52
and then finally i was like okay i gotta
00:05:54
like see what this guy's into right
00:05:55
you did too you slid what is this about
00:05:59
like i hope it's to promote his business
00:06:00
or something because he's just spending
00:06:02
way too much time on this anyway
00:06:03
so now henry does run his like
00:06:07
videos by us as a courtesy but he comes
00:06:10
up with them
00:06:11
he chooses what takes he wants to run
00:06:13
with and he puts it all together
00:06:15
sometimes i'll have a note for him i'll
00:06:17
say you know oh my god whatever
00:06:19
he's never sent me anything you're gonna
00:06:22
get a hold of you
00:06:22
he's coming to me me and jason are on a
00:06:24
throne jason don't pretend you're not
00:06:26
you're not on the channel
00:06:29
yes yes the three yeah because he says
00:06:32
is it okay for me to do this and we're
00:06:34
just like go ahead but then david's like
00:06:35
well actually
00:06:36
if we could change this and cut this
00:06:38
word and david's like oh you don't need
00:06:39
any editing
00:06:40
just let the chips fall where they may
00:06:42
and then he's like machiavellian back
00:06:43
there like he scorsese
00:06:45
changing every [ __ ] frame of henry
00:06:47
belicaster animated gift mate
00:06:50
i i just think it's a courtesy that
00:06:52
henry's running it by us
00:06:54
and you know david are you paying him
00:06:57
no have you given him any compensation
00:07:00
okay well no
00:07:05
separately i after finding out that
00:07:07
henry and then his partner dylan they've
00:07:09
got like a
00:07:10
it is a business for them okay so i said
00:07:12
listen you guys are doing great work
00:07:13
i think she does great work by the way
00:07:15
yeah i said listen
00:07:16
um why don't you guys start doing like
00:07:18
product videos or videos for startups
00:07:20
you can do the first one for uh call in
00:07:22
so they're working on a video for that i
00:07:24
think we're going to pay them like five
00:07:25
grand
00:07:26
and if it's good it'll be great for
00:07:27
their business i want them to be
00:07:29
successful
00:07:30
no but let's get to the point let's get
00:07:31
to the point about you know reducing
00:07:34
the the conversation to sound bites and
00:07:36
i want to respond to your point about
00:07:38
not taking a position on things
00:07:39
but okay so i feel like
00:07:43
um first of all within this group there
00:07:45
are hard
00:07:46
ticks within this group of four people
00:07:48
so there are heart takes already in the
00:07:49
show
00:07:50
and um i think that it's important in
00:07:53
many
00:07:54
debates and many of the topics we cover
00:07:56
there is more than one
00:07:58
side to the story and we can have our
00:08:00
formed opinion
00:08:01
but i think understanding what the other
00:08:03
counterpoints
00:08:05
and encounter arguments might be is
00:08:07
critical to get people to actually get
00:08:09
to that opinion themselves
00:08:11
as opposed to just telling them this is
00:08:13
the single point that you should believe
00:08:15
nothing else matters and so i i really
00:08:18
think also many of these conversations
00:08:20
are generally two two sides of the same
00:08:23
coin
00:08:24
and many more often than not if you zoom
00:08:26
out there are shared values
00:08:28
and many of the things that we all argue
00:08:30
about broadly a society and i'm not
00:08:32
trying to get too kind of philosophical
00:08:33
here
00:08:34
um but if you kind of distill things
00:08:36
down to different points of view with
00:08:38
the same set of values or
00:08:40
recognize that there are actually
00:08:41
different values you can come to a point
00:08:43
that allows people to think more
00:08:45
progressively
00:08:46
and you know achieve a point of view on
00:08:48
their own and i think that's critically
00:08:50
missing today
00:08:51
broadly in society that so much is all
00:08:53
about like the good and the evil
00:08:55
good and bad them and us and we don't
00:08:57
recognize that in moments where there
00:08:59
are shared values we're just sitting on
00:09:00
you know
00:09:01
both sides of the same coin or
00:09:03
recognizing that sometimes having
00:09:04
different values doesn't necessarily
00:09:06
make someone evil
00:09:07
it makes them different and that's why i
00:09:10
try and kind of elevate the conversation
00:09:11
a little bit and why i care so much
00:09:13
about this point
00:09:14
because i really think it's worth
00:09:15
everyone getting a broader perspective
00:09:17
on everything that they're addressing
00:09:18
so that they can kind of go into things
00:09:20
eyes wide open now sax i will
00:09:22
say on nearly everything i actually
00:09:24
fundamentally agree with you
00:09:26
on many of the points on the show and so
00:09:27
it's a little bit kind of you know gets
00:09:29
a little echo chambery for me to kind of
00:09:30
agree with sax like that's it
00:09:32
i think it's also worth highlighting why
00:09:33
there are other points of view and why
00:09:35
there are other arguments to be made out
00:09:36
there
00:09:37
and for me i certainly have strongly
00:09:38
held opinions um
00:09:40
and uh you know i i just don't think
00:09:43
that it's worth
00:09:44
getting to my opinion without taking the
00:09:46
broader context of the conversation
00:09:48
did you notice that freeburg got a
00:09:50
little emotional there
00:09:52
i think that was a little actual emotion
00:09:56
is tuned out right now i was confused i
00:09:58
am
00:09:59
confused okay let me let me try and find
00:10:01
someone hold on
00:10:02
let me just ask you one question about
00:10:03
this because this is getting i mean
00:10:05
we're kind of in the dugout right now
00:10:06
and
00:10:06
i don't know if this is fabulously
00:10:08
boring to people or not um
00:10:10
but do you frequently hold back your
00:10:12
opinions
00:10:13
on the show because you don't want to
00:10:15
influence people or you're afraid of
00:10:17
being canceled or having an
00:10:18
adverse effect to your business as it
00:10:20
has to david's business
00:10:22
i don't give a [ __ ] about that no i care
00:10:25
more about um
00:10:27
uh the uh the path to an opinion
00:10:30
um no and i care more about like
00:10:35
achieving the objective so what i mean
00:10:37
by that is
00:10:38
if you just say this is my opinion take
00:10:41
it or leave it
00:10:42
the other half that has a different
00:10:43
opinion doesn't change their opinion
00:10:46
if you if you zoom out for people and
00:10:48
you say here's the broad set of facts
00:10:50
and circumstances and why different
00:10:51
groups have different opinions
00:10:53
it ends up being a lot easier to
00:10:54
actually get people to see what may be
00:10:56
the better path forward
00:10:57
listen if you want to get meta i have
00:11:00
formed my opinion on many of these
00:11:02
matters
00:11:02
i don't think stating my opinion changes
00:11:04
anyone's mind i think zooming out and
00:11:06
giving people the broader perspective so
00:11:07
they can get there themselves is the way
00:11:09
to kind of
00:11:09
achieve change okay guys enough we're
00:11:11
onto the subject this is we can walk and
00:11:13
chew gum at the same time here's the
00:11:14
point i think that
00:11:15
dave david sacks has opinions
00:11:18
they are strong opinions but as i've
00:11:21
known him for 20 years they're also
00:11:22
weakly held and he changes his mind and
00:11:24
i think that's powerful
00:11:26
david friedberg and i've known you for a
00:11:27
very long time as well is great at
00:11:29
explaining things
00:11:31
all of it is additive so let's all just
00:11:34
keep yeah and of course of course um you
00:11:37
know i support
00:11:38
having a nuanced conversation that gets
00:11:40
all point of views out on the table
00:11:42
the point of the pod is not to you know
00:11:44
engage in sort of sound bites it's just
00:11:46
that
00:11:47
what henry creates is the result of a
00:11:50
conversation he boils it down
00:11:52
from 30 minutes into one minute i think
00:11:54
that performs a service
00:11:55
for the audience maybe gets our takes
00:11:58
out there in a way that you know
00:12:00
um that that more people can hear them
00:12:02
so i think that's just you
00:12:03
know but do you understand freeburgs i
00:12:04
mean i feel like i feel like i'm a
00:12:06
couple's therapist here
00:12:07
but do you understand friedenberg's
00:12:09
position david
00:12:10
yeah he doesn't want people to look at
00:12:13
the podcast as
00:12:14
reductio a reduction down to a 60-second
00:12:16
clip or a 30-second clip
00:12:18
of someone else he wants them to hear
00:12:20
the full discourse yeah well that's
00:12:21
great well then they can listen and do
00:12:23
that but
00:12:24
i mean realistically a lot of people
00:12:26
don't have time to listen to the full 60
00:12:27
minutes they made sense to the clip
00:12:29
but look i think if there's a meta
00:12:30
purpose to me being on the pod i think
00:12:32
it's to expand
00:12:34
the parameters of what people think they
00:12:36
can say because i actually i agree with
00:12:38
freeberg that the debate
00:12:40
is shut down in a lot of contexts and we
00:12:43
want to open it back
00:12:44
up and you know your overturn window
00:12:46
needs to be reopened yeah like look at
00:12:47
what happens the whole frank slootman
00:12:49
thing
00:12:50
last week where he puts out a pretty
00:12:52
mild statement about
00:12:53
supporting diversity but not to the
00:12:55
point where it's it jeopardizes merit
00:12:57
you know there was a giant uproar over
00:12:59
that he has to walk it back and issue an
00:13:00
apology
00:13:01
there was no the ceo of snowflake yeah
00:13:03
there's no there's no
00:13:04
discussion or debate there that was a
00:13:06
shutting down of the conversation
00:13:07
because one side of the debate is
00:13:10
basically
00:13:11
engaging in moral indictments against
00:13:13
the other side they're not really
00:13:14
interested in having
00:13:15
a serious debate about the issues i
00:13:17
think that my metapurpose
00:13:19
in speaking out on the pod about all
00:13:21
these issues that i think are just
00:13:22
common sense
00:13:24
you know is is just to kind of reopen
00:13:26
the debate
00:13:27
yeah i mean it is that merit versus
00:13:32
diversity and what is the point of a
00:13:34
business and should the business be
00:13:36
compromised or throttled
00:13:37
i think that's a very hard thing for
00:13:39
people to say should we throttle this
00:13:40
business
00:13:41
so that we have diversity should we slow
00:13:44
down in order to have more diversity we
00:13:45
can't find the right candidate but we
00:13:46
have a candidate here
00:13:48
who's a white male but yeah we already
00:13:50
have seven
00:13:51
people on this right we've talked about
00:13:53
that my my point in giving that example
00:13:55
is just to show how shut down the debate
00:13:57
is because
00:13:58
the day after slootman said ceos are
00:14:01
having this conversation in private
00:14:02
they're telling me this
00:14:03
and they're afraid to say it publicly
00:14:05
the very next day he walks it back and
00:14:07
issues an apology
00:14:08
kind of buttressing his original point
00:14:10
that people can't say what they really
00:14:11
think
00:14:12
so in my view like part of the reason
00:14:14
why the all empot is successful
00:14:15
is we're getting issues on the table
00:14:18
that people want to talk about but feel
00:14:19
they can't
00:14:20
and i think freeberg brings a very
00:14:22
valuable perspective to that
00:14:24
conversation
00:14:25
but my goal is kind of if i have a
00:14:27
medical besides expressing my point of
00:14:28
view it is to expand
00:14:30
like you said the overton window all
00:14:32
right so speaking of the overton window
00:14:33
new york city
00:14:34
has voted for a basically
00:14:38
universally both on the democratic side
00:14:40
and on the
00:14:41
republican side for a tough on crime
00:14:43
mayor 70 percent of san francisco
00:14:46
feels worse about crime in a separate
00:14:47
poll um
00:14:49
and eric adams is the current borough
00:14:51
president a former nypd
00:14:53
uh officer and he is looking like he
00:14:57
because of this stacked voting
00:15:00
which can take a little time to figure
00:15:01
out who
00:15:03
will become the mayor of new york but he
00:15:05
has 32 percent of first place votes
00:15:07
among
00:15:08
800 000 democratic voters this guy is a
00:15:12
a really decent centrist moderate human
00:15:15
being
00:15:16
um grew up where he was affected and
00:15:20
touched by crime
00:15:21
decided to fight through that wasn't you
00:15:24
know complaining
00:15:25
became a police officer did that you
00:15:28
know eventually
00:15:29
borough president has done that runs for
00:15:32
mayor
00:15:33
he goes on television he gives an
00:15:35
interview
00:15:36
where they say what is your perspectives
00:15:38
on stop and frisk
00:15:40
and the answer he gives was pretty
00:15:42
specific which is that you know
00:15:44
i believe in stopping um and
00:15:47
investigating potential crimes or some
00:15:49
such
00:15:49
right uh jason you can probably find the
00:15:51
exact well i mean having been
00:15:52
in the uh you know a new york city
00:15:54
police department family
00:15:56
um the and living in new york during
00:15:58
stop and frisk
00:16:00
they left out a key word it was stop
00:16:02
question frisk so in high crime areas
00:16:04
where there were a lot of shootings or
00:16:06
guns they would do
00:16:09
stop question and then possibly frisk
00:16:12
obviously
00:16:12
all policing techniques can be abused
00:16:15
but his feeling on it was when
00:16:17
deployed correctly stop in question is a
00:16:20
great technique and i can tell you when
00:16:22
i lived in new york previously
00:16:24
70 80 percent of people including people
00:16:26
of color including people from the
00:16:28
toughest neighborhoods
00:16:29
were in favor of this this was
00:16:30
universally seen as a huge success at
00:16:32
the time
00:16:33
because they were taking guns off the
00:16:34
street illegal guns constantly
00:16:37
because somebody would hop a turn style
00:16:39
or there would be people hanging out on
00:16:41
a street corner
00:16:42
and cops would come up and say hey
00:16:43
you're hanging out here at three in the
00:16:44
morning what's going on
00:16:45
but the problem the problem is that he
00:16:47
gave a pretty reasonable answer
00:16:50
yes and then they tried to cancel them
00:16:53
yep
00:16:54
and he would not allow himself to be
00:16:55
cancelled he went on the breakfast club
00:16:58
and all kinds of other media outlets and
00:17:01
explained his position
00:17:02
and they couldn't cancel him which is
00:17:05
how they
00:17:05
really thought it was an incredible
00:17:07
testament to what we're going through
00:17:08
right now which is
00:17:09
right now nobody knows what to do to
00:17:12
solve the things we feel
00:17:14
we've tried the radical right version of
00:17:18
a candidate
00:17:18
it didn't work we're now wondering to
00:17:21
ourselves while we have a custodian in
00:17:23
the white house whether we go to the
00:17:24
radical left that's probably not going
00:17:27
to work either
00:17:28
because unfortunately in san francisco i
00:17:30
mean unfortunately it looks like the
00:17:32
the the progressive left or the radical
00:17:34
left is really
00:17:36
really judgmental um and none of these
00:17:39
folks have really done anything
00:17:40
and so they they are easy to complain
00:17:43
it's almost as if
00:17:44
they know that they what they want won't
00:17:46
work so they don't want anything else to
00:17:48
work and so they just want everything to
00:17:49
devolve into chaos
00:17:51
that's a shame and so you know people
00:17:53
tried to literally
00:17:54
lie about what this guy said on
00:17:56
television
00:17:57
that was taped no no
00:18:01
i did it five times and clarify i am not
00:18:03
by the way
00:18:04
they were there were people jason i
00:18:06
don't know if you saw that the art the
00:18:08
the video length there were people
00:18:10
holding a press conference in front of
00:18:12
his office
00:18:13
literally screaming about stop and frisk
00:18:16
when he never said
00:18:18
stop and frisk he said stop in question
00:18:20
is a reasonable strategy
00:18:22
if somebody if we think that there is
00:18:23
the potential of a crime
00:18:25
and the fact that people could not have
00:18:27
that conversation
00:18:29
and had to go to basically this guy
00:18:31
needs to
00:18:32
either quit or be completely removed
00:18:34
from his ability to run for mayor yes
00:18:36
it's insanity yeah and
00:18:39
uh you can people seem to have lost this
00:18:42
ability to hold two conflicting ideas in
00:18:44
their mind
00:18:46
uh which is you could be for criminal
00:18:48
justice reform you could be
00:18:50
against police violence um
00:18:53
and you could be for strong policing
00:18:57
of violent crimes and law and order and
00:19:00
what seems to be happening in both
00:19:02
cities new york san francisco
00:19:04
and other places where crime is getting
00:19:05
acute is
00:19:07
um that they uh people are voting
00:19:10
here's here's two other to be safer
00:19:12
here's here's another conflicting
00:19:14
thoughts
00:19:14
uh you can believe um
00:19:18
that you know uh asians are awesome
00:19:22
but you can also believe that the uh
00:19:25
coronavirus
00:19:26
may have come from the wuhan lab
00:19:29
and believing the latter doesn't mean
00:19:31
that you're supporting asian hate
00:19:33
i'm just going to put that out there
00:19:35
right okay can i chime in on this um
00:19:38
on this uh on the um on the addams win
00:19:41
because i think this is this is huge
00:19:43
news do you have your notes from harry
00:19:45
to make the clip
00:19:46
okay go look i mean
00:19:49
eric adams is going to be the next mayor
00:19:51
of new york city
00:19:52
um and i think there's like three big
00:19:55
takeaways from
00:19:56
from this number one crime is the issue
00:19:58
that i've been saying on this pod that
00:19:59
it is
00:20:00
for at least six months it is the number
00:20:02
one issue when people do not feel safe
00:20:04
in their homes and in their
00:20:05
neighborhoods uh you know nothing else
00:20:08
matters
00:20:08
and here comes uh this really underdog
00:20:11
candidate
00:20:12
he is despised by the
00:20:15
uh sort of the progressive left and sort
00:20:18
of the elites of the democratic party
00:20:20
and he wins i mean he this is a huge
00:20:23
underdog victory
00:20:24
he's only a former cop he still carries
00:20:26
a gun i mean he is
00:20:28
packing and that sent a message to the
00:20:30
electorate i am going to be tough on
00:20:32
crime i'm not standing for defunding the
00:20:34
police and deep prosecution
00:20:36
and decarceration which are the hobby
00:20:38
horses right now the progressive left
00:20:40
i'm going to protect you and the city
00:20:42
and the voters
00:20:43
were eating it up even in the democratic
00:20:45
party so
00:20:46
number one crime is the huge issue and i
00:20:49
think it's going to reverberate
00:20:50
throughout america for the next few
00:20:52
years number two it
00:20:54
showed how out of touch these sort of
00:20:57
progressives these and i'd say
00:20:59
predominantly white
00:21:00
progressives are how out of touch they
00:21:02
are with the constituencies they claim
00:21:04
to represent um you know the the mostly
00:21:08
uh black and latino neighborhoods who
00:21:11
voted in
00:21:11
large numbers for eric adams were having
00:21:13
none of this sort of elite
00:21:16
woke progressive thinking around
00:21:17
decarceration deep prosecution
00:21:20
um they are interested in real solutions
00:21:24
for the problems that they see not
00:21:26
engaging in this sort of like action
00:21:28
identity
00:21:30
there's actually an interesting nugget
00:21:32
in what you're saying which i think you
00:21:33
can broaden out which is
00:21:35
the the radical left i don't even call
00:21:37
them the progressive left because that
00:21:38
would mean they were making progress in
00:21:39
their thinking i think it's just this
00:21:41
radical left
00:21:42
they seem to be white rich affluent
00:21:44
people yes
00:21:45
and they seem to be super totally
00:21:47
they're super guilty about something but
00:21:49
they're all totally disconnected from
00:21:50
what actual people of color
00:21:52
want they're totally discussing like
00:21:54
they're speaking for a group of people
00:21:56
who maybe are like that's not actually
00:21:58
my position
00:21:58
i want my kids to be safe on the way to
00:22:00
school i want guns off the street if
00:22:03
somebody
00:22:04
you know and i think that i want to read
00:22:06
the quote that he had because this is
00:22:08
really important is to go to the source
00:22:09
material
00:22:10
not the headlines from let's face it the
00:22:14
radical left is running these news uh
00:22:17
publications and they're determining how
00:22:19
they frame
00:22:20
him and here's the question uh from
00:22:23
vanity fair so you think there is a way
00:22:25
to use stop and frisk
00:22:26
that isn't abusive it's a reasonable
00:22:29
question
00:22:30
and his answer well there's a word
00:22:32
that's missing in there it's called stop
00:22:34
question and frisk so two o'clock in the
00:22:37
morning you look out your door
00:22:38
you see a person standing in front of
00:22:39
your house he places a gun in his
00:22:41
waistband
00:22:42
you go to call the police i hope that
00:22:44
police officer responds
00:22:46
he needs to be able to question that
00:22:48
person what are you doing with that gun
00:22:50
if we're telling police officers you
00:22:51
can't question people we are
00:22:53
jeopardizing
00:22:54
the safety of the city i mean this is
00:22:57
the most common sense
00:22:58
logical right framing of the discussion
00:23:01
it's not like they're saying
00:23:03
just pick a random person on the subway
00:23:05
and say empty your pockets and get up
00:23:06
against the wall like the gestapo
00:23:09
you know somebody called something and
00:23:10
you questioned people in the area
00:23:12
we've seen this in san francisco that
00:23:13
you've got these you know social justice
00:23:16
crusaders who claim that they're helping
00:23:17
minority communities and you see an
00:23:19
increase in the number of victims from
00:23:20
those communities and what eric
00:23:22
adams said is listen we can't just care
00:23:24
about
00:23:25
the cops abusing their power we also
00:23:27
have to care about violence
00:23:28
against these communities when it's
00:23:30
perpetrated by criminals
00:23:31
and people responded to that to that
00:23:33
message and i think this the the final
00:23:35
point that i think that the
00:23:37
eric adams win represents is that
00:23:39
twitter is
00:23:40
likely win like likely win okay fair
00:23:41
enough is that twitter is not real life
00:23:44
okay
00:23:44
eric adams has 14 000 twitter followers
00:23:48
yang has two million okay yank him in
00:23:51
fourth
00:23:51
okay and you know yang was sort of the
00:23:54
darling of the
00:23:55
you know sort of the twitter elites you
00:23:57
know he's sort of i mean look
00:23:58
when he first got into the democratic
00:24:00
primary for president he was a little
00:24:02
bit of a
00:24:02
breath of fresh air but ultimately he
00:24:05
kind of adopted the generic progressive
00:24:07
positions on things that did not
00:24:08
resonate
00:24:09
with the people of new york they wanted
00:24:11
someone tough on crime
00:24:12
and so i think you know eric adams he
00:24:14
had another great quote i think on
00:24:16
election night he said
00:24:17
social media does not pick a candidate
00:24:19
people on social security pick a
00:24:21
candidate
00:24:22
okay great line and and i mean and so
00:24:25
here's the thing is i think we all
00:24:27
are distorted in our thinking based on
00:24:30
what this like
00:24:31
very loud but ultimately small number of
00:24:34
voices
00:24:35
on social media says and i think it's
00:24:37
not just politicians
00:24:39
by the way i mean it's it's not just
00:24:40
eric adams who won because he ignored
00:24:42
twitter i mean biden won because
00:24:44
he ignored twitter right i mean biden
00:24:46
was not
00:24:47
on twitter and he was able to win the
00:24:49
democratic primary for president
00:24:51
so you know i think there's a lesson
00:24:52
here for politicians which is like
00:24:54
twitter modern moderates can win
00:24:57
anything and everything as long as they
00:24:59
show up and they do the work but if you
00:25:01
to your point
00:25:02
spend all your time trying to curate
00:25:04
your
00:25:05
twitter image all you're going to do is
00:25:07
validate a bunch of people that really
00:25:09
at the end of the day are trying to
00:25:11
punch up
00:25:12
right if you think about all the people
00:25:13
that are spouting off
00:25:15
trying to cancel trying to judge there's
00:25:17
a there's a great there's a great
00:25:19
quote in many drake songs which is like
00:25:22
these people have more followers than
00:25:23
dollars
00:25:24
and what he's trying to say is like you
00:25:26
make them important when they don't need
00:25:28
to be important
00:25:30
totally now now do ceos right you've got
00:25:33
ceos of some of the biggest companies in
00:25:35
the world like tim cook
00:25:36
like frank slootman who are making their
00:25:38
company policy based on what this
00:25:40
small number of loud voice on twitter
00:25:42
are saying it's ridiculous
00:25:44
i mean i think the eric adams win is a
00:25:47
watershed because
00:25:48
it shows the emperor wears no clothes
00:25:50
these these very loud progressive woke
00:25:53
voices ultimately do not
00:25:55
have that many supporters and all people
00:25:57
have to do
00:25:58
not not listen to them not when it goes
00:26:00
into the privacy of the ballot box
00:26:02
you have a lot of people again similar
00:26:04
to the to the
00:26:05
to the to what we saw in the in the
00:26:08
trump election in 2016 where
00:26:10
all these people quietly said oh i
00:26:13
cannot support trump
00:26:14
and then one in two people went into
00:26:17
that ballot box and said
00:26:18
[ __ ] you to everybody and this is the
00:26:21
exact same thing that's playing out
00:26:23
except the opposite which is now if you
00:26:25
are not completely progressive
00:26:27
at least in your posture and your
00:26:29
vocabulary there's this threat of being
00:26:31
cancelled and so you adopt this stuff
00:26:33
almost to make your life easy but when
00:26:35
push comes to shove
00:26:36
and we see it here in new york city and
00:26:38
we'll probably see it all over the
00:26:39
country
00:26:40
you get into the ballot box you're going
00:26:42
to go for somebody moderate and
00:26:44
reasonable that does the simple things
00:26:46
that you want to get done
00:26:47
and by the way they tried to cancel the
00:26:49
new york times tried to cancel andrew
00:26:51
yang
00:26:51
because he um had made uh
00:26:54
very i he basically said you know
00:26:58
that uh mentally ill men
00:27:01
uh who are addicted to drugs basically
00:27:03
are
00:27:04
um punching people in the face and you
00:27:07
know we need to address that
00:27:09
and the new york times framed it really
00:27:11
interestingly and i'll read you the
00:27:13
tweet
00:27:13
watch andrew yang's response to a
00:27:15
question about how he would handle
00:27:16
mental health
00:27:17
during when wednesday's new york city
00:27:19
mayoral debate
00:27:21
uh drew fire on social media from people
00:27:24
who said
00:27:24
it lacked empathy or understanding and
00:27:27
when you look at that framing
00:27:28
he said how he would handle mental
00:27:30
health he wasn't talking about mental
00:27:32
health
00:27:32
generally and broadly he was talking
00:27:35
about
00:27:35
people suffering from mental health on
00:27:38
the streets who were homeless who were
00:27:39
addicted to drugs and who punch people
00:27:41
on the face
00:27:41
right massive subset yeah but they
00:27:44
framed this
00:27:45
to attack him then let me just finish
00:27:46
the other way they framed it
00:27:48
it drew fire on social media
00:27:52
so instead of saying this person said
00:27:54
this they literally
00:27:56
the new york times is trying to get
00:27:59
andrew yang canceled and to get more
00:28:01
people to subscribe
00:28:03
uh by being part of the woke mob yes
00:28:06
literally their twitter handle
00:28:07
does that he i could find ten times as
00:28:10
many people who said
00:28:11
yeah we can't have people who are
00:28:12
mentally ill and violent on the street
00:28:14
punching people
00:28:15
it was andrew yang's it was andrew
00:28:17
yang's single best moment of the
00:28:19
campaign
00:28:19
is he talked honestly about the risk to
00:28:23
the public
00:28:24
of mentally ill people living on the
00:28:25
streets and attacking people
00:28:27
it was his single best moment the reason
00:28:29
he did it is because he saw the traction
00:28:30
that
00:28:31
eric adams was getting on the safety
00:28:33
issue and if yang had done that from the
00:28:35
beginning of the campaign he might be
00:28:37
the next mayor
00:28:37
yeah let me let me read this from here
00:28:40
yang cared too much ultimately his
00:28:43
achilles heel
00:28:44
was caring too much about the very
00:28:46
online voices
00:28:47
on twitter like the new york times and
00:28:49
we've just seen
00:28:50
that eric adams has proved is all a
00:28:52
house of cards
00:28:54
nobody really cares what they think
00:28:56
here's the here's the quote from eric
00:28:58
adams if the democratic party fails to
00:29:00
recognize what we did here in new york
00:29:03
they're going to have a problem in the
00:29:04
midterm elections and they're going to
00:29:06
have a problem in the presidential
00:29:07
election the
00:29:08
brooklyn borough president said america
00:29:10
is saying
00:29:12
we want to have justice and safety
00:29:15
and end inequality and we don't want
00:29:18
fancy candidates
00:29:19
we want candidates their nails are not
00:29:21
polished
00:29:22
they have calluses on their hands and
00:29:24
they're blue-collar people
00:29:25
common sense common people they've
00:29:27
returned to common sense
00:29:29
freeburg i had uh cc jew on um
00:29:32
this uh thread where somebody said they
00:29:36
found
00:29:36
missing sequencing of the kova genes
00:29:39
that were submitted to a database
00:29:42
did you have a chance to review that at
00:29:43
all um
00:29:45
i did and since you sent that it's
00:29:47
become a little bit of a story
00:29:49
a lot of people have kind of picked it
00:29:51
up and followed up on it because it did
00:29:53
ignite quite a bit of interest so the
00:29:56
story is a guy named jessie bloom who's
00:29:58
a researcher at the hutchinson cancer
00:30:00
center
00:30:01
in seattle and has been studying um
00:30:04
you know covet as a lot of scientists
00:30:06
have kind of shifted their attention
00:30:07
over the past year but has a background
00:30:09
in virology
00:30:12
he was uh trying to pull some early
00:30:16
genomic samples that that may have been
00:30:19
taken from patients early in china
00:30:22
so what this means is you know when
00:30:24
patients kind of
00:30:25
um in the early days were emerging as
00:30:28
potentially having stars cov2 they were
00:30:30
swabbing them
00:30:31
and then doing a genomic read of the rna
00:30:34
they find from the virus in that swab
00:30:36
and around the world a lot of scientists
00:30:39
contribute to this
00:30:40
openly available genomic database um and
00:30:43
they contribute their whole genome
00:30:44
samples
00:30:45
when they when they run studies and so
00:30:47
on so other scientists can use it in the
00:30:48
future for research
00:30:50
and what this guy found was that there
00:30:51
were a few dozen of these samples
00:30:53
that had been on this genomics database
00:30:55
that were now missing
00:30:57
and they had been pulled down and using
00:31:00
a little technical sleuthing he realized
00:31:02
they had been pulled down from the
00:31:03
directory
00:31:04
but the raw genomic sample read data was
00:31:07
still available on the google cloud so
00:31:08
he used the google cloud api to pull
00:31:11
that actual data
00:31:12
down from the servers and then ran a
00:31:14
study on it it turns out the
00:31:16
the interesting kind of intrigue around
00:31:18
this story
00:31:19
is why did that data get get deleted who
00:31:21
deleted it and it turns out the only way
00:31:23
it gets deleted
00:31:24
is if the original kind of authors go in
00:31:26
and make a request to have it removed
00:31:28
and these were some
00:31:29
random scientists in china who had
00:31:32
and so in the days following this
00:31:34
publication
00:31:36
of this guy so this guy published this
00:31:38
on a pre-print server called bioarchive
00:31:40
so it's not a peer-reviewed journal
00:31:42
uh it basically is a place for
00:31:44
bioarchive is a place where uh
00:31:46
biology scientists can submit uh early
00:31:49
versions of their research papers or to
00:31:50
get a new finding out really quickly
00:31:52
and then the world can kind of study it
00:31:54
and you don't have to wait for the
00:31:55
journalistic kind of cycle of getting
00:31:57
things approved
00:31:58
which is which is common now um and so
00:32:00
he put this thing out there
00:32:02
and everyone's kind of questioning well
00:32:04
okay where did these samples go it turns
00:32:05
out that these chinese scientists
00:32:07
had submitted them and now it has shown
00:32:10
uh or it has come out that apparently
00:32:12
some
00:32:12
um us officials made the request to have
00:32:15
it taken down after being asked to do so
00:32:17
by some chinese officials
00:32:18
uh to pull this data down and so there's
00:32:21
a really weird kind of intrigue going on
00:32:22
right now around this whole story
00:32:24
now so so that's kind of thread number
00:32:27
one
00:32:28
which is why was this request made to
00:32:29
pull this data down what was the
00:32:31
motivation etc
00:32:32
thread number two is what does the data
00:32:34
show us and what the data shows us
00:32:36
unfortunately is a little bit
00:32:38
inconclusive so a guy named trevor
00:32:39
bedford just put out a tweet um
00:32:41
earlier today uh analyzing this he's a
00:32:43
he's a world-class virologist also works
00:32:45
at the french hutchinson center
00:32:47
in seattle um and he basically
00:32:49
highlights that in the early days
00:32:51
of the sarsko v2 explosion in china
00:32:54
you can really identify from a genomic
00:32:57
variant perspective
00:32:58
two lineages of the virus that means you
00:33:00
know we're trying to get back to origin
00:33:01
or patient zero
00:33:03
and it turns out there were kind of like
00:33:04
these two families of the virus that
00:33:05
were emerging
00:33:07
and even with that new data you could
00:33:08
kind of reconstruct
00:33:10
the family tree in such a way that the
00:33:13
wuhan meat market
00:33:15
could have been the origin meaning the
00:33:17
root virus could have come out of that
00:33:18
wuhan market
00:33:20
or the wuhan meat market could have been
00:33:23
one of the two branches of the tree that
00:33:24
emerged early on so there may have been
00:33:26
an even earlier origin
00:33:28
and wuhan market was just one place
00:33:30
where it started to take off
00:33:31
so you know he said look he still thinks
00:33:33
that it's about a 50 50. you know
00:33:35
there's no clear evidence one way or the
00:33:36
other based on these newly uh
00:33:38
uncovered samples but
00:33:41
you know there is still this question of
00:33:43
does the wuhan market kind of
00:33:45
paint the patient zero story or is it
00:33:47
one of the places where the explosion
00:33:49
happened and patient zero was
00:33:50
in fact much earlier than wuhan market i
00:33:53
i will say
00:33:54
a couple episodes ago i kind of made a
00:33:55
comment you know with respect to the
00:33:57
origin of this virus that i don't know
00:33:58
don't care
00:33:59
and and i just want to clarify because i
00:34:01
know that some people kind of reached
00:34:02
out to me about that
00:34:04
i didn't really uh my my intention with
00:34:06
that statement was that this was really
00:34:08
meant to be
00:34:09
um i think a little bit more of a canary
00:34:11
in a coal mine for us
00:34:12
broadly about you know hey what we
00:34:14
should be looking forward to is what's
00:34:16
next
00:34:16
not just absolutely what happened in the
00:34:19
already
00:34:20
let's move on to the next thing is what
00:34:21
you're saying not being callous that it
00:34:23
doesn't matter yeah
00:34:24
i think i think what's more important is
00:34:25
that we need to get prepared for how do
00:34:27
we prevent these things happening in the
00:34:28
future and and what are the
00:34:30
um you know the key kind of checkpoints
00:34:31
we have around us in the future because
00:34:33
one thing i am most concerned about is a
00:34:35
huge step back but i'm concerned about
00:34:37
our normalization
00:34:39
of cancel um you know we kind of have
00:34:41
started to cancel people but we've also
00:34:43
you know
00:34:43
these shutdowns have been normalized and
00:34:46
the normalization where shutdown is the
00:34:48
response to an emerging variant or
00:34:49
emerging virus is really scary
00:34:52
because you know how is society going to
00:34:53
function properly when there's going to
00:34:55
be a proliferation of these viruses a
00:34:57
proliferation of
00:34:58
of risks uh with new technologies being
00:35:00
made available to us
00:35:02
and then shutting down becomes our
00:35:03
immediate response well how do you feel
00:35:04
about
00:35:05
shutting down borders friedberg as the
00:35:07
first course of action
00:35:08
if everybody in unison had shut down the
00:35:11
borders in february and said
00:35:13
no intercountry travel you know it would
00:35:15
have obviously been
00:35:16
devastating for the airlines but it
00:35:19
might have stopped the pandemic in its
00:35:21
tracks
00:35:21
there was no way to stop the the
00:35:22
pandemic once the genie's out of the
00:35:24
bottle the genies out of the bottle
00:35:26
and we saw this in states that had
00:35:28
lockdowns and states that didn't have
00:35:29
lockdown it's where we saw equivalent
00:35:31
but why wasn't taiwan and australia and
00:35:33
those kind of places that are islands
00:35:34
that lock down why were they spared
00:35:37
i i don't know if you can really say
00:35:39
that they were spared
00:35:40
um and i don't know if you can really
00:35:41
say that people are happy with the the
00:35:43
life that they led for that year
00:35:44
right i i think what we need to solve
00:35:46
for is how do we have these vaccines
00:35:48
come to market much faster
00:35:50
and be much more variable in their
00:35:51
efficaciousness because
00:35:53
we are going to have a lot more of these
00:35:55
kind of emerging variants over the next
00:35:56
couple of years with stars cov2 but also
00:35:58
with
00:35:59
potentially engineered bugs that form to
00:36:01
be careful about
00:36:02
question for trimatha saks then um in
00:36:05
friedberg's
00:36:06
sort of analysis there um and what was
00:36:09
explained
00:36:10
uh on the web about the these new
00:36:12
sequences
00:36:13
the us was allegedly involved in taking
00:36:17
this down with the chinese
00:36:19
if the usa and i'm just creating a
00:36:21
hypothesis here
00:36:22
just to do a little game theory if the
00:36:23
u.s
00:36:25
was allowing china to take this down
00:36:28
what would the game theory be
00:36:30
if the u.s was involved in dare i say a
00:36:32
cover-up
00:36:33
or being opaque like the chinese have
00:36:36
already been proven to be
00:36:38
why would the u.s do that tremoff
00:36:42
what would be the possible theories and
00:36:44
sacks
00:36:45
why did why did the nba shut down daryl
00:36:48
mori
00:36:50
but that may not be um that made it
00:36:52
sorry that may not be national policy
00:36:53
jake all right so like a scientist an
00:36:55
american scientist or an american
00:36:57
official could have made that request it
00:36:59
doesn't mean that it was a
00:37:00
conspiratorial process to remove this
00:37:02
stuff yeah no i want to jump the gun i
00:37:04
want to jump the fence and say
00:37:05
if in fact the some u.s people were
00:37:08
involved so
00:37:09
to your point it could be an individual
00:37:11
covering it up or it could be
00:37:13
an organization in america or it could
00:37:15
be you know
00:37:16
some set of organizations but saks you
00:37:18
wanted to well look i i don't believe
00:37:20
the wet market
00:37:21
theory precisely because there is a
00:37:24
cover-up i mean the wet market theory
00:37:25
was the official ccp
00:37:28
who party line about where the virus
00:37:31
came from
00:37:32
if that was the case why wouldn't they
00:37:34
just throw open the gates to
00:37:36
investigators let them go into the wuhan
00:37:38
institute of virology
00:37:40
um you know why why all the cover-up why
00:37:42
and wouldn't they shut down all wet
00:37:44
markets
00:37:46
maybe i mean but yeah and maybe the
00:37:48
logical competition but why why
00:37:50
obstruct the investigation why um ask
00:37:53
these american researchers to delete
00:37:55
these sequences
00:37:57
of um dna or whatever and in terms of
00:38:00
why would the researchers do it because
00:38:01
they were asked to and they've got a
00:38:02
relationship why would americans be
00:38:04
if in fact they were why is it just why
00:38:08
is the who been carrying water for
00:38:10
um the chinese government they get their
00:38:12
paycheck from them
00:38:13
no because i think the the who is stupid
00:38:15
i mean that's well they've
00:38:16
all got all these you know institutional
00:38:18
incentives they all work together
00:38:20
and um you know there's money involved
00:38:23
there's sort of relationships involved
00:38:24
there's bureaucracy involved
00:38:26
um and then there's a level of
00:38:28
incompetence
00:38:30
yeah so it could be incompetence could
00:38:33
it also not be
00:38:34
that uh we funded that laboratory
00:38:38
in some way right we had given some
00:38:40
money towards it that's i think
00:38:41
established yeah
00:38:42
the functional resources i think it's a
00:38:44
if look i i am a better person and then
00:38:47
on our face if they were in fact doing
00:38:49
this so
00:38:50
i think we don't want a little or we
00:38:51
don't want to be in conflict with them
00:38:53
because no i think americans in the west
00:38:54
might demand we be in conflict with
00:38:56
china no no i think it's i think it's
00:38:57
what friedrich said which is like look
00:38:59
uh
00:38:59
what seemingly a low-level request is
00:39:02
made
00:39:02
to basically delete an entry in a table
00:39:04
you do it
00:39:05
you know not thinking anything of it uh
00:39:08
it
00:39:09
i think it's pretty clear that
00:39:12
this was something that leaked out of
00:39:16
that lab
00:39:17
the thing that we will never ever know
00:39:20
is how and why and whether it was purely
00:39:24
accidental or something more nefarious
00:39:26
than that
00:39:26
and i think this is why to friedberg's
00:39:28
point we just have to put a pin
00:39:30
in all of that and move on and try to
00:39:33
figure out a way where we set ourselves
00:39:35
up so that the
00:39:35
the next time for example the
00:39:38
like you know we we hear about the delta
00:39:41
variant now
00:39:42
we're going to hear about other variants
00:39:43
in the fall it's going to be a tough
00:39:45
winter
00:39:47
we cannot shut down yeah i think we need
00:39:50
to know
00:39:51
what happened here in order to inform
00:39:53
our plan for the future
00:39:54
so i think to your point walking and
00:39:56
chewing gum at the same time why can't
00:39:57
we do
00:39:58
both yeah well i mean think about it if
00:40:01
the
00:40:02
so so i've never i've never heard anyone
00:40:05
seriously
00:40:06
argue that the lab leak was intentional
00:40:09
i mean i think
00:40:10
because that would have posed i think a
00:40:12
risk to china itself but
00:40:14
but let's say let's say it was an
00:40:16
accidental lab leak
00:40:18
um what what that suggests is look the
00:40:20
chinese knew everything about this virus
00:40:22
for months while we were all here
00:40:25
pulling out our hair trying to figure
00:40:26
this thing out what is it
00:40:28
who does it affect you know what are the
00:40:30
risks we're all having these debates in
00:40:32
the united states and trying to get to
00:40:33
the bottom of this
00:40:34
and they knew everything about it and
00:40:35
they were they weren't telling us but
00:40:37
hold on freeburg
00:40:38
i mean the i think i think i i read this
00:40:40
somewhere but
00:40:41
moderna had characterized the vaccine 48
00:40:44
hours after getting an email of the dna
00:40:45
sequence of the
00:40:46
anyone can do that yeah within within 40
00:40:48
so so this was done in january as soon
00:40:50
as we got
00:40:51
yeah but if they did make it to david's
00:40:53
point why don't they tell us how they
00:40:55
made it
00:40:56
it it took months it took months to
00:40:58
understand the pathology of the virus
00:41:00
right
00:41:00
yeah it's it's that's not what matters
00:41:02
jkl you can read the code it's very
00:41:04
readable you can read the code within a
00:41:06
day and then you can pick the area of
00:41:08
the spike protein which we already knew
00:41:10
about
00:41:10
and you can say let's go build some you
00:41:12
know target so how they got there
00:41:13
doesn't matter is what you're saying
00:41:14
freeberg how they how they created it
00:41:17
how they got i mean the you're saying
00:41:20
you're asking how the chinese edited
00:41:22
the virus in a lab is that what you're
00:41:23
saying yeah how they was just like a
00:41:25
three-year project is this the 17th
00:41:27
version they worked on or the second
00:41:30
you know like there's so many things
00:41:32
jason you're speaking about you're
00:41:33
characterizing this as if it was a
00:41:35
designed weapon is that what you're
00:41:36
saying
00:41:37
well i'm i'm saying it was designed not
00:41:39
as a weapon
00:41:40
but they were doing what it studied
00:41:42
evolutionary
00:41:44
function research yeah gain of function
00:41:46
means that it
00:41:48
there so there is a gain of function in
00:41:50
plain english fredberg
00:41:52
so so when they say neurology in
00:41:55
virology they're going to study
00:41:57
what changes in the genome might do to
00:42:00
biology to an animal to a biological
00:42:03
system
00:42:04
and that study gives them insights into
00:42:06
how a virus may evolve
00:42:08
or how certain parts of a virus may
00:42:10
affect humans ultimately in different
00:42:12
ways
00:42:13
and so understanding viruses and really
00:42:15
important when you're studying viruses
00:42:16
is you want to understand where they're
00:42:17
headed not just where they're coming
00:42:19
from
00:42:19
and so to understand where they're
00:42:20
headed you may make genomic changes and
00:42:23
study how those genomic changes affect
00:42:25
so they
00:42:25
enhanced can i use the word enhanced or
00:42:29
solved you could say evolve you could
00:42:30
say enhanced you could say engineered
00:42:32
but um
00:42:32
but very much it's about understanding
00:42:35
where the changes in the proteins and
00:42:37
the virus can
00:42:38
affect biology in different ways in the
00:42:40
future so that we can better understand
00:42:42
you know what these viruses are capable
00:42:43
of and prepare ourselves
00:42:47
we found out the implications of covet
00:42:49
19. and thank god we didn't have to find
00:42:51
it out for
00:42:52
17 16 15 14 13 12 11 1098.
00:42:56
you know what i mean like yes so that's
00:42:58
my point freeburg
00:42:59
would it not be helpful to open kimono
00:43:01
look at every single
00:43:03
enhancement they made and what the
00:43:05
results of those were
00:43:07
like they did something in that lab for
00:43:10
the last couple of years
00:43:11
who's got that information they knew
00:43:14
the name is the same
00:43:18
the name is the same thing
00:43:26
what this database thing uh represents
00:43:29
is look there was a cover up here and
00:43:30
that cover-up has
00:43:32
fingerprints and the information is
00:43:34
leaking out
00:43:35
and we are seeing more crime and and
00:43:37
more information is going to come out i
00:43:39
actually disagree with you guys that
00:43:40
we're not going to learn more about what
00:43:41
happened
00:43:42
we're going to learn how we're going to
00:43:43
learn we're going to learn a lot more
00:43:45
and it's going to get
00:43:45
worse and worse it's going to be but sex
00:43:48
where does it head so like let's say we
00:43:49
discover
00:43:50
that was my original question question
00:43:52
let's say we discover that there's an
00:43:54
accidental lab leak out of the wuhan
00:43:55
institute of virology a scientist got
00:43:57
infected
00:43:58
left the lab gave it to her boyfriend
00:44:00
people spread it in the street suddenly
00:44:02
became a whole pandemic what what do we
00:44:04
do
00:44:04
what do you think the response is do you
00:44:05
think americans basically now
00:44:08
impose sanctions on china and we and we
00:44:10
lead to a cold war like where is this
00:44:11
all headed
00:44:13
what are the motivating principles of
00:44:14
politicians who are going to respond as
00:44:16
that evidence comes out
00:44:17
yes that's what i want to know okay
00:44:19
number one i've said it before we've got
00:44:20
to reassure the whole
00:44:22
pharmaceutical industry we cannot be
00:44:24
dependent on china for our
00:44:26
pharmaceutical supply chain our
00:44:27
antibiotics our ppe
00:44:29
that is insane um second of all i mean
00:44:32
we got to be more realistic about the
00:44:33
nature of the regime
00:44:34
that we're dealing with they knew
00:44:36
everything about this virus
00:44:37
for months while we were trying to
00:44:38
figure it out where does it take us like
00:44:40
let's say we find out that to be true
00:44:42
where does this
00:44:43
what happens next decoupling decoupling
00:44:45
here and here's another thing that i
00:44:46
think needs to happen which is that
00:44:49
but i guess that's sorry one sec but
00:44:50
doesn't decoupling happen either way
00:44:52
like why do we need all this because
00:44:54
there is such a motivating principle on
00:44:56
on both sides of the aisle to decouple
00:44:58
from china
00:44:59
and there is a motivating principle no
00:45:01
there isn't there is a reason to not
00:45:03
decouple it's called
00:45:04
money there is a group of elites who do
00:45:07
not want the decoupling to happen
00:45:09
from the nba to iphones apple the nba
00:45:13
and disney do not want to decouple
00:45:15
they want to integrate these two
00:45:16
societies so that we can make money
00:45:18
i'm not sure the decoupling is my theory
00:45:20
of what people are scared of
00:45:21
no okay people are scared of a
00:45:23
decoupling i just want to say two things
00:45:25
i don't think that there's like a group
00:45:26
of elites that want
00:45:28
that to happen necessarily because i
00:45:31
think that
00:45:32
their lives are complicated and what
00:45:35
they would
00:45:35
love to have i think is actually two end
00:45:38
markets you have to remember
00:45:39
if you go from one global market to
00:45:42
a duopoly market and you're a seller of
00:45:45
services
00:45:46
you actually have more pricing power and
00:45:48
a duopoly than you do in a monopoly into
00:45:50
a monopoly so
00:45:51
you know if you're disney theoretically
00:45:53
and you have the ability to
00:45:55
differentially price
00:45:56
two different pieces of content you're
00:45:58
going to do that so
00:45:59
i i tend to think in general
00:46:02
it's better for economic systems to have
00:46:05
this bifurcation
00:46:06
so the i just want to go back to the the
00:46:09
thing that i wanted to
00:46:11
define bifurcation you're saying two
00:46:12
different markets but what if there
00:46:14
is hey we're going to sanction we're not
00:46:16
going to send disney movies
00:46:17
where they're not going to let disney
00:46:18
and nba and like they don't like google
00:46:20
and twitter and
00:46:20
or iphones are not going to be made
00:46:22
there and apple's going to start making
00:46:23
iphones and vietnam and pakistan and sri
00:46:25
lanka
00:46:25
i actually think what happens is it
00:46:27
accelerates democracy
00:46:28
because again you have an enormously
00:46:32
difficult
00:46:32
and thorny issue inside of china which
00:46:35
is they have a
00:46:35
cataclysmic demographic bombshell going
00:46:39
on
00:46:40
they have we have the average age in
00:46:42
china
00:46:43
versus the average age in the united
00:46:45
states is now the same
00:46:47
yep which is an unbelievable thing
00:46:49
because china was facing
00:46:50
policy china was 15 or 20 years younger
00:46:53
in the early 90s when all of this
00:46:55
offshoring started to happen in full
00:46:57
scale
00:46:58
by the end of 21s by the end of this
00:47:01
century
00:47:02
china's population i think is projected
00:47:04
to shrink to about
00:47:05
700 million people so they
00:47:08
are in a hugely difficult demographic
00:47:11
situation where
00:47:12
there's no young people people are
00:47:14
getting older and older and older
00:47:15
and so there's just going to be a lot of
00:47:17
upheaval you just saw by the way people
00:47:19
cost a lot of money too much much more
00:47:21
money
00:47:22
japan china just you know relax their
00:47:24
one child policy to two
00:47:26
then within a month they relax their
00:47:28
two-child policy to three
00:47:30
and they're gonna be paying people to
00:47:31
have kids i mean just like we give tax
00:47:33
incentives well and now
00:47:34
they're uh they're floating a policy
00:47:36
which says unlimited kids okay so
00:47:38
so that's why you can just i just want
00:47:40
to go back to what uh one of the
00:47:42
practical things we can do coming out of
00:47:44
wuhan as all this new data comes out
00:47:46
is instead of vilifying china or trying
00:47:48
to enter some cold war which is stupid
00:47:50
we should just go and reshore everything
00:47:52
as sac suggested
00:47:53
one thing that you can say is wherever
00:47:56
there is this kind of research happening
00:47:58
in the world
00:47:59
every single variant needs to go to some
00:48:02
basically open source repository that
00:48:04
virologists all around the world
00:48:06
can basically watch what's happening in
00:48:08
lockstep
00:48:10
well right what the [ __ ] was going on
00:48:12
here then yeah they deleted it
00:48:14
it was deleted but to be clear
00:48:21
that is exactly the principle and that
00:48:23
is exactly what goes on within the
00:48:25
academic and research communities
00:48:27
worldwide there's
00:48:28
very open and cooperative dialogue with
00:48:30
academics around the world
00:48:31
about these matters and generally that
00:48:33
is absolutely true in the way things are
00:48:35
done because scientists don't care about
00:48:36
politics
00:48:37
they care about you know human health
00:48:39
and progress answer this question please
00:48:41
is every single variant of covid that
00:48:43
led up to covet 19
00:48:45
well characterized and well understood
00:48:47
by a broad class of scientists and
00:48:49
virologists all over the world
00:48:51
or yeah or a small subset of people the
00:48:55
the plurality of which we're working at
00:48:57
the wuhan lab for virology
00:48:58
we didn't know the argument goes you
00:49:01
don't know that you have sars cov2 in
00:49:03
those early days
00:49:04
and so you see some people getting sick
00:49:06
and then suddenly you put your head up
00:49:07
and you're like wait a second that's
00:49:08
what's going on here that's not what i'm
00:49:09
about my point is you're not you're not
00:49:11
running a genomic sequencing on all
00:49:12
those people
00:49:13
in those early days no no i'm asking
00:49:14
something you have this original virus
00:49:17
that you've been testing and mutating
00:49:19
and
00:49:20
you know reprogramming you're testing
00:49:22
you're basically doing a massive monte
00:49:23
carlo simulation on an original virus
00:49:27
are all the intermediate instantiations
00:49:29
of that virus
00:49:30
well characterized okay that's my point
00:49:35
yeah okay if they were publicly
00:49:37
available wouldn't that be super
00:49:38
dangerous
00:49:39
also also by the way like wouldn't it
00:49:41
make sense then if if you were doing
00:49:42
these iterations of these viruses that
00:49:44
that the dna sequences should go to
00:49:47
places like pfizer and moderna where you
00:49:49
are
00:49:49
mandated to create vaccines just in case
00:49:52
well we are going to enter a stage here
00:49:54
in the next decade where we will have
00:49:56
vaccine printers around the world
00:49:58
they're going to be small bioreactors
00:49:59
they're going to be able to effectively
00:50:00
ship
00:50:01
code to them they're going to print
00:50:02
vaccines there's several companies
00:50:04
pursuing this
00:50:05
i'm just i'm just going to go over this
00:50:08
i like your idea though
00:50:09
i'm just going to be interesting this
00:50:10
system is immature
00:50:13
naive and inefficient and i think what
00:50:14
if that's something that we can fix
00:50:16
that's why what matters most in my
00:50:18
opinion and based on
00:50:20
the comments i made a few episodes ago
00:50:22
is that we need to focus on how to get
00:50:24
there
00:50:24
versus trying to trace back the origins
00:50:26
because i think honestly tracing back
00:50:27
the origins is just going to put
00:50:29
kindling on a fire that's already
00:50:30
burning
00:50:31
and so my my this this this has been my
00:50:34
point about this whole like
00:50:35
you know blame china we want to get to a
00:50:37
point where we can quote unquote blame
00:50:38
china for this
00:50:39
but the decoupling and the onshore there
00:50:41
is already enough motivation there
00:50:43
and there is already on both sides of
00:50:44
the aisle there is already kind of an
00:50:46
obvious trajectory that we're headed
00:50:48
this way
00:50:48
i'm not sure this is a catalyst maybe or
00:50:50
it's a little bit more kindling
00:50:52
we're already headed there and it
00:50:53
doesn't actually answer our
00:50:54
forward-looking question which is how do
00:50:56
we secure our future
00:50:57
and how we secure our future is really
00:50:59
where technology and industry and and
00:51:01
some of these free burgers let me
00:51:02
let me build on chamat's idea what if
00:51:05
the mrna vaccine creation and the
00:51:08
research
00:51:09
laboratory were the same facility and
00:51:11
you had a cross-disciplinary
00:51:13
approach where they're making stuff and
00:51:17
then they're curing it next door
00:51:19
in real time so that they can trade
00:51:20
notes why would that be a terrible idea
00:51:22
it seems like
00:51:22
a brilliant idea you could just you
00:51:24
could just transfer the date from the
00:51:26
research and
00:51:27
print the vaccines with the people that
00:51:28
are really good at making vaccine
00:51:30
right you don't need to have an
00:51:32
intricate understanding of the biology
00:51:34
to actually be effective at making
00:51:36
vaccines right no but isn't there
00:51:37
something about scientists who are
00:51:38
cross-disciplinary sharing space and
00:51:40
having collisions building relationships
00:51:41
isn't that part of the science process
00:51:43
that's worked over the last couple years
00:51:44
you talk about how
00:51:45
in synthetic biology and all this you
00:51:47
want the mathematicians computer
00:51:49
programmers
00:51:50
you know and the biologists in the same
00:51:51
area and the chemists resolving to a
00:51:53
world where we have very cheap
00:51:55
very fast and distributed production of
00:51:58
vaccines
00:51:59
is an engineering problem and the the
00:52:02
engineering work is what is kind of
00:52:03
being undertaken now by several
00:52:05
companies and will be fueled by this uh
00:52:07
this new um
00:52:08
uh bill that biden's trying to get past
00:52:10
this infrastructure build is a ton of
00:52:11
money and therefore
00:52:12
and as that happens that engineering
00:52:14
process is effectively think about them
00:52:16
like printers
00:52:17
and they can take code and that code
00:52:19
allows the that printer to not print
00:52:20
whatever you want to print
00:52:22
the question of what you want to print
00:52:24
is going to be determined by the
00:52:25
research that's being done over here
00:52:26
which is okay here's what we're
00:52:27
discovering here's what we should print
00:52:29
here's what we should protect against
00:52:30
and why but i think that there's a
00:52:32
separate engineering exercise which
00:52:33
you know let's let let's build this
00:52:35
distributed production system
00:52:36
i'm going to go on a limb and say these
00:52:38
labs are immature
00:52:40
naive and unsophisticated in the
00:52:44
checks and balances that exist and i
00:52:46
think we've seen that
00:52:48
and we need to fix it and you need to do
00:52:51
something more than just have
00:52:52
a bunch of folks that are focused on
00:52:55
science
00:52:55
going ham in whatever way they want all
00:52:58
right so
00:52:59
just to wrap sax anything else on this
00:53:00
as we put a cherry on it well i just
00:53:02
you asked the question what do we do
00:53:04
about china i think that is a question
00:53:06
that's a generational question we're
00:53:07
going to be asking that for totally for
00:53:09
decades it's
00:53:10
this is an area where we need freed
00:53:12
bergy and nuance
00:53:13
because it's something that we're going
00:53:15
to have to navigate as a country
00:53:17
for for decades a really good book about
00:53:20
this is the
00:53:21
thucydides trap by graham allison who's
00:53:25
a harvard professor
00:53:26
and he discusses different strategies we
00:53:28
can take he quotes uh lee kuan yew who
00:53:31
is the
00:53:32
you know president of singapore who has
00:53:34
a great quote about this he said
00:53:36
lee kuan yew said that the size of
00:53:38
china's displacement of the world
00:53:39
balance
00:53:40
is such that the world must find a new
00:53:42
balance it is not possible to pretend
00:53:44
that this is just another
00:53:45
big player this is the biggest player in
00:53:47
the history of the world
00:53:48
that was that was the lee kuan yew quote
00:53:50
um so we were dealing with this issue
00:53:52
even before covet but i do think that
00:53:55
kovid has unmasked this regime
00:53:58
a little bit and caused
00:54:01
people across both sides of the whole
00:54:03
spectrum to look
00:54:05
at this regime i think more
00:54:06
realistically all right so
00:54:08
in somewhat related news uh apple
00:54:12
obviously
00:54:12
building all their phones over there and
00:54:14
now having servers and data over there
00:54:17
um has led to a lot of scrutiny of big
00:54:20
tech
00:54:21
but the more pressing issue is the
00:54:23
anti-trust bills that seem to be
00:54:25
fast-tracked on wednesday u.s house
00:54:28
judiciary committee discussed six
00:54:30
six proposed anti-trust bills uh one
00:54:33
bill
00:54:34
uh sponsored by a democrat from rhode
00:54:37
island
00:54:38
uh would call for apple to allow
00:54:40
third-party app stores
00:54:42
seems reasonable and provide iphone
00:54:44
technologies to third-party
00:54:46
software makers so i think that means
00:54:49
maybe opening up imessage
00:54:51
which would be delightful i'm not sure
00:54:53
exactly what they mean there
00:54:55
and so apple and tim cook is in a panic
00:54:58
he apparently called nancy pelosi
00:55:01
and said can you pump the brakes
00:55:04
just to give you an idea of what's going
00:55:06
on here um
00:55:08
apple's uh revenue even though it's a
00:55:10
small percentage of just 10
00:55:12
uh of their 274 billion dollars in uh
00:55:17
2020 revenue it's obviously pure
00:55:20
profit profit margins got to be in the
00:55:23
notes here it says 75
00:55:24
but i would think it's even more clearly
00:55:27
services
00:55:27
and the app store inside of apple is i
00:55:30
think analogous to the aws for amazon is
00:55:32
a money printing machine that's growing
00:55:34
really fast uh what do we think about
00:55:37
apple being forced
00:55:39
to put other app stores on their
00:55:42
phones just like you can on your android
00:55:44
phone i support it
00:55:46
i've been blue pilled on this issue
00:55:47
actually that's what the that's what the
00:55:49
commenters on
00:55:50
of our the all-in fans have said is that
00:55:52
why sacks taking blue pills on this
00:55:53
issue
00:55:54
um and and look the reality is because
00:55:57
i'm not in the business of um of helping
00:56:00
two trillion dollar
00:56:02
uh market cap companies i'm in the
00:56:03
underdog business i'm in the business
00:56:05
of helping the entrepreneur get started
00:56:08
with a new company
00:56:10
and the fact of the matter is is that
00:56:11
apple has the market power the same
00:56:14
market power
00:56:14
greater than microsoft did in its heyday
00:56:17
with the windows monopoly
00:56:18
they are total gatekeepers of what
00:56:21
applications can be built on these ios
00:56:23
devices and windows windows you could
00:56:25
win
00:56:26
it was open i mean it was open they
00:56:27
already have an app store yeah
00:56:29
right so this this proposal by uh
00:56:31
representative
00:56:33
right so this proposal by representative
00:56:35
sicilian the democrat from rhode island
00:56:37
would allow the side loading it would
00:56:39
basically loosen the grip
00:56:41
that apple has over the apps that can be
00:56:43
loaded onto apple devices
00:56:44
it would at least uh you know create
00:56:47
some
00:56:48
degree some potential no it would create
00:56:50
a tremendous competition
00:56:52
and it's very easy to execute great
00:56:54
jamaa uh um
00:56:55
i i think you said it really well i am
00:56:57
also in the underdog business so i think
00:56:59
the
00:57:00
the faster they've rammed this thing
00:57:02
through the better off it'll be
00:57:04
um the thing that is important to
00:57:08
recognize is that apple will make this
00:57:09
argument that well look there's always
00:57:11
android
00:57:12
and also look there's the open web and
00:57:14
that's structurally not true for a
00:57:16
couple of reasons
00:57:17
the overwhelming amount of development
00:57:20
at least in silicon valley and broadly
00:57:22
speaking in tech starts on the iphone
00:57:25
sure um and it's only then as an
00:57:28
afterthought almost i mean
00:57:29
you have to remember it took snapchat
00:57:32
three or four years of being a public
00:57:34
company before they actually had a
00:57:35
reasonable android app
00:57:37
right and so android is has always been
00:57:40
sort of the low rpu afterthought even
00:57:42
though it has
00:57:43
meaningfully more users they're just not
00:57:45
as much revenue per user
00:57:47
and so exactly and so you know it's kind
00:57:50
of a baseless argument
00:57:51
the overwhelming revenue the north star
00:57:54
for developers where all of the venture
00:57:56
capital money goes into is the funding
00:57:59
and developing ios apps
00:58:01
and in that world view ios is a complete
00:58:05
monopoly and uh breaking up the ability
00:58:10
for them to basically dictate a 30 take
00:58:13
rate
00:58:14
um and also loosening the technical
00:58:16
guard rails i think is a huge
00:58:17
step forward there's only one thing that
00:58:19
i would say however
00:58:22
apple has done an incredible job with
00:58:24
privacy locking down the phone
00:58:26
sandboxing instances and we'll have to
00:58:28
find some technical alternative
00:58:31
to fortifying um oh no
00:58:34
actually they don't chamoth actually i
00:58:35
think what they do is when you go to
00:58:37
your settings
00:58:38
you say unlock iphone you now are not
00:58:40
protected
00:58:41
apple is not responsible you've decided
00:58:44
to sideload stuff
00:58:45
and it's basically like putting your mo
00:58:47
your phone into jailbreak or dev mode
00:58:49
where they are not going to support you
00:58:51
that's the way i think apple should
00:58:52
execute it is
00:58:53
that would be like they're you know if
00:58:54
you want to load anything you want when
00:58:56
you get viruses and your privacy gets
00:58:58
hacked
00:58:58
it's not on us you just essentially
00:59:01
although we have one warranty
00:59:03
for people who are not jailbroken and
00:59:04
side loaded and one warranty for people
00:59:06
who decide to jailbreak their phones
00:59:08
what's what's incredible to me the other
00:59:10
the other point on this is how quickly
00:59:11
these guys pass this bill and actually
00:59:13
oh actually all six and then how
00:59:15
reasonably well they were written
00:59:17
i mean this is one topic where sometimes
00:59:19
you know politicians can really kind of
00:59:21
get it wrong or they can get lobbied in
00:59:22
one way or the other and
00:59:24
these bills come out they don't make
00:59:25
sense i mean if you have to remember
00:59:26
where how far we've come
00:59:28
you know wasn't the first antitrust
00:59:30
thing where like some guy asked zuck a
00:59:32
question about like a model t
00:59:33
ford or something i mean it was just so
00:59:36
stupid they were so dumb
00:59:38
and they've gone from there to this it's
00:59:39
really incredible how fast they've
00:59:41
caught up
00:59:42
i think this is just a terrible
00:59:44
precedent and i
00:59:45
i think if you guys um weren't going to
00:59:47
make money
00:59:48
by weakening apple and alphabet you guys
00:59:51
put your free market hats on you'd kind
00:59:53
of acknowledge that this is just
00:59:55
we were not angel investors we did not
00:59:57
do the series of either of those
00:59:58
companies fredberg yeah i
01:00:00
i recognize that and i think like if you
01:00:02
guys have if you guys had a bunch of
01:00:03
shares in alphabet
01:00:04
or amazon or apple your your opinion
01:00:06
would be a little bit different but
01:00:07
um i'm just observing exactly what you
01:00:09
think i have shares i have shares on
01:00:11
amazon and facebook yeah well look i i
01:00:13
think in this particular case
01:00:15
he's in the process of selling them you
01:00:17
know
01:00:18
at the end of the day if if apple and
01:00:20
alphabet didn't make
01:00:22
incredible products for consumers and
01:00:23
focus on consumer happiness they
01:00:25
wouldn't be as successful as they are
01:00:27
and much of if you remember kind of the
01:00:28
early days of the apple app store
01:00:31
ideology it was about curating apps and
01:00:33
curating the quality of those apps so
01:00:35
that the quality of the overall iphone
01:00:37
experience
01:00:38
would be superior to anything else out
01:00:40
there and consumers would love it
01:00:41
it wasn't about blocking out competitors
01:00:43
and blocking out rivals and blocking out
01:00:45
other platforms
01:00:46
it was about making something that
01:00:47
consumers would absolutely love
01:00:50
and the same ideas freedberg they
01:00:53
blocked
01:00:54
third party uh book stores and
01:00:57
uh book readers they blocked browsers
01:01:00
they wanted
01:01:00
to block experience vlc and open source
01:01:03
players they did that because they
01:01:04
wanted you to use their own products
01:01:06
basically they set standards on the app
01:01:08
store and as long as you met those
01:01:09
standards those apps got in there so
01:01:11
youtube's in there
01:01:12
uh google chrome is in there you know
01:01:14
i've got chrome installed on my iphone i
01:01:15
think it's a better browser
01:01:16
it took them years years and they
01:01:18
realized they had to give that up they
01:01:20
had to give up the browser because
01:01:21
that's what
01:01:22
wanted
01:01:27
no the only reason that chrome is there
01:01:28
is because of the amount of money that
01:01:31
google pays
01:01:32
apple for search yeah look and that was
01:01:35
a quid pro co in that search deal i will
01:01:37
bet you dollars to donuts if that's the
01:01:39
only reason
01:01:41
yeah i don't think apple i don't think
01:01:42
apple is that dumb i'm pretty sure that
01:01:44
these guys recognize that if consumers
01:01:46
want something they better give it to
01:01:47
them and if consumers wanted a bunch of
01:01:48
shitty apps on the phone that didn't
01:01:50
work and broke down all the time you
01:01:52
will
01:01:52
then go through the process of
01:01:54
jailbreaking should you be able to
01:01:55
jailbreak your phone and hack it
01:01:56
freedberg
01:01:57
i don't i don't think that i should be
01:01:59
telling apple how to make their friggin
01:02:00
hardware
01:02:01
they should make their hardware and i as
01:02:02
a consumer in the free market should
01:02:04
decide if
01:02:04
i want to buy it or not and if i would
01:02:06
oh it's not a free market it's a
01:02:08
monopoly
01:02:10
i can go buy a freaking samsung or i
01:02:11
don't know if htc still makes phones or
01:02:13
you know nokia or blackberry i guess
01:02:14
these guys are all dead because their
01:02:15
products suck but okay
01:02:16
at the end of the day if there's an
01:02:18
alternative out there i will buy it and
01:02:20
if you guys want to go fund a hardware
01:02:21
company that builds a software platform
01:02:23
on top of the hardware
01:02:24
and maybe i'm not a monopolist
01:02:29
now i know why you didn't want to say
01:02:30
your opinion you're a goddamn robber
01:02:32
no it's really it's really interesting
01:02:34
that free book actually on this issue is
01:02:35
actually
01:02:36
the the free market um monster
01:02:39
red pill no and ever and everybody else
01:02:41
is sort of blue pill but but david
01:02:42
you're right
01:02:43
i'll point out that red pill blue pill
01:02:45
like you know the books
01:02:52
i think it's better for startups i don't
01:02:53
particularly have a lot of
01:02:55
trust or faith that these big companies
01:02:58
when they get this big are particularly
01:03:00
well run or have the best interest of
01:03:01
the broad
01:03:04
market in their minds and so
01:03:07
yeah i'll be honest with you i hope
01:03:09
these companies get broken up i think
01:03:11
it's great for what we do
01:03:12
i think it's great for entrepreneurship
01:03:14
i think it's super
01:03:16
uh phenomenal for the innovation cycle
01:03:18
we could
01:03:19
be a part of um and i would hope to
01:03:21
participate in that and make a bunch of
01:03:23
money
01:03:23
i think the best the best way to destroy
01:03:25
a monopoly is to build better technology
01:03:27
that disrupts them
01:03:28
and that has always been the case
01:03:30
throughout history and anytime
01:03:31
government gets involved and tries to
01:03:33
break up a monopoly
01:03:34
in a way that is not natural to the way
01:03:36
the market forces might
01:03:37
demand you end up declining an
01:03:40
innovation standard we have to disrupt
01:03:42
apple we have to disrupt amazon we have
01:03:43
to disrupt alphabet using technology if
01:03:45
we want to have an advantage to go in
01:03:47
the market
01:03:47
and by having government come in and
01:03:48
intervene i feel like it ends up being
01:03:50
like like
01:03:51
like you know this cronyism which which
01:03:53
ultimately affects markets in an adverse
01:03:55
way
01:03:55
here's the problem is that the developer
01:03:57
network effects around an operating
01:03:59
system monopoly are insuperable
01:04:01
they you you cannot overthrow them there
01:04:03
are now
01:04:04
thousands and thousands maybe even
01:04:06
millions of apps have been developed on
01:04:07
the ios system
01:04:09
and uh no competitor can ever get that
01:04:12
kind of traction
01:04:13
it is the windows monopoly all over
01:04:15
again and by the way
01:04:16
microsoft and windows might have
01:04:18
dominated the internet if it weren't for
01:04:20
the government coming down
01:04:21
with the whole netscape litigation
01:04:24
netscape didn't survive but it kind of
01:04:26
it kind of froze microsoft in its tracks
01:04:29
and prevented them from dominating
01:04:30
the nascent internet and so you know i
01:04:33
think that turned out to be a good
01:04:34
government intervention
01:04:36
uh in terms of allowing innovation to
01:04:38
move forward and by the way just on the
01:04:39
sicily proposals
01:04:40
i think part of the reason why they make
01:04:42
so much sense is because we can't break
01:04:44
up apple
01:04:44
how would you break up apple right i
01:04:46
mean apple sells one product which is
01:04:48
ios
01:04:49
on different sizes the only way to break
01:04:51
up apple is to force them to use their
01:04:53
opera
01:04:54
let their operating system be licensed
01:04:55
to other hardware
01:04:57
that's not breaking them up so uh it
01:05:00
would certainly create downward pressure
01:05:01
on their margins if
01:05:03
dell could make a competing apple
01:05:05
desktop okay fair enough what i'm saying
01:05:07
what i'm saying is there's no
01:05:08
natural fault lines within apple like
01:05:10
there are at amazon
01:05:12
or google right yes amazon could spin
01:05:15
out aws very easily google could spin
01:05:17
out youtube or maybe
01:05:19
enterprise instagram apple's
01:05:23
yes of course so so what that means is
01:05:26
because you can't split up the company
01:05:27
if you want to address their power the
01:05:29
only way to do it is with proposals like
01:05:31
side loading i feel like you're you're
01:05:34
either looking at a
01:05:36
capitalist monopoly or you're looking at
01:05:37
a government monopoly
01:05:39
so if you think about what's happened in
01:05:40
financial services in the united states
01:05:42
the the regulatory burden on being a
01:05:44
service provider in the financial
01:05:45
services industry
01:05:46
is so high that it is very difficult for
01:05:49
startups to come in and compete
01:05:50
and look at what emerged bitcoin right i
01:05:53
feel like there is always going to be
01:05:55
a consumer innovation model that will
01:05:57
supplant the
01:05:58
monopoly and you can't just say hey the
01:06:00
government's going to come in and
01:06:01
sideload or or break up these big
01:06:03
businesses what ultimately happens when
01:06:04
you do that is you create a regulatory
01:06:06
burden
01:06:07
that makes it equally difficult for
01:06:08
competition to arise over time
01:06:10
or to reduce innovation that's going to
01:06:12
benefit consumers this is the
01:06:14
princess leia uh you know basically
01:06:17
theory the the tighter you squeeze
01:06:19
the more galaxies slip through your
01:06:20
fingers and maybe tick tock
01:06:23
uh and snapchat are examples of that
01:06:25
with facebook but there aren't many and
01:06:26
i don't know
01:06:27
who's coming up to fight against amazon
01:06:30
at this point um
01:06:32
so shopify and shopify is crushing it
01:06:34
and they're incredible and they're going
01:06:35
to create this long tail of stores that
01:06:37
ultimately could end up competing really
01:06:38
effectively with amazon
01:06:40
and we've seen it right and and and
01:06:41
consumers choose it
01:06:43
and this because just because shopify is
01:06:45
making a lot from sas revenue
01:06:46
does not mean that the majority of goods
01:06:48
are not going to go through i will tell
01:06:49
you the consumer the the consumer
01:06:51
experience on shopify stores is
01:06:52
fantastic
01:06:53
i mean we all don't realize it but we're
01:06:55
buying a ton of stuff from shopify
01:06:56
stores it's pretty good it's pretty good
01:06:57
and it has forced innovation
01:06:59
you know and and i will also highlight
01:07:01
that one of the benefits of these scaled
01:07:02
businesses
01:07:03
is that they end up having the
01:07:05
resourcing to fund new and emerging
01:07:07
businesses that otherwise wouldn't be
01:07:08
fundable
01:07:09
i don't think that aws would have
01:07:11
emerged and therefore google cloud and
01:07:12
all these other
01:07:13
alternatives wouldn't have emerged if
01:07:14
amazon went yeah it didn't have this
01:07:16
incredible
01:07:17
chromium open source project and think
01:07:19
about the industry that emerged around
01:07:21
android but nobody david nobody's
01:07:23
nobody's suggesting to have broken these
01:07:25
thing up in 2007
01:07:27
but it's 2021 and things have changed
01:07:30
i don't know what's down the road that
01:07:31
we're going to miss out on right i mean
01:07:32
i i guess my point is like
01:07:35
you know let the consumer make the
01:07:36
decision as opposed to create regulatory
01:07:39
burden that over time has its own
01:07:40
what is the downside to allowing
01:07:42
somebody who wants to put an app store
01:07:45
on their iphone what's the downside
01:07:46
freeberg what's the downside to letting
01:07:47
me
01:07:48
have amazon's app store or android app
01:07:50
store and me to pick
01:07:52
that i want to just have one subscript
01:07:54
set of subscriptions and i prefer the
01:07:56
android store
01:07:56
yeah why is that bad i'm not making it
01:07:59
personally the apple argument is
01:08:01
absolutely
01:08:01
quality of the the quality of i think
01:08:04
you i just think it's a little bit
01:08:05
short-sighted for us to all jump to say
01:08:06
let's break up big tech like
01:08:08
the quality of what no no no no
01:08:09
overlapping i think it's incredible
01:08:11
and and the new products that have come
01:08:12
out is just mind-blowing and you know we
01:08:14
all kind of miss the fact
01:08:15
that these are the beneficiaries of
01:08:17
scaled businesses
01:08:18
and you know you can't really see a
01:08:20
startup we are not saying break up big
01:08:23
tech we're saying
01:08:24
get rid of the 30 app store fee because
01:08:26
that negatively impacts our portfolios
01:08:29
let's be clear here this is screwing
01:08:32
with the margins
01:08:33
and a lot of the companies we invested
01:08:35
we want
01:08:36
that take rate lowered i mean this is if
01:08:39
apple just made the take rate 15
01:08:41
this entire thing goes away epic games
01:08:43
feels great spotify's feel great
01:08:45
that's what they should have done when
01:08:46
you over play your hand
01:08:48
and then all of a sudden you create a
01:08:50
group of enemies from netflix to spotify
01:08:52
to epic games
01:08:54
that was apple's big mistake they should
01:08:56
have
01:08:57
given those people a lower rate and just
01:08:59
slowly lowered the rate which is what
01:09:00
everybody's doing
01:09:02
now with creator percentages
01:09:05
and i think that's what youtube should
01:09:06
do now the 45 percent they're taking
01:09:08
just lower that to 30.
01:09:09
just give up a little bit of the take
01:09:11
rate and and people will be feel more
01:09:12
reasonable about
01:09:14
what you're taking can i can i bring in
01:09:15
the that sub stack article by antonio
01:09:18
garcia martinez
01:09:25
i want to end the apple segment on on um
01:09:28
on
01:09:28
agm's article which was called bad apple
01:09:30
although a great article great art yeah
01:09:32
i mean it was it was unbelievable but
01:09:33
david
01:09:34
was so i just want to let people know
01:09:36
how excited david was about this
01:09:38
david i think is like ready
01:09:41
to be in a full-blown bromance with
01:09:44
antonio
01:09:44
i mean which david are you talking about
01:09:47
i'm talking about you sacks you
01:09:49
are are you in love with antonio
01:09:54
it's a big pause oh oh
01:09:58
we lost upon zoom when i asked him if
01:10:00
he's in love apple came in and they
01:10:01
press
01:10:02
pause pause on the stream he's frozen
01:10:04
look at this
01:10:05
look at the frozen look at his eyes look
01:10:07
how he's he that's the look of love
01:10:10
did you read that article of love i
01:10:12
thought it was really well written too
01:10:14
it was well written he's a really really
01:10:17
good writer
01:10:18
but here's the thing he is getting paid
01:10:21
probably three hundred thousand to seven
01:10:23
hundred thousand dollars
01:10:25
to write on stubstack after getting
01:10:26
fired and after getting a giant
01:10:28
settlement from apple whatever that's
01:10:29
gonna be
01:10:30
so he is making out like a bandit but
01:10:33
i thought the funniest part was like i'm
01:10:35
not being
01:10:36
um silenced here because i'm now being
01:10:39
paid to talk about apple for the next
01:10:41
year my sub sack
01:10:42
um but he i thought his most salient
01:10:45
point was
01:10:46
steve jobs would not have been able to
01:10:48
exist in the apple that exists today
01:10:50
he would have run out of apples what do
01:10:52
you say he would have been cancelled
01:10:53
what i mean steve jobs would have a
01:10:55
hundred percent david you broke up us
01:10:57
if you were in love with antonio you
01:10:59
just you i think you got
01:11:01
no money off yeah exactly no look i
01:11:04
think um i don't agree with everything
01:11:05
agm writes but i do think he
01:11:07
is a fantastic writer with a lot of
01:11:09
interesting perspective and
01:11:10
that ending of that article the reason i
01:11:12
want to mention it is it kind of goes to
01:11:14
freeberg's point about how much
01:11:15
innovation
01:11:16
how much innovation is there really at
01:11:18
apple now
01:11:19
that the that the genius who created it
01:11:21
is gone
01:11:22
and he he ends his article by saying
01:11:25
when apple
01:11:26
launched the mac computer in 1984 you
01:11:28
know they famously ran that super bowl
01:11:30
ad that featured
01:11:31
a solitary figure flinging a
01:11:33
sledgehammer into a big brother-like
01:11:35
face spewing propaganda at the huddled
01:11:37
ranks
01:11:37
of some drab dystopia and then agm says
01:11:40
the tech titans nowadays
01:11:42
resemble more and more the harangue
01:11:43
figure on the screen
01:11:45
rather than the colorful rebel going
01:11:47
against the established order
01:11:49
whether it be hiring policy or free
01:11:51
speech silicon valley has to decide
01:11:52
whether it becomes what it
01:11:54
once vowed to destroy the reality is the
01:11:57
great
01:11:57
genius who founded apple is long gone it
01:12:00
is run
01:12:01
by hr people and woke mobs
01:12:05
it's run by a supply chain manager
01:12:07
exactly and and
01:12:08
and so there is no more innovation there
01:12:10
they are just a gatekeeper
01:12:11
collecting rents and you know freeberg
01:12:14
you're right to raise the issue of
01:12:15
what's going to create the most
01:12:16
innovation
01:12:17
but the thing that's going to create the
01:12:18
most innovation is letting entrepreneurs
01:12:20
create new companies without needing
01:12:22
apple's permission i will tell you
01:12:23
something i think that over the next
01:12:25
decade because of exactly what you guys
01:12:27
said
01:12:27
that apple is run by managers who don't
01:12:30
want to see
01:12:31
loss but aren't driven to gain you're
01:12:33
going to end up seeing
01:12:35
amazon particular and apple likely as
01:12:37
well
01:12:38
lose to the likes of shopify and square
01:12:41
and stripe shopify square and stripe are
01:12:43
all
01:12:43
formidable threats to amazon over time
01:12:46
and now that bezos is actually going to
01:12:47
step out
01:12:48
and it is going to be run by a bunch of
01:12:50
managers and you have these founders of
01:12:51
these three companies still running all
01:12:53
three of those businesses
01:12:55
and all three of those businesses are
01:12:56
going to be incredible competitive
01:12:58
threats from different angles on amazon
01:12:59
that is where innovation wins
01:13:01
and you will see it because leadership
01:13:03
driven by founders at those businesses
01:13:05
could take them to compete directly with
01:13:06
these guys and you don't need the
01:13:07
government to come and
01:13:08
intervene all three of them are building
01:13:10
and are going to continue to build
01:13:11
better experiences for consumers
01:13:13
and for merchants that could end up
01:13:15
disrupting the answer
01:13:16
i'll give you a different take i think
01:13:17
that all four companies are going to win
01:13:21
including amazon yeah they're going to
01:13:23
continue to win and
01:13:25
i think what it shows is that shopify
01:13:27
and stripe and square had to have very
01:13:30
precise entry points in markets
01:13:32
and in many ways the things that they
01:13:33
are allowed to do is still quite
01:13:35
constrained because amazon exists
01:13:39
i think that that's fine that should be
01:13:41
allowed but i don't think that's what's
01:13:43
going to get
01:13:43
you know legislated and then litigated
01:13:46
over the next 10 or 15 years it's a
01:13:48
handful of very
01:13:49
specific practices that constrain what
01:13:52
folks can do
01:13:53
i think the app store is a constraint
01:13:56
the algorithmic nature of facebook's
01:13:58
newsfeed and google search are
01:14:00
constraints
01:14:01
and people are going to test those
01:14:03
things
01:14:04
and i think that in testing it you're
01:14:07
probably going to do
01:14:08
what the government was successful as
01:14:10
sac said in 2000 which is just slow
01:14:13
these guys down you have to remember at
01:14:14
some point there were probably more doj
01:14:16
lawyers inside of microsoft than product
01:14:18
managers
01:14:19
and everything if i remember correctly
01:14:21
from a feature perspective had to go to
01:14:23
the doj
01:14:24
for approval for some time that's
01:14:26
probably the best thing that can happen
01:14:28
to these companies which is you
01:14:29
completely gum up
01:14:30
the product infrastructure then you know
01:14:33
friedrich you're right
01:14:34
the human capital equation changes
01:14:36
people leave
01:14:37
it's not that fun to be there they go to
01:14:39
startups but again
01:14:41
you needed the government to step in and
01:14:44
they're not going to necessarily solve
01:14:45
it but they can really slow down
01:14:48
the overreach of these companies for the
01:14:50
next 20 years and i think that that's
01:14:52
net additive
01:14:53
for the world here's here's my
01:14:55
prediction i think the pirates are
01:14:57
assembling themselves whether it's
01:14:58
coinbase saying we're not going to have
01:15:00
politics at work or antonio
01:15:02
and the end of cancel culture the end of
01:15:06
taking the hysterical left or the
01:15:08
historic or the trolling right seriously
01:15:11
i feel like that is ending and this
01:15:13
great like nightmare of hysteria
01:15:15
uh and is going to end and the overton
01:15:18
window is going to blossom and open up
01:15:19
and people are going to
01:15:22
be more innovative and accepting of new
01:15:24
ideas and be reasonable and not cancel
01:15:26
people
01:15:27
who wrote something five or ten or two
01:15:29
go go reasonableness
01:15:30
let's go reasonable well-reasoned all
01:15:32
right everybody uh this has been another
01:15:34
episode of the all waiting podcast
01:15:37
uh nobody uh what am i doing today
01:15:40
yeah what you are you inviting us
01:15:42
somewhere no i'm just wondering
01:15:44
oh is this a flex are you using are you
01:15:46
gone or did you get an electric
01:15:48
electricity it's 8 30 pm for me so i got
01:15:51
to go hang out with my family
01:15:54
um i've got the accelerator and a board
01:15:56
meeting
01:15:57
and that's it i'm in the mediterranean
01:15:59
general area
01:16:00
yes i'm actually conquering europe
01:16:04
but i did again i just want to say i did
01:16:05
go to the dentist and um
01:16:07
i filmed pretty good overcame sex are
01:16:09
you hearing about people moving back
01:16:11
from miami this like little
01:16:12
thing going on about people saying no
01:16:15
people are so happy here
01:16:16
yeah do you think you're gonna end up
01:16:18
living there
01:16:20
uh no i mean we'll see maybe
01:16:23
no maybe did you
01:16:26
did you get orthopedic did you get
01:16:28
orthopedic shoes when you bought that
01:16:30
shirt
01:16:32
oh my god did you join a golf club are
01:16:34
you in a retirement community right now
01:16:38
guys i'm i'm on a i'm on a diet i
01:16:40
predict by the end of the summer i'll be
01:16:42
thinner than jason
01:16:43
yeah is there a weight check coming
01:16:52
uh and let's go next episode show your
01:16:55
decks again i'll show mine
01:16:56
and wait do it do it do it dexter
01:17:03
please i think i'm 194. okay 195
01:17:07
something like that
01:17:08
and what's your height five foot three
01:17:13
five nine what are you you do look
01:17:15
thinner yeah i think i've lost about
01:17:16
five pounds already i'm about 185 right
01:17:19
now
01:17:19
and what's your height for five nine oh
01:17:22
we're the same height and you weigh 10
01:17:24
pounds less
01:17:25
you look good are you on any
01:17:26
pharmaceuticals to lose weight
01:17:28
no i'm doing i'm doing intermittent
01:17:29
fasting i'm doing no carbs
01:17:31
and i'm trying to be as plant-based as
01:17:33
possible so go
01:17:35
sex nice yeah good for you you do look
01:17:37
better you do look better
01:17:38
you feel good more energy yeah i mean i
01:17:42
yes i was getting like just that extra
01:17:44
five pounds like kind of tipped me over
01:17:45
i think i got like another
01:17:47
15 to go but you think you could be 170
01:17:50
oh yeah yeah yeah that's my goal
01:17:51
have you cut back on drinking yeah
01:18:02
we had some incredible wine last night
01:18:04
you know what i thought you were a vodka
01:18:06
guy can't you just do like a vodka and
01:18:08
soda and be good i don't want to give it
01:18:10
i can't give a wine
01:18:11
you know i can't wait till we play poker
01:18:13
and drink some more tomos wine and it's
01:18:14
so fun
01:18:16
oh i can't wait either love you love you
01:18:18
saks love you harry
01:18:20
love you harry videos
01:18:24
back all right this has been the all-in
01:18:27
podcast brought to you by
01:18:28
nobody and uh if you'd like to join the
01:18:30
all-in
01:18:31
chat you can join our imessage group uh
01:18:33
the first ten people it's ten thousand
01:18:35
dollars a month we're gonna monetize by
01:18:36
allowing ten people
01:18:38
to be in the
01:18:42
it's only like 300 bucks a day to begin
01:18:45
i got to figure out a way to monetize
01:18:47
this all right we'll see you all next
01:18:48
time bye-bye
01:18:54
[Music]
01:19:00
and they've just gone crazy with it
01:19:10
[Music]
01:19:34
where need to get mercy's
