00:00:00
freeberg free bro what's up it seems
00:00:02
like you have a piece of [ __ ] on the
00:00:03
side of your mouth or is that a
00:00:04
birthmark
00:00:06
oh no that's a birthday catcher
00:00:10
did you record that yeah absolutely
00:00:13
jesus
00:00:14
look at this guy he takes his shirt off
00:00:16
for one [ __ ] selfie and now everybody
00:00:18
who's fat and pal on the show the other
00:00:20
three of us
00:00:21
is gonna be ridiculed i'm having steak
00:00:24
tonight
00:00:25
s-t-e-a-k tonight i'm lifting twice a
00:00:27
week now
00:00:28
oh come on sacks come get some let's
00:00:30
[ __ ] go
00:00:31
three two let your winners ride
00:00:36
rain man david sources to the fans
00:00:44
[Music]
00:00:49
hey everybody hey everybody welcome to
00:00:51
another episode of the all in
00:00:53
podcast with me again the dictator
00:00:56
himself trump paulie hapatia rain man
00:00:59
david sacks definitely with us
00:01:01
definitely a great driver
00:01:02
his dad lets him drive in the driveway
00:01:04
and of course
00:01:06
everybody's favorite the queen of quinoa
00:01:09
the science conductor himself
00:01:13
david freeman queen the queen
00:01:16
a lot of activity online it's been a
00:01:18
little bit of chaos since we
00:01:20
all got together here i guess we should
00:01:23
talk about this apple story
00:01:25
with antonio garcia martinez you may
00:01:29
have heard
00:01:30
that he was hired by apple to i guess
00:01:33
run
00:01:34
their ad efforts and i have a little bit
00:01:36
of information on kind of
00:01:38
what he was going to do there in terms
00:01:40
of ads which is really interesting
00:01:42
um but uh tell us tell us tell us tell
00:01:44
us okay well anyway
00:01:46
you know how we're basically start at
00:01:48
the beginning and assume people don't
00:01:49
know who antonio garcia
00:01:51
so antonio garcia martinez was a
00:01:53
facebook
00:01:54
developer he is some really smart guy
00:01:57
who uses a lot of big words and wrote a
00:01:58
book
00:01:59
called chaos monkeys which is a great
00:02:01
book where he takes
00:02:03
um a very jack kerouac
00:02:07
kind of you know a lot of pros and uh he
00:02:10
wrote this book about his time at
00:02:12
facebook
00:02:13
the problem is he said some things in
00:02:16
the book
00:02:16
that would be five years later
00:02:19
problematic at the time they were
00:02:20
actually
00:02:21
considered problematic by some folks and
00:02:25
in the full quote maybe uh less
00:02:28
problematic
00:02:29
but he was essentially ousted because
00:02:33
of the following problematic quote um
00:02:36
the quote is most women in the bay area
00:02:38
are soft and weak
00:02:40
costed and naive despite their claims of
00:02:43
worldliness and generally full of [ __ ]
00:02:45
they have their self regarding
00:02:47
entitlement feminism
00:02:49
and ceaselessly vaunt their independence
00:02:52
but the reality is come the
00:02:54
epidemic plague or foreign invasion they
00:02:57
become precisely the sort of useless
00:02:58
baggage you trade for a box of shotgun
00:03:00
shells
00:03:01
or a jerry can of diesel
00:03:04
and they shorten that quote to be that
00:03:07
most women are soft and weak
00:03:10
and uh full of [ __ ] so in context in
00:03:13
context
00:03:14
in this book he was contrasting the bay
00:03:17
area women he had dated with the mother
00:03:19
of
00:03:19
kids who he describes as strong and tall
00:03:22
and tough and amazing but still the
00:03:26
quote's a little gnarly and the quote
00:03:27
out of
00:03:28
you know when it's out of context
00:03:30
becomes particularly gnarly
00:03:31
and of course um this led to
00:03:35
a petition at apple which then led to
00:03:37
him being fired
00:03:39
uh which now is going to lead to him
00:03:40
probably getting a 10
00:03:42
million dollar settlement uh of course
00:03:45
there's a lot of
00:03:47
hypocrisy being brought up here because
00:03:49
apple has allegedly been using
00:03:52
or apple's supply chain has slave labor
00:03:54
in it from the uyghurs
00:03:56
and other ethnic minorities um and
00:03:59
obviously
00:04:00
apple gave dr dre billions of dollars
00:04:03
uh for uh beats by dre and
00:04:06
uh he
00:04:10
has a even more misogynistic um
00:04:13
series of lyrics and was also accused of
00:04:16
physically assaulting um
00:04:19
i believe his wife and other people he
00:04:21
dated who dr dre dr dre yeah
00:04:25
uh so anyway uh
00:04:28
what do you think
00:04:32
okay there you go next story no i'm
00:04:34
happy to jump into this
00:04:35
um i think jason i think you're you're
00:04:38
you focus a little bit too much and i
00:04:39
saw your your pod with zach coleus on
00:04:41
this
00:04:42
um a lot of good takes but i think
00:04:43
you're a little too focused on what
00:04:45
agm as i think it's easier to call him
00:04:48
by his initials
00:04:49
what he did as opposed to what the
00:04:50
employees at apple did and
00:04:52
um there's at least four things that
00:04:55
apple
00:04:56
did or five things that apple did wrong
00:04:58
i mean number one
00:04:59
i think there was a really good reason
00:05:00
not to hire this guy which is that he
00:05:02
wrote
00:05:03
a best-selling tell-all book about the
00:05:05
last big tech company he worked at
00:05:07
so why if you're a big tech company why
00:05:09
in the world would you hire him so that
00:05:11
was stupid
00:05:12
decision number one but they did decide
00:05:14
to hire him and once they hire him they
00:05:15
gotta treat him like any other employee
00:05:17
and give him a chance to show what he
00:05:18
can do
00:05:19
and so that leads to mistake number two
00:05:20
which is these 2000 employees who signed
00:05:23
this petition
00:05:25
really distorted and took out of context
00:05:26
that passage and i know the passage is
00:05:29
cringe
00:05:29
okay um and gnarly and and it could
00:05:32
you know certainly appear sexist but you
00:05:34
have to put it in its context and the
00:05:36
the larger con this is a work of
00:05:37
literature this is a best-selling
00:05:39
uh book it's 150 000 words they're
00:05:42
taking 150 words
00:05:44
out of context and the context was like
00:05:46
you said he's describing
00:05:47
the mother of his children the love of
00:05:49
his life in as this sort of
00:05:51
linda hamilton-esque in terminator type
00:05:54
figure
00:05:54
or charlize theron in mad max
00:05:57
and this passage is not in there to
00:06:00
describe all women it's just basically a
00:06:02
literary flourish
00:06:03
to contrast the the the woman that he
00:06:06
loves
00:06:07
uh being such a badass compared to every
00:06:09
other woman and and
00:06:10
you know when kara swisher interviewed
00:06:12
agm five years ago
00:06:14
she bought this passage he explained it
00:06:16
and she said yeah okay i get it
00:06:17
so you know it it certainly the case
00:06:20
that people can understand the context
00:06:23
if they choose to and they simply
00:06:25
are not choosing to understand the
00:06:27
context
00:06:28
which brings me to mistake number three
00:06:30
which is these 2000 employees
00:06:32
lied in their petition by claiming that
00:06:35
their safety is threatened
00:06:37
by apple hiring agm that is simply
00:06:40
untrue
00:06:40
it's physically impossible in the era of
00:06:43
zoom when everyone's working from home
00:06:45
but this guy is not a threat to anyone's
00:06:46
safety but they you but they use that
00:06:49
claim
00:06:49
they make that claim because they know
00:06:52
that if you accuse someone of
00:06:53
threatening your safety it will trigger
00:06:55
the machinery of
00:06:56
hr to remove that person from the
00:06:58
workplace
00:06:59
this is the language of safetyism and
00:07:01
it's a specific
00:07:02
tactic to basically get somebody
00:07:04
canceled and removed from the workplace
00:07:07
okay and then that leads to the the next
00:07:09
mistake i think mistake number four
00:07:11
which is the bosses apple caved into
00:07:14
this pressure
00:07:15
they were total cowards they never even
00:07:17
gave agm the chance to explain himself
00:07:19
they never asked him what did you intend
00:07:21
by this passage what were you trying to
00:07:22
do and by the way
00:07:23
they knew about this book when they were
00:07:26
saying it's even worse
00:07:26
they knew about the book they had vetted
00:07:29
and they talked to many people as when a
00:07:30
big time
00:07:31
when a big tech company hires somebody
00:07:33
for a major position like this
00:07:35
they call all the references of course
00:07:37
this is uncovered and dealt with
00:07:39
of course they knew about it and then
00:07:41
when the mob complains they fire him
00:07:43
summarily without subjecting
00:07:45
the decision to proper hr processes this
00:07:47
is hr by mob
00:07:48
rule it's totally unacceptable no
00:07:49
company should be run this way and then
00:07:51
finally that brings us to number five
00:07:52
is that in explaining their decision and
00:07:56
trying to justify their cowardice and
00:07:57
giving it to the mob
00:07:59
they said that they fired him because of
00:08:00
his behavior agm never had a chance to
00:08:03
engage in any behavior he barely started
00:08:05
at the job
00:08:06
this wasn't because of his behavior this
00:08:08
is because of the book that he wrote
00:08:09
five years ago so what they're saying is
00:08:11
that if you ever publish a written work
00:08:14
at any time in your life
00:08:16
years and years ago that that can
00:08:18
somehow constitute present day behavior
00:08:21
and that other people in the workplace
00:08:23
can have a problem with that be
00:08:24
that this is not behavior and this is
00:08:26
why he's going to have a giant
00:08:28
um defamation suit and settlement
00:08:31
because they are making him
00:08:32
unemployable in the tech industry by
00:08:34
claiming that he was fired for some
00:08:37
some sexist behavior he was not what do
00:08:39
you think he'll get paid in a settlement
00:08:41
i put it at 10 10 million well i was
00:08:44
just thinking he's a half million dollar
00:08:46
a year employee
00:08:47
to a million with his rsu so let's just
00:08:50
put it at a million
00:08:51
unemployed for 10 to 20 years because of
00:08:53
this or the damages to his reputation
00:08:55
and he doesn't value that back yeah so
00:08:57
and yeah so i think 10 million is the
00:08:59
number
00:09:00
my curiosity in this was just um
00:09:03
did those 2 000 employees feel the same
00:09:05
way about dr dre
00:09:07
of course or did they do they feel the
00:09:10
same way
00:09:11
about some of the movies that they sell
00:09:13
uh in the itunes store
00:09:15
or do they feel the same way about some
00:09:18
of the games
00:09:19
that they enable um into the app store
00:09:23
or some of the subscriptions that are
00:09:25
sold um
00:09:27
right do they care do they care that
00:09:29
much about what's happening in their
00:09:30
chinese supply chain
00:09:32
um i mean i think it seems at least on
00:09:34
the outside the answer is no
00:09:36
but it would be interesting to get an
00:09:38
explanation of that from the same hr
00:09:40
people
00:09:41
i don't know whether the guy should have
00:09:43
been fired or not but i do think that
00:09:45
you should have a predictable standard
00:09:46
and every company is allowed to do what
00:09:48
they want if
00:09:49
the standard at apple is that we are
00:09:51
going to hold you accountable
00:09:53
for everything you've done in the past
00:09:54
irrespective of whether you've disavowed
00:09:56
it or not
00:09:57
so be it that's their right and i think
00:09:58
that the employees of that company
00:10:00
have a right to do that i think is that
00:10:03
if you start to arbitrarily enforce it
00:10:06
you go down this weird place which is
00:10:07
like basically i think what they're
00:10:09
saying is
00:10:11
if it's good for business we're going to
00:10:13
ignore it
00:10:14
if it's not obvious that it's good for
00:10:16
business we'll act because it's a
00:10:17
low-cost way
00:10:19
of keeping the masses um you know that
00:10:22
the
00:10:22
medicated and i think that's what's even
00:10:25
scarier to the 2000 people
00:10:26
it's not that you know maybe they should
00:10:28
feel proud that they got their pound of
00:10:29
flesh
00:10:30
but they really should figure out how
00:10:33
they want to stand on all these other
00:10:34
points because
00:10:35
to cherry pick puts puts the whole
00:10:37
company in just a weird
00:10:38
posture that's that's not scalable
00:10:40
freeberg
00:10:42
uh i'm less interested in the hypocrisy
00:10:45
and the values debate
00:10:46
which is obvious that's kind of the
00:10:50
first order
00:10:51
point with all this stuff it's like do
00:10:53
the employees have the right values is
00:10:54
there hypocrisy by management is there
00:10:56
hypocrisy by the employees
00:10:58
what strikes me though is um a failure
00:11:01
of leadership
00:11:02
at these organizations you know you guys
00:11:04
think back to brian armstrong's kind of
00:11:07
purging of the woke mob and the
00:11:08
political discourse that was happening
00:11:10
at coinbase a few months ago
00:11:12
he took a point of strong leadership um
00:11:15
to a new level
00:11:16
and i think it highlighted when the
00:11:17
leader steps up and says this is how
00:11:19
we're going to operate these are how
00:11:20
we're going to make decisions and puts
00:11:22
his foot down
00:11:23
people will leave and you evolve the
00:11:25
culture and i think it indicates to me
00:11:27
that certain companies as they've gotten
00:11:29
really big
00:11:30
and really successful like apple and
00:11:33
even alphabet
00:11:35
and various other kind of large tech
00:11:36
companies
00:11:38
the leaders no longer lead the employees
00:11:40
lead the narrative on culture
00:11:42
and the narrative on values and um you
00:11:45
know it speaks to two things
00:11:47
one is that there perhaps aren't founder
00:11:50
leaders running those organizations
00:11:52
anymore that there are managers
00:11:54
whose jobs are critically important
00:11:55
whose job is to keep the wheels on
00:11:57
and keep the wheels from falling off so
00:11:58
they have more to lose
00:12:00
and they are constantly trying to
00:12:02
protect the downside than they are
00:12:04
trying to be aggressive about growing
00:12:05
to the upside um and then i think it's
00:12:08
just
00:12:08
uh you know secondly this kind of um you
00:12:11
know failure
00:12:13
uh to kind of define what your values
00:12:16
are from a leadership perspective and
00:12:17
the void gets filled by
00:12:19
the employees the void gets filled by
00:12:21
the mob and so while it's this one kind
00:12:23
of you know debatable point today
00:12:25
and this one kind of hypocritical point
00:12:26
today it's really interesting to see
00:12:28
that this
00:12:29
isn't happening at other companies that
00:12:31
are founder-led and if it is
00:12:33
the you know the culture gets reached
00:12:35
would have handled this completely
00:12:36
different steve jobs would not have let
00:12:38
his employees tell him who or she would
00:12:40
have stopped concerned let's have a
00:12:41
discussion
00:12:42
a really clear point of view about who
00:12:43
we hire why we hire them
00:12:45
and how we make decisions and not let
00:12:47
the democ democratic kind of rule
00:12:49
or the you know um it's not even
00:12:51
democratic it's not like all employees
00:12:53
took a vote how much of this chamoth has
00:12:55
to do with
00:12:56
the coddling of silicon valley employees
00:12:58
for two decades vis-a-vis
00:13:00
you know you get driven to school on
00:13:01
your school bus you sit on
00:13:03
you know you get your lunch prepared for
00:13:05
you we do your dry cleaning
00:13:07
every friday you get to come and ask
00:13:09
challenging questions to the leaders and
00:13:11
this concept of like you know everybody
00:13:14
has a voice at work as opposed to
00:13:16
this is a company controlled by
00:13:18
shareholders and or a founder and you
00:13:20
work for it and there is a trade of
00:13:21
services here vis-a-vis
00:13:23
what toby had to say at shopify which is
00:13:26
this is not a family this is a sports
00:13:28
team
00:13:28
you are here to perform we are here to
00:13:30
perform for our customers the
00:13:32
end so the in fact if you if you had a
00:13:34
chance and maybe nick we can post it in
00:13:36
the show notes but
00:13:37
the email that toby lutky wrote to
00:13:39
shopify employees
00:13:41
was unbelievable that to me is like
00:13:43
that's a tour de force
00:13:45
that should be basically like that
00:13:47
should be minted and sold as an nft
00:13:50
what's an nlt we forgot about those and
00:13:53
it was it was it was just an incredible
00:13:54
email adjacent to your point and the way
00:13:56
that that started
00:13:57
if i i may be getting these facts wrong
00:13:59
but there was an emoji of a noose
00:14:03
inside of a slack channel
00:14:06
um and then and then folks got quite
00:14:08
upset with it
00:14:09
and so i think toby's response was to
00:14:11
basically shut down the whole channel
00:14:14
and say hey guys you know we're losing
00:14:17
the script
00:14:17
about why we're here and
00:14:21
you know i think brian armstrong's essay
00:14:23
was a version of that
00:14:24
the question is why are we here if i had
00:14:26
to guess i think it's because we've
00:14:28
pumped so much money into silicon valley
00:14:30
companies
00:14:31
they didn't know where to spend it and
00:14:33
so i actually think
00:14:34
that what we've really done is over
00:14:37
hired far too many people into many of
00:14:39
these companies and so they kind of are
00:14:40
very smart people
00:14:42
sitting around twiddling their thumbs
00:14:44
and so obviously they're just gonna get
00:14:45
distracted
00:14:46
meaning um i remember like you know
00:14:49
at facebook there was barely enough
00:14:51
people to keep the lights on for a while
00:14:54
then i remember by the time i was
00:14:55
leaving i was like wow there's way too
00:14:57
many people
00:14:58
here a lot of them and most of them were
00:14:59
all really really smart
00:15:01
but it wasn't obvious to me what many of
00:15:03
them did and
00:15:04
you know people would look at me and
00:15:06
then say oh you know that's a really
00:15:07
arrogant thing to say and that's not
00:15:09
true and everybody's valuable
00:15:11
i don't know um you know if you look at
00:15:13
google
00:15:14
i've always thought like that company
00:15:15
could probably run by 2 000 people
00:15:18
but you know there's 200 000 people so
00:15:20
the 198 other thousand of them need to
00:15:22
find something to do
00:15:23
it's probably the same at apple it's
00:15:25
probably the same at all these big tech
00:15:26
companies
00:15:27
and that's the leverage that you get
00:15:28
from technology it's naturally
00:15:31
massively deflationary so but if you
00:15:34
keep pumping
00:15:34
billions and billions and billions of
00:15:36
dollars into these companies
00:15:38
where the app experience is written by
00:15:40
50 or 100 critical people or managed by
00:15:43
500 or a thousand critical people
00:15:45
um this is the natural byproduct i think
00:15:49
which of all of that by the way freeberg
00:15:50
said organizations want to grow right
00:15:52
like
00:15:53
how many organizations say you know we
00:15:54
should be smaller we don't see
00:15:56
something sir you're saying something
00:15:57
really important not enough
00:15:59
founders and boards understand the
00:16:02
difference between growing a business
00:16:03
and growing an
00:16:04
org those are two totally different
00:16:06
things
00:16:07
and the reason is because we've lost
00:16:09
sight of very simple financial metrics
00:16:11
in silicon valley meaning
00:16:12
if you go to any other industry where
00:16:14
there is a cost of capital
00:16:16
people understand what return on
00:16:18
invested capital means they know how to
00:16:20
measure it yeah they know what operating
00:16:22
leverage means they know what margin
00:16:24
expansion means
00:16:24
we only have evaluation and they seek
00:16:27
that out
00:16:27
here we think about exactly as you said
00:16:30
valuation and so this idea that
00:16:32
having a hundred people do the work and
00:16:34
see margins lift is antithetical to the
00:16:37
silicon valley culture it's oh as
00:16:38
margins go up
00:16:39
let's just keep running the same
00:16:40
profitable business but instead have a
00:16:42
500 people a thousand what do you think
00:16:44
you're an operations machine people
00:16:46
would say on a co basis you're one of
00:16:48
the top
00:16:49
three to five in the history of the
00:16:50
valley what do you say coo man
00:16:54
um yeah i mean look chamath is right
00:16:56
that in a company that's
00:16:57
well run and well led where uh people
00:17:00
people don't have time on their hands to
00:17:01
engage in these shenanigans
00:17:04
so yeah i mean i think i think that's
00:17:06
absolutely right i think companies and
00:17:08
startups are increasingly have to choose
00:17:10
whether they
00:17:11
want to be apple or whether they want to
00:17:13
be um
00:17:14
coinbase or shopify for that matter and
00:17:17
just
00:17:18
this this week at apple there's a new
00:17:20
petition circling now there's a petition
00:17:22
called by thousands of employees calling
00:17:24
for tim cook
00:17:25
to denounce the israelis and endorse the
00:17:28
palestinian side of the conflict
00:17:29
yeah how's that gonna work well does he
00:17:32
have a position on abortion is there an
00:17:34
abortion position
00:17:35
at well but but now that they've given
00:17:37
in to the the woke mob
00:17:39
there's no reason for the mob to stop
00:17:40
they're gonna be circulating a petition
00:17:41
every week and that's kind of the point
00:17:43
is
00:17:44
so and actually agm himself had a really
00:17:46
good quote about this
00:17:47
he did a great interview with um matt
00:17:50
taibi
00:17:51
and um he laid out the choice that
00:17:53
companies face like this he said it's
00:17:54
interject
00:17:55
this is um antonio garcia martinez
00:17:57
saying is interjecting the whole [ __ ]
00:17:59
twitter
00:18:00
cesspool with all the dog piles and all
00:18:02
the performative signaling and all that
00:18:03
crap
00:18:04
into a corporate setting and replicating
00:18:06
those dynamics and calling it work
00:18:09
that's basically what happened is what's
00:18:11
happening is you your
00:18:12
these employees are performing twitter
00:18:15
at work
00:18:17
on slack and they're pretending like
00:18:19
it's really work and it's not
00:18:21
and i think you know founders are going
00:18:23
to have to make a decision do you stand
00:18:25
up
00:18:25
and take a uh brian armstrong-like
00:18:27
position or a toby position
00:18:29
or you would eventually degenerate into
00:18:32
some sort of or a baseball cap by the
00:18:33
way
00:18:34
or even base camp the most woke virtual
00:18:36
signaling founders
00:18:38
on twitter decided to take that's right
00:18:41
the most
00:18:42
libertarian or spartan approach you know
00:18:45
stoic approach of toby to give you uh
00:18:47
toby's
00:18:49
well base camp just to finish the base
00:18:50
camp thought so so base camp
00:18:52
try to accommodate this sort of like
00:18:55
woke mentality
00:18:56
and what they found is that they got
00:18:58
pushed so far
00:18:59
it became so distracting they eventually
00:19:01
had to move to the armstrong position
00:19:03
and that's kind of my point is once you
00:19:05
yeah everybody's gonna move to that
00:19:06
yeah that's my point i mean and if you
00:19:08
don't believe what i what i said was
00:19:10
like listen if you believe that
00:19:11
a organization that allows political
00:19:14
speech
00:19:15
and this kind of stuff as a primary
00:19:18
function inside the company
00:19:19
well then go build a competitor to base
00:19:21
camp and show that that system works
00:19:23
better here's toby's
00:19:24
quote to help you make this more clear
00:19:26
to team members here are some pointers
00:19:27
about
00:19:28
what shopify is not shopify like any
00:19:31
for-profit company is not a family the
00:19:33
very idea is
00:19:34
preposterous you are born into a family
00:19:36
you never choose it
00:19:38
and they can't un-family you it should
00:19:40
be massively obvious that shopify is not
00:19:42
a family
00:19:42
but i see people even leaders casually
00:19:45
use the term like shoppy fam
00:19:46
which will cause the members of our
00:19:48
teams especially junior ones that have
00:19:50
never worked anywhere else
00:19:52
to get the wrong impression the dangers
00:19:54
of family thinking in quotes
00:19:56
are that it becomes incredibly hard to
00:19:57
let poor performers go
00:19:59
shopify is a team italicized not
00:20:02
a family we literally only want the best
00:20:04
people in the world the reason
00:20:06
why you join shopify is because i hope
00:20:09
all other people you met during the
00:20:10
interview process were really smart
00:20:12
caring and committed this
00:20:13
is magic and it creates a virtuous
00:20:15
magnetism on talented people because
00:20:17
very few people in the world
00:20:19
have this in themselves people who don't
00:20:22
should not be part of this team
00:20:24
i mean when i was um when i was at
00:20:26
facebook strong when i was at facebook
00:20:28
we used to convene the senior team
00:20:30
and you know i was like i want i really
00:20:33
want to fire the bottom five or ten
00:20:34
percent of the company
00:20:35
and we would force stack rank and we did
00:20:37
it for about three or four years and
00:20:38
then
00:20:39
the excuse was it's too big and there
00:20:41
are too many people and the rules are
00:20:42
too diverse and you can't rank
00:20:44
i actually don't believe that even to
00:20:46
this day i think it's pretty obvious
00:20:48
who the real 1000x kind of employee
00:20:51
contributors are and by the way they
00:20:52
exist in every function there's thousand
00:20:54
x sales people there's thousand x
00:20:56
you know product managers there's
00:20:58
there's the thousand x people that work
00:20:59
in facilities
00:21:00
they exist in every job function and
00:21:03
companies i don't think do a good enough
00:21:05
job of figuring out who they are
00:21:07
and so instead what happens is people
00:21:08
that are not even 100x or not even a 10x
00:21:11
are really more like a 1 or 1.1 x
00:21:13
can basically hide in all of that noise
00:21:16
and
00:21:17
i think that if you could separate hr
00:21:19
into two things
00:21:20
or there's really three things one is
00:21:22
like benefits which is critical
00:21:24
the second is actually like safety and
00:21:28
the ability to whistle blow if there's
00:21:29
something really nefarious or bad that's
00:21:31
happened
00:21:32
and then the third that's really
00:21:33
valuable i think is organizational
00:21:35
design right how do you put people
00:21:37
in good jobs and how do you allow them
00:21:38
to have a huge amount of autonomy to run
00:21:40
and build a career
00:21:42
but all of this other policing stuff to
00:21:44
me just seems like
00:21:46
um it cuddles to the lowest 25 percent i
00:21:49
don't know if that and this is my
00:21:50
intuition to the lowest 25 percent
00:21:52
performers of course
00:21:53
of course it does and just to uh close
00:21:56
this story up and wrap to our next uh
00:21:58
and tone agm announced that he is going
00:22:00
to take a year
00:22:01
wait for it to write for sub stack so
00:22:04
he is going to get paid 10 million
00:22:07
dollars i
00:22:08
i would guesstimate in a settlement by
00:22:10
apple he's going to get a half million
00:22:12
dollars
00:22:12
i'll take it over
00:22:16
on this oh i set such a good line
00:22:19
we can bet on it yeah we can bet on it
00:22:20
i'll take the over who okay
00:22:22
anybody want the under i'll take you'll
00:22:25
take the uh
00:22:26
well go go give it give it a different
00:22:28
bed not then oh yeah you got a different
00:22:29
line and you can set it down a different
00:22:30
line set a different line
00:22:31
i think ted's a good line because you
00:22:34
got to think like
00:22:35
if they offered him seven or four i mean
00:22:38
it's gonna
00:22:53
that's not a good line good thing eleven
00:22:55
would have been a good one
00:22:56
it's a good line okay let me give you
00:22:58
11.5 what do you take
00:23:00
jamal can afford the book against all
00:23:01
three of us okay 11.5
00:23:03
takes the over 11.5 free brook sacks
00:23:06
yeah i don't know under can i just tell
00:23:08
you why if you look at the last
00:23:10
four-year compounding of apple stock
00:23:12
right and so if you think about
00:23:13
reasonable number of grants as his level
00:23:15
of seniority plus the imputed
00:23:17
compounding
00:23:17
plus whatever he would have you should
00:23:19
be part of his team somebody said in
00:23:21
this clip because
00:23:22
that's the argument is i i do think you
00:23:25
end up getting to probably
00:23:26
sure yeah you got to include the
00:23:28
information yeah you get to buy it now
00:23:30
price at 15 and call it and
00:23:31
they've also also you could make the
00:23:33
argument they've rendered him
00:23:34
unemployable in the industry so
00:23:36
he needs to foregone
00:23:40
mental suffering what about suffering he
00:23:42
is going to suffer
00:23:43
he's going to need to be on meds my
00:23:45
client is suffering he's in therapy
00:23:47
twice a week
00:23:48
he can't get out of bed he's not going
00:23:50
to be able to be in functional
00:23:51
relationships
00:23:52
and he's too scared to leave the house
00:23:54
he should wait on the sub stack because
00:23:55
he's going to make so much money on sub
00:23:57
stack it's going to mitigate his damages
00:23:59
yeah don't take the sunset wait just
00:24:02
wait on the subject
00:24:04
do you guys know what apple's market cap
00:24:06
divided by employees is
00:24:08
apple is apple's marketing seven million
00:24:11
in employee
00:24:12
anyone else wait a second this car is a
00:24:14
hundred thousand employees and it's
00:24:16
worth
00:24:16
two trillion okay there's 150 000
00:24:20
employees 2.1 trillion so it's 14
00:24:22
million
00:24:22
an employee so the other way to think
00:24:24
about it is if apple's like gonna lose
00:24:26
one or two good employees over this
00:24:28
um you know they'd happily pay up to
00:24:32
get uh to get the guy to be quiet so
00:24:33
it's worth one employee to pay 14
00:24:36
million dollars
00:24:37
wow no i mean well you're you're not
00:24:39
dividing by all the slave labor in china
00:24:42
and i'll recalc i'll recalculate
00:24:46
they actually caused zero so
00:24:50
that was bad sorry for all the power
00:24:53
it's dark but it's true i mean this is
00:24:55
the hypocrisy of apple
00:24:57
they've literally got slave labor in
00:24:59
their supply chain not that they wanted
00:25:01
in their supply chain
00:25:03
how do you know that how do you know
00:25:04
that let's just go through this because
00:25:06
like this is a common narrative but has
00:25:08
anyone actually like gotten to the
00:25:10
bottom of well that's why i said
00:25:11
reported
00:25:12
i mean yeah it is it is known again like
00:25:14
i don't know
00:25:15
pushing i don't like pushing narratives
00:25:19
i tweeted something that well i
00:25:20
retweeted something that came from
00:25:22
i think a pretty valid source um that
00:25:25
author from the atlantic
00:25:27
who i think is pretty legit also i just
00:25:30
think just in terms of his quote if he
00:25:31
had taken the word woman out of the
00:25:33
quote
00:25:34
most people in the bay area are soft and
00:25:35
weak in a zombie apocalypse i don't
00:25:38
think you're recruiting from the bay
00:25:39
area
00:25:40
but related to this story uh in terms of
00:25:42
chamat's point about
00:25:45
you know uh 1000 next performers
00:25:48
uh america is uh really doing a bad job
00:25:51
at math and gary tan
00:25:53
the venture capitalist retweeted and
00:25:56
participated in a tweet thread
00:25:57
about immigrants um who know that
00:26:00
standardized test is probably your best
00:26:01
shot at getting somewhere
00:26:03
uh your money social status can't take
00:26:04
you the rules are well standardized and
00:26:07
he tells this story about this
00:26:08
but there was a persuasion article um
00:26:11
about us failing math and that they're
00:26:13
going to be
00:26:13
in california getting rid of the gifted
00:26:16
programs
00:26:17
for math because it's unfair to the kids
00:26:20
who are not gifted as a kid who is
00:26:23
was not gifted uh and to the
00:26:26
three kids on the program who were in
00:26:27
gifted programs or at least two of you
00:26:29
were
00:26:30
i have no problem with there being a
00:26:31
gifted program but any thoughts on this
00:26:34
i think it's shameful yeah it really is
00:26:37
i mean like we are
00:26:38
we are really doing our level best to
00:26:40
just completely
00:26:42
[ __ ] our population why i mean why is
00:26:45
this even
00:26:46
how could this even be possible it's
00:26:48
like like
00:26:49
just as like it's it's kind of like the
00:26:51
equivalent it's the moral equivalent of
00:26:53
actually saying you know what we're
00:26:54
going to eliminate welfare for the
00:26:56
bottom
00:26:57
five percent like our job as a society
00:27:01
is to kind of like
00:27:02
find the broadest set of solutions for
00:27:06
the most number of people
00:27:07
and solve for both extremes so when
00:27:10
you're dealing with education
00:27:12
you both need to understand that there
00:27:14
are folks that need
00:27:15
some kind of structural support look
00:27:17
when i came to canada i had esl
00:27:19
right english as a second language you
00:27:21
take that so that you can learn the
00:27:22
native language of a country
00:27:24
it didn't mean that i was stupid it just
00:27:25
meant that i was behind you know
00:27:27
if i had dyslexia or something else i
00:27:29
would need some kind of support
00:27:31
one of my children had a speech
00:27:32
impediment we had a speech therapist
00:27:34
this is what you do
00:27:35
but on the other side if you have a kid
00:27:37
who's an incredibly high performer who
00:27:39
has the potential to just completely
00:27:40
crush
00:27:42
hey like you should be able to give that
00:27:44
kid a pathway
00:27:45
to achieve and give back so the idea
00:27:47
that you would eliminate
00:27:48
anything at the extremes is kind of
00:27:50
completely uncompassionate and
00:27:52
stupid just totally [ __ ] stupid well
00:27:54
it's in the name
00:27:56
of having a more equitable math class
00:27:58
again i hate that word don't use that
00:28:02
word
00:28:03
that is that is the least this i mean
00:28:05
this goes back to the point i made a few
00:28:07
episodes ago that you know you can have
00:28:08
progress or you can have a quality but
00:28:10
it's very difficult to have both
00:28:12
and you know if you want to try and make
00:28:13
everyone equal and give no one
00:28:15
the opportunity to have more or get more
00:28:17
than anyone else because of whatever the
00:28:19
circumstance may be whether it's earned
00:28:21
no or whether it's no but this is my
00:28:24
point like you know
00:28:25
you limit the ability for everyone to to
00:28:27
progress as a group because we're now
00:28:29
limiting the ability for folks to take
00:28:30
calculus
00:28:31
i know equality look i'll use a video
00:28:33
game example equality means we all get
00:28:35
to play grand theft auto
00:28:36
not that we have a somebody who actually
00:28:39
plays for us and gets to the same answer
00:28:41
and just gives you a ticket
00:28:45
yeah so so that's that is what equality
00:28:48
means is that we all get to play
00:28:50
and we all get a chance versus equity
00:28:51
which is leveling everyone
00:28:53
equity is leveling everybody and saying
00:28:55
here's your result right by the way
00:28:58
but the notion of leveling everyone
00:29:00
where no one can be ahead of anyone else
00:29:02
by too far
00:29:03
uh obviously limits as a group our
00:29:05
ability for the top decile to to
00:29:07
increment or the top quartile to
00:29:09
increment
00:29:10
i gotta think look let's let's again use
00:29:12
our friends because instead of ours but
00:29:15
you know we know a lot of really smart
00:29:17
people
00:29:18
um who have really really smart kids
00:29:21
we also know people in general that are
00:29:24
in tough circumstances who also probably
00:29:26
have
00:29:27
really smart kids just purely selfishly
00:29:30
for me
00:29:31
i want those kids doing the best they
00:29:33
can to figure out what the hell they can
00:29:35
invent for us in the future
00:29:37
why would you slow those kids down you
00:29:40
know
00:29:40
it's kind of like saying you know what
00:29:41
like how about a black athlete
00:29:43
would you would it be preposterous to
00:29:45
say you know what you don't have a right
00:29:47
to go to the nba
00:29:48
and make money for your family i'm gonna
00:29:50
slow you down
00:29:51
because there's another white kid that's
00:29:53
gonna go through four years of college
00:29:54
so you know what you're gonna have to go
00:29:55
through four years of college and you're
00:29:56
gonna have to pay for it well actually
00:29:58
what i would propose
00:29:59
uh is when i go up to dunk
00:30:02
that we just the rim automatically
00:30:04
lowers two feet yeah yeah so i can dunk
00:30:06
and then when you go for a layout we'll
00:30:08
just raise this six inches
00:30:09
it would be more equitable for me that's
00:30:11
more equitable yes more accurately let
00:30:13
me let me let me add another layer to
00:30:14
this so i
00:30:15
i agree with you with you guys that what
00:30:17
we should be thinking about is
00:30:18
opportunity we should always be asking
00:30:20
what increases opportunity for the most
00:30:22
people
00:30:22
and that's how we should measure
00:30:24
political programs and we're not doing
00:30:25
that here
00:30:26
we are sort of leveling down but i would
00:30:28
say it's even more nefarious than that
00:30:30
which is i think what's happening is
00:30:32
that the education establishment is
00:30:34
completely failing
00:30:36
our kids in our schools and what they're
00:30:38
trying to do is destroy
00:30:39
the evidence of that failure and and so
00:30:42
they're hiding
00:30:43
they're hiding the results now this
00:30:45
persuasion piece
00:30:47
yes this persuasion piece lays out the
00:30:50
statistics which are pretty grim
00:30:51
okay so according to these like global
00:30:53
measurements by
00:30:54
oecd okay math proficiency in the us
00:30:58
we rank 37 in the world okay and there's
00:31:01
only
00:31:01
37 developed nations in the world
00:31:03
according to the development so we're
00:31:05
last
00:31:05
among developed countries china which is
00:31:07
our main global competitor
00:31:09
is number one okay and we achieve these
00:31:11
horrible results despite ranking fifth
00:31:13
in the world and per people spending
00:31:15
so it's not a spending problem okay and
00:31:18
as we know to extend we do have high
00:31:21
performing math students in the us
00:31:22
a huge majority of them are actually
00:31:24
foreign born
00:31:25
and so we're actually kind of cheating
00:31:27
our numbers a little bit it's even worse
00:31:29
than it appears now
00:31:31
what is the education establishment
00:31:32
doing about this how are they hiding the
00:31:34
failure well
00:31:35
when school comes back in the fall
00:31:37
they're planning to eliminate
00:31:38
accelerated math
00:31:39
okay that means that there's no more
00:31:41
algebra for eighth graders who are ready
00:31:42
to take it on
00:31:43
there's no more calculus for high
00:31:45
schoolers who want to
00:31:47
you know do like the ap classes and get
00:31:49
a jump on stem
00:31:50
you know for college the entire idea of
00:31:53
gifted students is now under attack
00:31:55
like we talked about in the name of
00:31:56
equity it's become a catch-all for every
00:31:58
bad idea
00:32:00
and the university of california system
00:32:02
has now abandoned the s.a.t and act
00:32:05
so they temporarily got rid of those
00:32:07
requirements during the pandemic but now
00:32:09
they've used the crisis crisis and now
00:32:13
they say they're not bringing
00:32:14
back the requirements until at least
00:32:16
2025
00:32:17
and you can bet it's never going to
00:32:18
return at all and so here's the thing
00:32:21
they're trying to get rid of measuring
00:32:23
how bad we are at math so we won't have
00:32:25
to think about it
00:32:26
they just want to give everyone a gold
00:32:27
star and a pat on the back and just
00:32:29
say how you know what this reminds me of
00:32:31
saks is when you threw away the um
00:32:33
the uh digital scale i got you
00:32:37
right i'm not i'm not fat because i'm
00:32:40
not measuring it great
00:32:42
perfect
00:32:45
oh my god it's like we really it's it's
00:32:48
the movie idiocracy
00:32:50
it's literally we are doing the movie
00:32:52
idiot have you guys seen it
00:32:53
why don't we just uh why don't we just
00:32:55
eliminate all admissions programs at
00:32:57
every university and just have one
00:32:59
global admissions board where every
00:33:01
campus is the same
00:33:02
what is the difference between mit um
00:33:05
and stanford and caltech and the
00:33:07
university of arkansas in my opinion
00:33:09
there shouldn't be it's
00:33:10
more equitable to just have somebody go
00:33:12
close to home because you can save money
00:33:14
you know carbon emissions are lower
00:33:16
right you can just take the bus to the
00:33:18
local
00:33:18
competition you're gonna have one
00:33:19
centralized place teach you why have
00:33:21
anybody give a basic course i mean if i
00:33:24
said this you you'd think that i was a
00:33:25
crazy person
00:33:26
except that's basically what we're now
00:33:28
telling all of our high schools i'm also
00:33:29
getting rid of michelin stars and i'd
00:33:31
like yelp to take off their
00:33:32
review system because it's not equitable
00:33:35
like we should not
00:33:36
have michelin stars anymore every show
00:33:38
just restaurant's the same every
00:33:39
restaurant you get three quarters of a
00:33:41
star we should not the health department
00:33:43
should not give ranks of letters and
00:33:45
they should not be forced to post it
00:33:46
because that's inequitable
00:33:48
absolutely you know yeah also you can
00:33:50
game you can game the health test you
00:33:52
could
00:33:52
literally just follow let me just ask
00:33:55
the um the counterpoint question which
00:33:57
is
00:33:57
uh uh standardized testing for example
00:34:02
benefits people that can afford tutors
00:34:04
and special
00:34:05
you know classes to get ahead and
00:34:07
provide more tutors
00:34:09
yeah therefore well therefore it's
00:34:10
higher income people that can always
00:34:12
well the point is they can always layer
00:34:13
on additional tutoring they can always
00:34:15
layer on additional classes and there
00:34:16
therefore
00:34:17
number of math is a finite score
00:34:19
freedberg you can only get 800 on the
00:34:21
math
00:34:22
i'll i'll be somewhat um flip-floppy
00:34:25
here i don't believe
00:34:27
in standardized tests that much i never
00:34:29
did well particularly in standardized
00:34:30
tests i do think that they can be gamed
00:34:33
but that's different from what we're
00:34:34
talking about what we're saying is
00:34:36
if kids show aptitude we are explicitly
00:34:39
choosing to not give them a chance to
00:34:41
develop at their potential
00:34:44
and the problem is we do this in other
00:34:46
areas we do it in athletics
00:34:48
we do it in music we do it in the arts
00:34:51
but we're not going to do it in stem
00:34:53
that's what we're choosing to do that is
00:34:55
what's crazy
00:34:56
so choose to get rid of the sat or act
00:34:59
whatever you want i don't care
00:35:01
but if you are the lebron james of
00:35:03
physics jesus christ
00:35:05
like let that kid become the lebron
00:35:07
james officials tell you like i
00:35:08
i am i got into uc berkeley because i
00:35:10
had great standardized test scores
00:35:12
because
00:35:13
i had an aptitude what was your s.a.t
00:35:15
freiburg
00:35:16
let's do this um i got a uh let's do
00:35:20
this an 800 math and i think it was a
00:35:22
720 verbal
00:35:24
okay so you got a 15 20 out of 1600 at
00:35:26
the time i got 11. i
00:35:34
uh 750 math um 720 verbal
00:35:40
14 are you writing this down
00:35:43
this is pretty the inflation there was a
00:35:45
big uh
00:35:46
i was a i was 15 10 on the sct oh we
00:35:49
were
00:35:50
okay so i woke up 400 points 500 points
00:35:53
behind each of you
00:35:54
in canada it was just kind of like we
00:35:56
didn't even write it but i went and i
00:35:57
wrote it just for shits and giggles and
00:35:58
i didn't do well you just said you
00:36:01
weren't good at standardized tests so
00:36:02
what are you talking about you're in the
00:36:04
top three percent yeah yeah i know but
00:36:06
generally like i wasn't a good test
00:36:08
taker i was in probation and college
00:36:09
academic yeah
00:36:11
but look the the reason why these tests
00:36:13
got invented was actually to prevent
00:36:15
discrimination
00:36:16
um i think it was back in like the 50s
00:36:18
right um yeah i think it was like
00:36:20
at that time it was jews being kept out
00:36:21
of the ivy league and
00:36:23
one of the ways that they corrected for
00:36:24
that was they made everyone take the
00:36:25
same test
00:36:26
and so you could see the scores and it
00:36:28
would shine some light
00:36:30
on you know making sure that people
00:36:31
didn't just get in because they were
00:36:33
legacies that they got in because
00:36:35
um you know they had their good good
00:36:37
scores and
00:36:38
there's been decades of work since then
00:36:41
to try and eliminate bias in the test
00:36:43
and so the the the claims of bias now
00:36:45
and the tests really aren't
00:36:47
supported now right to freeburg's point
00:36:50
obviously that if you take some rich kid
00:36:53
who lives
00:36:54
in the suburbs who gets a 1400 and you
00:36:56
compare that
00:36:57
to a kid in the inner city who doesn't
00:37:00
have who grew up poor doesn't have the
00:37:02
advantages
00:37:02
and that kid gets to thirteen hundred
00:37:04
well which score is better
00:37:06
probably the thirteen hundred and so you
00:37:08
can take that into account in my view
00:37:10
in the admissions process but
00:37:12
eliminating the scores all together
00:37:14
why would you want to have less
00:37:16
information to make a decision
00:37:18
there's no reason not to get rid of
00:37:19
these i would just think more
00:37:20
holistically about
00:37:21
how you accept students and i mean is it
00:37:23
more competition
00:37:25
and having better teachers what we
00:37:27
should be focusing on here as opposed to
00:37:29
even standardized testing or
00:37:30
god forbid canceling programs let's just
00:37:32
invest in
00:37:33
more competition for schools well so in
00:37:36
canada we had this thing where
00:37:37
when i was graduating we had specific
00:37:40
different kinds of
00:37:41
math contests and computer science
00:37:42
contests and other
00:37:44
things that you could write the putnam
00:37:46
etc
00:37:47
and uh those things were actually really
00:37:50
instructive because they were purely
00:37:52
verticalized things that could test your
00:37:53
aptitude
00:37:54
and the school that i went to university
00:37:56
of waterloo would look at a lot of those
00:37:58
things and adjust for it because my
00:38:00
grades were
00:38:00
decent but my some of those one this one
00:38:03
specific math test i took was pretty
00:38:05
good i remember
00:38:06
and then they would adjust it exactly as
00:38:08
david said to what is this kid's
00:38:10
background and his circumstances and
00:38:12
they called it a
00:38:12
french factor they would just adjust my
00:38:14
marks and that's how i got into waterloo
00:38:16
and i didn't think i was going to
00:38:18
so there's all kinds of ways where you
00:38:20
can be smart about it but again
00:38:22
we're talking about guys don't lose
00:38:23
sight of what you're saying we are
00:38:25
actually going to cut all these kids off
00:38:27
at the knees starting in grade 8.
00:38:28
so forget about all of this stuff by the
00:38:31
time that these kids graduate they're
00:38:32
going to be
00:38:33
i honestly they're going to be like
00:38:34
really dumb
00:38:36
the problem ultimately isn't just
00:38:37
measurement it's the denial of
00:38:39
opportunity to learn
00:38:41
it's about it's about getting rid of the
00:38:42
learning in the classes
00:38:44
that's the biggest problem you have to
00:38:46
move to a state with a gifted program
00:38:47
now
00:38:48
if your kid is really smart out of
00:38:50
public education um
00:38:51
which doesn't help anybody i mean
00:38:53
literally schools don't have to t
00:38:55
we put it n we've now designed a system
00:38:57
to summarize
00:38:58
schools don't have to compete for
00:39:00
students teachers don't have to compete
00:39:02
for jobs
00:39:03
or for their employment and now we're
00:39:05
saying students don't have to compete
00:39:06
so if you remove competition from the
00:39:09
human condition
00:39:11
you're just not going to have any
00:39:12
performance there's going to be no
00:39:14
progress and as a species we need
00:39:16
progress
00:39:17
we need to solve global warming we need
00:39:19
to solve a lot of
00:39:21
issues and don't we want to live longer
00:39:23
and better lives like where is the
00:39:25
optimistic nature of the human species
00:39:29
competition is at the core of excellence
00:39:32
and to just take it out of everything
00:39:35
the whole staff
00:39:36
that's the smartest thing you've ever
00:39:37
said way smarter than 11 20 sat score
00:39:40
thank you thank you he's only 11
00:39:43
20. how clean is it that we're still
00:39:46
talking about our s.a.t score it's like
00:39:47
30 years hundred was the average so
00:39:49
in brooklyn when you're 320 points above
00:39:51
average david
00:39:52
it's a bfd what's lame is the four of us
00:39:55
all remembered
00:39:56
down to the number what our score is
00:39:58
that's what's lame i think i was 11 20
00:40:00
11 50. i gotta i gotta look it up
00:40:01
um all right uh do we wanna go to the
00:40:05
crypto meltdown or talk about inflation
00:40:07
or do we should we dovetail those
00:40:08
together or just wanna go straight to
00:40:09
ufos
00:40:10
well bri biden just uh they they just a
00:40:13
press release just hit the wire and they
00:40:14
just cut the
00:40:15
infrastructure bill from 2.3 trillion to
00:40:18
1.7 trillion
00:40:19
so we're doing our job here at the
00:40:21
podcast
00:40:22
and uh i i had heard from somebody that
00:40:25
there just is not the broad-based
00:40:27
support
00:40:28
um for uh the capital gains tax so
00:40:32
that's not going to happen
00:40:33
um and it looks like the corporate tax
00:40:36
will probably go to 25
00:40:38
not even up to 28 and interestingly i
00:40:42
didn't realize this but
00:40:43
one of the biggest features of the bill
00:40:44
that has the most popularity is that
00:40:46
they're closing this loophole around ip
00:40:48
that sits outside the united states
00:40:50
and that more than the corporate taxes
00:40:53
will raise almost a trillion dollars of
00:40:55
revenue i agree with that one why should
00:40:56
you put your why is apple i mean you
00:40:58
want to talk about hypocrisy putting
00:40:59
their ip in ireland so they don't pay
00:41:01
taxes google does the same
00:41:02
it was everybody's doing that why does
00:41:04
that exist it's so un-american
00:41:06
well it's a subsidiary that has
00:41:09
different taxation on it and you know to
00:41:11
kind of
00:41:12
that capital and that uh and that
00:41:14
earnings
00:41:15
sits outside the u.s that ip was made in
00:41:18
california it was not made in dublin no
00:41:21
offense to
00:41:22
you know my home country i remember
00:41:24
facebook we did that we did this exact
00:41:26
thing we signed over all the ip
00:41:28
and then the irs sued facebook and i
00:41:30
remember like i was called either to
00:41:33
i was subpoenaed and we went through
00:41:34
like a whole multi-year trial it may
00:41:36
still be going on and it was around this
00:41:38
issue which was the irs said
00:41:40
hey facebook how come you you know you
00:41:42
ported this over there
00:41:44
and i think facebook's answer was yeah
00:41:45
we paid the tax and i think they did
00:41:47
they don't think they did anything wrong
00:41:48
because the laws allowed it
00:41:50
but it effectively helped shield then
00:41:52
tens of billions of dollars of future
00:41:53
taxes
00:41:54
i i mean i remember reading about this
00:41:56
and i'm like how does this
00:41:58
pass the sniff test well it's where the
00:42:00
revenue is recognized recognize jcal so
00:42:02
you basically can produce the ip here
00:42:04
and then transfer it to your
00:42:05
subsidiary when you transfer to your
00:42:07
subsidiary you can recognize the
00:42:09
earnings in that subsidiary and that
00:42:11
subsidiary pays taxes in its local
00:42:13
jurisdiction
00:42:14
the i think the issue facebook had was
00:42:16
that they transferred the ip
00:42:19
and they undervalued what the future
00:42:21
value would be from that ip transfer and
00:42:23
that's why the irs sued them
00:42:24
is this accounting snafu in terms of
00:42:26
like what did you value it out at the
00:42:27
moment you transferred it
00:42:29
here's another idea what does why don't
00:42:30
they look at as part of this ip
00:42:33
licensing
00:42:34
where does the consumption of that ip
00:42:36
occur
00:42:37
and where do the employees who maintain
00:42:39
that ip live
00:42:41
jkl it's a very smart idea the problem
00:42:43
is that's the slippery slope that then
00:42:44
gets to local taxation
00:42:46
you know the thing is we have all these
00:42:47
global tax treaties where these large
00:42:49
corporate entities
00:42:50
can basically play this game and they're
00:42:52
not subject to local tax
00:42:54
but that's the thing that's going to
00:42:56
really start the undoing of the big
00:42:58
monopolies because if you
00:42:59
start to abandon these global tax
00:43:02
treaties and you're starting to see it
00:43:04
france is trying to do some stuff the uk
00:43:06
is trying to do some stuff
00:43:08
states individually in the united states
00:43:10
are trying to sue these companies or tax
00:43:12
them more
00:43:13
that's the that's the first way to chip
00:43:14
away at these monopolies is to basically
00:43:16
say [ __ ] your global tax treaty
00:43:18
you need to pay x amount of dollars to
00:43:20
be here and it already exists because of
00:43:22
these
00:43:23
you know uh real estate sorry the retail
00:43:26
tax nexuses
00:43:27
and uh how e-commerce companies have to
00:43:29
pay local tax in the areas
00:43:30
um but once it sort of touches a whole
00:43:32
bunch of other
00:43:34
industries um and countries uh i think
00:43:37
that you're gonna have that that's why i
00:43:39
think yellen
00:43:40
janet yellen yesterday said that you
00:43:42
know she's in support of
00:43:43
trying to have a global minimum tax of
00:43:45
12 basically trying to get to the
00:43:47
end state and tell every country let's
00:43:49
all circle the wagons and agree that
00:43:51
we'll all just charge everybody 12
00:43:52
and then we won't go all our separate
00:43:54
ways the problem is that if you have a
00:43:56
lot of usage in a country
00:43:58
you know that country doesn't care what
00:44:00
the taxation is in
00:44:01
zimbabwe right or canada they're like if
00:44:04
i'm the uk or france i'm like i look at
00:44:06
the top 20 apps in my country and i'm
00:44:08
like
00:44:08
wait a minute these guys would be paying
00:44:09
me 50 billion dollars a year in tax
00:44:12
it's hard to get away from the incentive
00:44:13
to to not want to tax these companies
00:44:15
right now
00:44:15
sacks any thoughts yeah i don't have a
00:44:18
huge thought on the
00:44:19
ip issue um it seems like i know the
00:44:23
the republican proposal on the
00:44:24
infrastructure was six to eight hundred
00:44:26
billion
00:44:27
um biden's proposal initially was 2.3
00:44:30
chmath is right now they're down to 1.7
00:44:32
i think that the markets have been
00:44:34
choking on the size of all of this tax
00:44:36
and spend
00:44:38
and the there's been all these reports
00:44:40
of inflation
00:44:41
spiking and so the growth stocks have
00:44:44
just been hammered
00:44:46
because we're all expecting big interest
00:44:48
rate increases
00:44:49
to control this future inflation so um
00:44:52
buying has been horrible for growth
00:44:54
stocks so far and it really i guess that
00:44:56
what it shows
00:44:57
is that you know what are growth stocks
00:44:58
growth stocks are future investment
00:45:01
and it shows the way that the government
00:45:02
can crowd out when you have
00:45:04
excess government spending i guess you
00:45:07
can call it investment if you want but
00:45:08
when you have excess
00:45:09
government spending it starts to crowd
00:45:11
out
00:45:12
private investment because it raises
00:45:15
interest rates
00:45:16
and that you know decreases the the
00:45:18
value of gross stocks and there's less
00:45:20
money that flows into that
00:45:23
yeah it does seem like the market
00:45:25
reaction to
00:45:26
the infrastructure bill and to inflation
00:45:30
has made biden reconsider his approach
00:45:33
and maybe he just came out too hot is
00:45:36
that i don't know i don't think biden's
00:45:37
reconsidering i think it's people like
00:45:39
joe manchin
00:45:40
um remember it's a 50 foreigner mark
00:45:42
warner christian cinema the the moderate
00:45:44
there's a
00:45:44
three or four moderate democrats in the
00:45:46
senate who
00:45:47
i think are receiving the message your
00:45:50
mouth put it really well the last pod
00:45:51
that
00:45:51
the markets are sending a message to
00:45:53
washington i think some of those
00:45:55
centrist democrats
00:45:56
read the message i don't think biden's
00:45:58
aware of and i don't know what he's
00:46:00
aware of he doesn't seem to aware of
00:46:01
anything to me but
00:46:02
i think the moderate democrats are
00:46:03
getting the message and they're telling
00:46:05
they're telling the white house the
00:46:06
package is too big and they they're um
00:46:08
and i think that's why it's coming up
00:46:10
the other thing that i think people um
00:46:12
may be getting their heads around here's
00:46:13
what's changed since last week
00:46:15
there's a growing body if i had to say
00:46:17
like you know the beautiful thing about
00:46:18
the
00:46:19
the markets is that it is an extremely
00:46:21
elegant voting mechanism in the short
00:46:23
term right
00:46:24
i mean buffett says it's it's a voting
00:46:26
machine in the short term and a weighing
00:46:27
machine in the long term
00:46:29
but if you look at sentiment and how
00:46:31
things are voted on
00:46:33
in the public markets in real time it's
00:46:35
incredibly illustrative so
00:46:38
there's a body of people now that are
00:46:40
voting a very different scenario than
00:46:42
inflation
00:46:43
what they're voting for now is this idea
00:46:45
that by the fall
00:46:47
a lot of this short-term pent-up demand
00:46:49
will have worked its way through the
00:46:51
system
00:46:51
and instead we'll be back to this
00:46:53
realization that we've had for the last
00:46:55
20 years which is hey wait a minute
00:46:57
people don't actually want to buy more
00:46:59
of these physical goods they're going to
00:47:00
go back to consuming the way they did
00:47:01
before
00:47:02
it's going to reflexively push towards
00:47:04
technology companies again and we're
00:47:06
going to have this rebirth of growth
00:47:08
and you would say well how would you
00:47:10
know that that vote is likely
00:47:12
and this one incredible thing happened
00:47:14
this last week which i just want to
00:47:15
throw out here
00:47:16
um one thing that i look at is this
00:47:18
thing called 10-year break-evens which
00:47:20
is basically a thing that the
00:47:22
federal reserve of st louis publishes
00:47:25
and
00:47:25
what it basically shows is like what
00:47:27
people think collectively trillions of
00:47:28
dollars
00:47:29
what the 10-year break-even interest
00:47:31
rate's going to be and it peaked last
00:47:33
week at 2.54
00:47:36
and it's fallen 13 uh basis points uh
00:47:39
just in the last week down to 241
00:47:41
and i don't know whether it's sustained
00:47:43
or whatever but there is a
00:47:44
growing idea that the worst may be
00:47:47
behind us
00:47:48
and if you layer on top of this now
00:47:50
biden pulling back
00:47:52
right on stimulus because he can't get
00:47:56
it done
00:47:57
pulling back on cap gains pulling back
00:47:59
on corporate taxation
00:48:01
and a more measured policy of investment
00:48:05
we we could all be back so we're
00:48:07
basically taking the medicine and
00:48:08
getting back to where
00:48:09
we were but we still have massive asset
00:48:13
inflation
00:48:13
we're seeing in houses cars and other
00:48:15
things well we may have just pulled
00:48:17
forward demand meaning
00:48:18
you know people are like okay i'm flush
00:48:20
with money the savings rate in the
00:48:21
united states has been
00:48:22
you know going at an incredible clip
00:48:25
people may pull forward all that
00:48:26
spending and say i was going to buy a
00:48:28
car
00:48:28
18 months from now or i was going to buy
00:48:30
a house two years from now
00:48:32
[ __ ] it i'm going to do it now because
00:48:34
prices are going up too fast i don't
00:48:35
want to miss out
00:48:37
but then they're out of the market now
00:48:38
for the next many number of years and
00:48:40
this is what i'm saying where you see
00:48:41
this
00:48:42
short-term spike of demand and then
00:48:44
things get back to normal if that's what
00:48:46
we see
00:48:48
good times are back in growth stocks
00:48:52
all in podcast sentiment levels go high
00:48:55
again
00:48:56
i've literally i did like two or three
00:48:58
early stage deals recently
00:49:00
and i had members of my syndicate say
00:49:01
like how does this valuation make sense
00:49:03
and i said to them
00:49:04
you know it actually doesn't make sense
00:49:06
um if you're looking at it with the
00:49:08
traditional metrics but
00:49:09
all valuations are higher at all stages
00:49:12
so i'm going to selectively
00:49:14
you know overpay compared to what we
00:49:16
were paying a year or two ago
00:49:19
you know if i really love a company but
00:49:21
i will sit out a lot of i'm sitting at a
00:49:23
lot of rounds right now that
00:49:24
i just can't get my head around the
00:49:26
valuation so hopefully some well
00:49:28
there's always a trickle down there's
00:49:30
always a trickle down from gross stocks
00:49:32
in the public markets to venture right
00:49:34
because
00:49:35
the the last private investors like the
00:49:37
big funds
00:49:38
who do the super late stage stuff
00:49:40
they're just doing an arbitrage on what
00:49:41
they pay versus what the company's going
00:49:43
to list for
00:49:44
publicly so when they see those
00:49:45
valuations go down they adjust
00:49:47
and then it works its way all the way
00:49:49
down the stack so
00:49:50
you know growth stocks have just been
00:49:52
hammered and especially all the recent
00:49:54
listings the ipos and
00:49:56
spax and everything and and that's going
00:49:59
to trickle its way down i think
00:50:00
to venture i think we have the yeah and
00:50:03
i think we have the lead indicator on
00:50:04
that as clubhouse right which will be
00:50:06
the canary in the coal mine
00:50:08
i don't know how you guys recognize
00:50:09
explain explain what's going on with
00:50:11
clubhouse just for those of us
00:50:12
explain what it is okay so clubhouse is
00:50:15
a casual audio space you go into a room
00:50:17
and you're immediately taken to a live
00:50:19
conversation
00:50:20
with people speaking on stage and an
00:50:22
audience audience members can be
00:50:23
promoted to the stage and start talking
00:50:26
so wait wait hold on it's in an app and
00:50:28
it's all audio so there's an app
00:50:30
audio there's an app you go in and it's
00:50:31
all audio yes so it's like amateur night
00:50:33
at a strip club but for words
00:50:35
uh or more comedy club or whatever you
00:50:37
just bring pupil on stage
00:50:38
yeah it's kind of like a champagne room
00:50:40
but a little different um
00:50:42
so anyway
00:50:47
apple 2000 signatures from apple to
00:50:50
remove all in from the podcast
00:50:52
we just lost three ranks in the apple
00:50:54
podcasting app
00:50:56
so what's very interesting about this
00:50:58
app is that it had a massive number of
00:51:01
downloads
00:51:02
during the pandemic because people were
00:51:04
home and people were not doing anything
00:51:06
at night because they were sheltering in
00:51:07
place
00:51:08
and um they had in you know
00:51:11
2 million downloads in january 9.5
00:51:13
million in february of this year and
00:51:14
then
00:51:15
came crashing down 2.7 million in march
00:51:18
and
00:51:18
922 in april but at the same time their
00:51:22
valuation
00:51:23
over 18 months went from 100 million in
00:51:25
their seed when they had like three or
00:51:27
four thousand users
00:51:28
to a billion to four billion in the last
00:51:31
round of financing
00:51:33
for a company with zero revenue and
00:51:35
let's call it
00:51:36
a couple of million people using the app
00:51:39
and what's really interesting is the
00:51:40
same venture firm led all three rounds a
00:51:42
la
00:51:43
sequoia's investment in whatsapp where
00:51:44
they did all the private funding
00:51:46
so you have no outside capital marketing
00:51:48
this valuation a four
00:51:50
billion dollar evaluation four billion
00:51:52
dollars well they got a they got an
00:51:54
acquisition offer from twitter for four
00:51:55
billion
00:51:56
and they they turned was that ever
00:51:58
confirmed i've heard it was real
00:52:00
so so but so basically the reason why
00:52:03
the 4 billion private round happened
00:52:04
was so they would keep going as an
00:52:06
independent company they could basically
00:52:08
take some chips off the table through
00:52:09
secondary
00:52:10
and kind of go for the bigger outcome
00:52:12
but yeah they could have just sold to
00:52:13
twitter for 4 billion
00:52:15
so they may end up regretting that but
00:52:18
like is this really a function
00:52:19
of a broader um inflation evaluation
00:52:23
inflation or is this just a function of
00:52:25
there was a company that was a social
00:52:27
network with hyper growth
00:52:29
and then it turns out that the product
00:52:30
had no stickiness and the hyper growth
00:52:31
went away
00:52:32
the souffle collapsed the souffle
00:52:34
collapsed can i
00:52:35
can i can i just point out like and and
00:52:37
forgive me if any
00:52:38
any of you guys are investors in this
00:52:40
company or anyone that's listening and
00:52:41
cares
00:52:42
but like if this thing came out before
00:52:45
youtube
00:52:47
people would say you know this is
00:52:49
interesting but it needs an asynchronous
00:52:50
killer
00:52:51
it needs a thing where you can like
00:52:52
record a conversation post it online and
00:52:54
people can come and watch it listen to
00:52:55
it when they want
00:52:56
it was always so crazy to me that you
00:52:58
had to be logged into the app to listen
00:53:00
to what was going on
00:53:01
and if you didn't you missed the
00:53:02
conversation and there was no way to
00:53:03
like
00:53:04
go watch the recording of the
00:53:05
conversation like am i crazy to think
00:53:07
that this was just
00:53:08
like silly i think you nailed it that
00:53:11
they don't have async in there and
00:53:12
actually i've got a little bit of
00:53:13
disclosure
00:53:14
to make here
00:53:17
what what the beat got wet but it's
00:53:20
[ __ ]
00:53:21
special breaking news story okay
00:53:24
so i think i understand what clubhouse
00:53:27
did
00:53:28
wrong async is a huge part of it but
00:53:30
rather than tell you exactly i'm going
00:53:32
to show you
00:53:32
because i've been incubating a new what
00:53:35
what
00:53:36
what that we're we're on test flight
00:53:40
right now
00:53:41
and you guys after this pod i can i can
00:53:43
demo it for you and
00:53:44
if you guys if you guys want to invest
00:53:46
i'm going to close around
00:53:48
uh this week before it's getting wet and
00:53:50
so if you guys want to what's your
00:53:51
evaluation what's the value yeah what's
00:53:52
our insider
00:53:53
all in what's the best eval yeah what's
00:53:55
the best event i'll talk to you guys
00:53:56
about it offline
00:53:57
how much how much money do you want to
00:53:59
raise we're raising 10 million bucks and
00:54:01
we already have commitments and but i'm
00:54:03
creating room for you guys
00:54:04
yeah yeah so 500k each okay sounds like
00:54:08
500k each
00:54:09
where is it let's talk about it offline
00:54:11
but um but the apps on test flight i
00:54:12
think we'll be ready to launch in a few
00:54:14
weeks
00:54:14
can i can i say what's the point wait
00:54:16
what's it called can you see that
00:54:18
yeah no i'll say it it's called call in
00:54:21
colin
00:54:22
colin i thought it was i thought it was
00:54:24
going to be called club mouse
00:54:28
does this have a podcast after all like
00:54:32
are we going to do the podcast on it
00:54:33
we absolutely could do the podcast on it
00:54:36
and it would be awesome
00:54:36
nick would be out of a job so i don't
00:54:38
think he would like it i wouldn't have
00:54:39
the quality level but i think it's good
00:54:40
for call-ins if we wanted to do a
00:54:41
call-in show so it would be good for
00:54:42
that yes it'd be great it'd be great to
00:54:44
do
00:54:45
exactly and that's why it's called
00:54:46
call-in is because the ability for you
00:54:48
to take callers
00:54:49
is obviously a huge feature but also
00:54:52
like we could host
00:54:53
after parties for our fans to like you
00:54:56
know chop up the latest episode and talk
00:54:58
about it yeah
00:54:59
these fans are getting crazy do you guys
00:55:00
see the all in stats
00:55:02
twitter handle i don't know the twitter
00:55:03
handle off the top of my head but
00:55:05
somebody's
00:55:06
these kids are doing um uh they're using
00:55:10
machine learning or something to know
00:55:13
what percentage of time we each speak on
00:55:15
the pod
00:55:15
and how many monologues and they're
00:55:17
doing all these statistics it's crazy
00:55:18
that's really cool um i was gonna say uh
00:55:22
in defense of clubhouse for a second i
00:55:23
don't i don't know the app per se
00:55:25
but i think like why andreessen did all
00:55:28
of that
00:55:28
in my opinion is because they're
00:55:30
pressing a hot hand which makes a ton of
00:55:32
sense from their perspective it's like
00:55:34
you know i think that they're going for
00:55:35
the kill shot because i think they are
00:55:37
basically
00:55:38
set up they're basically set up to
00:55:40
become sequoia if
00:55:41
if they really i mean i think if you
00:55:43
think about like which two firms
00:55:45
are really crushing on all cylinders
00:55:48
right now
00:55:48
obviously sequoia has always been the
00:55:50
perennial number one
00:55:51
but if you think about the the heater
00:55:53
that andreessen it's on it's incredible
00:55:55
and so
00:55:56
from their perspective the four billion
00:55:58
dollar valuation is less important than
00:55:59
what is their real capital at risk and
00:56:01
that's probably 100 or 150 million which
00:56:04
in the grand scheme of having 40 or 50
00:56:06
billion dollars of aum
00:56:07
if you consider the value of all their
00:56:09
public positions as well that's a really
00:56:11
reasonable risk to take
00:56:12
so i think if you're sure in that way
00:56:14
it's kind of like they're taking a shot
00:56:16
to try to just you know go
00:56:17
if it does become worth 10 billion or 50
00:56:19
billion
00:56:20
also if it only gets sold for 500
00:56:23
million
00:56:23
they get their money out first so what
00:56:25
does it matter what does it matter
00:56:26
they're going for the 100 billion
00:56:28
outcome i mean they've seen that
00:56:29
instagram sold too soon
00:56:31
they saw that snap turned down a three
00:56:33
billion dollar offer from facebook and
00:56:34
now it's worth 80 billion
00:56:35
so they're going for the 100 billion
00:56:37
dollar youtube 1.6 billion yeah and now
00:56:39
it's worth hundreds of billions so
00:56:40
they're hoping it's going to be like
00:56:42
that um but
00:56:44
chamath is right look if they had taken
00:56:45
what say 20 of a 4 billion
00:56:47
outcome 800 million that doesn't even
00:56:50
pay back their fund
00:56:51
right but if it ends up being 100
00:56:52
billion outcome they make 20 billion
00:56:55
now it's like a coin base for them what
00:56:57
do you think they gave to the founders
00:57:00
well to keep them in the game because
00:57:02
four billion if they owned 80
00:57:05
yeah they took off they took chips off
00:57:06
the table but here's the thing all those
00:57:08
decisions were made
00:57:09
before the recent collapse in engagement
00:57:12
at clubhouse i'm not sure
00:57:13
anybody would be paying 4 billion for it
00:57:16
now
00:57:16
given everything that's gone wrong but
00:57:18
you know who knows
00:57:19
it's still pretty early just for people
00:57:21
who are curious there is a twitter
00:57:23
handle all in underscore stats
00:57:26
and um yeah it's all in stats.com i
00:57:29
don't know
00:57:29
we're not affiliated with these maniacs
00:57:32
but um
00:57:33
we we love the stands and we're going to
00:57:35
do something in person
00:57:36
in september congratulations to the
00:57:38
stands for losing their minds i think
00:57:39
it's a pretty good
00:57:41
uh way for them to capture a bunch of uh
00:57:43
attention on the twitter
00:57:45
all right um crypto is getting
00:57:48
absolutely hammered uh
00:57:49
and i it's the chinese have once again
00:57:53
said
00:57:54
that uh they're basically saber rattling
00:57:56
about cryptocurrency they're obviously
00:57:57
going to do their own um
00:57:59
uh jason i think i think you have to
00:58:01
talk about china in a
00:58:03
in a slightly broader lens than just
00:58:04
what's happening in crypto because like
00:58:06
this is the same week where
00:58:08
they basically they forced you know
00:58:10
zhang yaming to resign
00:58:11
from bike dance i mean you know last
00:58:14
week
00:58:14
last week it was or last month it was
00:58:16
the ceo of pinto duo
00:58:17
and just guys mia they're going for the
00:58:20
jugular i mean it's like
00:58:22
why are they taking out all their top
00:58:24
ceos this would be like putting elon and
00:58:26
jeff bezos on the bench is that they
00:58:29
just don't want any heroes
00:58:31
i don't know i mean i i guess maybe the
00:58:32
speculative part in me would say
00:58:34
they're showing them who's really in
00:58:36
charge of these companies
00:58:39
i mean it would be crazy to your point
00:58:41
if the government of the united states
00:58:43
forced sundar pachai and tim cook and
00:58:45
mark zuckerberg and elon musk
00:58:48
to resign it's like hey sorry i'm sorry
00:58:50
you need to leave right now and
00:58:52
put somebody else in and do you have to
00:58:53
debate their badges
00:58:55
yeah we just we just relentlessly
00:58:57
criticize them right but
00:58:58
but yeah yeah we just demonize them we
00:59:01
just try to cancel them but look but
00:59:03
they deserve that level of scrutiny
00:59:04
because the amount of power they have
00:59:06
but but yeah that we don't we don't
00:59:08
put them in jail or house arrest or
00:59:10
drive them out of their companies
00:59:11
and that is a big advantage for the us
00:59:13
economy the treasury department here in
00:59:15
the united states is doing a little
00:59:17
saber rattling
00:59:18
they want to know anytime there is a 10
00:59:21
000
00:59:21
transaction in any kind of digital token
00:59:24
and uh they're talking about a cbdc
00:59:27
to do their own cryptocurrency so
00:59:29
they're putting out a white paper for
00:59:30
feedback this summer
00:59:32
um and uh we are now seeing a pullback
00:59:36
on bitcoin from
00:59:37
you know mid 60s to uh you know now into
00:59:40
the 36
00:59:41
37 000 per bitcoin do you think this is
00:59:45
the
00:59:45
end of the beginning beginning of the
00:59:47
end
00:59:48
it's the beginning of the beginning
00:59:50
david rubinstein was on cnbc
00:59:53
today and david rubinstein for those you
00:59:55
guys don't know is um
00:59:56
was a co-founder of carlyle group you
00:59:58
know more blue chip
01:00:00
and blue-blooded you cannot get and very
01:00:03
connected in washington and you know he
01:00:05
said it best where he said you know
01:00:06
effectively
01:00:08
people want this and the government will
01:00:12
have no choice except to support it
01:00:14
because you can't take something like
01:00:16
this with this much
01:00:16
institutional and retail demand away so
01:00:20
we have to go to the place where now
01:00:22
crypto needs to be like everything else
01:00:24
and maybe the crypto stands get upset
01:00:26
with that because they don't like it
01:00:27
that you know
01:00:28
a bunch of their parents are all of a
01:00:29
sudden going to be buying tokens and
01:00:31
stuff but they got to get over it
01:00:32
um then this stuff should be you know
01:00:35
transacted in the same way you transact
01:00:36
anything else
01:00:37
you buy it you sell it you get a tax
01:00:39
return you pay your taxes and you move
01:00:41
on
01:00:42
this reminds me of the transition that
01:00:43
we all went through with i don't know if
01:00:45
you remember kazaa
01:00:46
and napster and bittorrent like
01:00:50
everybody all the we a lot of our
01:00:52
contemporaries in their 30s you know
01:00:54
whatever
01:00:54
10 20 years ago were like you can't stop
01:00:56
it you can't stop it and
01:00:58
it got stopped you know like you made it
01:01:01
illegal and you prosecuted people
01:01:03
and then you came up with solutions that
01:01:05
were regulated like spotify or
01:01:07
you know netflix and you gave the
01:01:09
consumers what they wanted so
01:01:11
david do you think this is a similar
01:01:13
path right now that we're going through
01:01:15
which is
01:01:16
the crypto zealots and the and the and
01:01:18
the stands are gonna
01:01:20
basically have to get used to as chemat
01:01:22
saying their parents buying it and
01:01:24
crypto not being this underground thing
01:01:26
but being regulated in a major way in
01:01:28
the united states and is that a good or
01:01:29
bad thing
01:01:30
i i think the thing that that's
01:01:31
happening quietly behind the scenes is
01:01:33
that
01:01:33
major wall street players institutions
01:01:36
endowments
01:01:37
and so forth over the past year have
01:01:39
decided that bitcoin and crypto
01:01:41
is a legitimate asset class and they've
01:01:43
been allocating to it
01:01:45
huge huge pools of capital balance sheet
01:01:48
capital have been allocating into it
01:01:50
i don't think that's gonna change this
01:01:52
is probably a pretty good buying
01:01:53
opportunity we've seen these
01:01:55
crashes in bitcoin many many times over
01:01:58
the years
01:01:58
it plummets down and then it goes back
01:02:00
up and it eventually goes back up and
01:02:02
reaches a new peak
01:02:03
so this is probably a pretty good entry
01:02:05
point for the next rally we don't know
01:02:06
when that's going to be but
01:02:08
the whole point of bitcoin is that it's
01:02:10
censorship resistant
01:02:12
and china can do its best to try and
01:02:14
stamp it out but i don't think they'll
01:02:16
be successful at that
01:02:17
you don't you're so wrong about that
01:02:20
that is the most naive take worst take
01:02:22
you've ever had
01:02:23
how's china going to stop bitcoin uh how
01:02:25
do they stop vpns they put people in
01:02:26
jail how do they stop religion they put
01:02:28
people in jail
01:02:29
they may make it incredibly hard for
01:02:31
chinese citizens to get a hold of
01:02:32
bitcoin i agree with that
01:02:34
but they're not going to be able to stop
01:02:35
bitcoin they're not going to stop
01:02:37
bitcoin in the west
01:02:38
but they will stop it in china 100
01:02:41
full stop and you know how many servers
01:02:43
are in china
01:02:45
i mean go talk to the people who were in
01:02:47
tiananmen square about
01:02:48
the miners will have to move out the
01:02:49
miners miners are done and then
01:02:51
if it'll be an underground thing it'll
01:02:53
be like having a vpn
01:02:54
which is five years in jail for selling
01:02:56
vpns what do you think about the irs
01:02:58
requirement that you have to report any
01:03:00
bitcoin transaction over ten thousand
01:03:02
dollars
01:03:03
do you think that that and americans can
01:03:05
be prosecuted for not reporting
01:03:07
right so i i don't know i don't know
01:03:10
fine okay so what do it so yes get over
01:03:13
it but i do think
01:03:14
you'll get rid of 20
01:03:17
this is the silk road fallacy that you
01:03:20
know that the only legitimate use for
01:03:22
crypto or
01:03:23
i said 20 percent i didn't say okay fine
01:03:25
but so
01:03:26
maybe that makes it that small fraction
01:03:28
of illegitimate or illicit use cases
01:03:32
no sex i think the point is um that
01:03:34
they're trying to chase down
01:03:35
it's not about illegal use cases it's
01:03:36
about not reporting a taxable gain on
01:03:38
your bitcoin
01:03:39
before you use that money to buy
01:03:41
something so sure of course it's about
01:03:43
tax evasion
01:03:44
but look but that's not that's not going
01:03:46
to stop bitcoin usage
01:03:48
um you know smart people who've been
01:03:51
trading bitcoin been paying taxes on it
01:03:52
for years
01:03:53
that's not i don't think that's really
01:03:54
an issue if you were in china and you
01:03:56
created your wealth in china
01:03:58
or many many other countries all over
01:03:59
the world and there were currency
01:04:01
restrictions and controls
01:04:02
and the government was asserting more
01:04:03
and more power and we're putting
01:04:05
business leaders under house arrest and
01:04:07
and seeking to
01:04:09
put them under their thumb you'd be
01:04:10
trying to convert as much of your net
01:04:12
worth into bitcoin as possible
01:04:14
so that all you have to do is if you
01:04:17
ever had to flee the country
01:04:18
you wouldn't have to have dollars in
01:04:20
your suitcase or gold bricks or diamonds
01:04:22
you'd simply have to have a password in
01:04:24
your brain that you could access at any
01:04:27
computer terminal when you got out of
01:04:28
the country
01:04:29
and so that i think that sort of digital
01:04:32
gold
01:04:33
is a phenomenal use case of bitcoin and
01:04:35
the more oppressive
01:04:37
all these countries become the more they
01:04:39
increase the value of that use case
01:04:41
what do you think is the black swan
01:04:42
event in crypto and bitcoin in
01:04:44
particular
01:04:47
taxation in the united states
01:04:50
traditional taxation like you do
01:04:52
on cigarettes that would be for me the
01:04:54
united states putting a tax on it
01:04:55
that makes it less competitive with our
01:04:58
our national
01:05:00
coming cryptocurrency the cbdc that the
01:05:02
united states will launch in the next
01:05:04
two or three years
01:05:05
they're going to say if you want to use
01:05:06
any of these other currencies there's a
01:05:08
10
01:05:08
tax on them we want you using ours the
01:05:11
legitimate one
01:05:13
there's there's a very negative black
01:05:14
swan that obviously has never occurred
01:05:17
um but if anyone ever manages to
01:05:19
counterfeit a bitcoin
01:05:20
yeah or this is the double spend problem
01:05:22
right if you could ever
01:05:23
if you could ever double spend or figure
01:05:25
out a way to create bitcoins
01:05:27
um or counterfeit them whatever that
01:05:29
weren't in the blockchain if the number
01:05:30
of bitcoins
01:05:31
ever grew beyond the 21 million that's
01:05:33
just built into
01:05:35
the way that the whole thing works if
01:05:36
that ever happened bitcoin is instantly
01:05:38
worthless
01:05:40
that would be the black swan on the
01:05:41
negative side i think the black swan
01:05:44
if it didn't happen in the first eleven
01:05:45
years what do you think the likelihood
01:05:46
of a percentage basis that it happens in
01:05:48
the
01:05:48
20th exactly it's too expensive now and
01:05:51
it's too
01:05:52
it's too visible like the way that it
01:05:54
would have happened it would have
01:05:54
happened in the first two or three years
01:05:56
or the argument could be made the
01:05:57
opposite that now it's so valuable that
01:05:59
it's worth
01:05:59
investing to figure out a bigger target
01:06:01
yeah yeah and and it's and
01:06:03
and rather than have it be about a
01:06:04
diminishing probability it could be an
01:06:06
increasing probability over time
01:06:08
which is that the pathways to get there
01:06:10
start to get resolved whereas
01:06:12
in the past you didn't have enough time
01:06:14
to resolve those pathways
01:06:16
speaking highly theoretical here but
01:06:17
like certainly it doesn't take into
01:06:19
account that it's open source and that
01:06:21
everybody can see it
01:06:22
so you would think that everybody would
01:06:24
discover the vulnerability at the same
01:06:26
time right in an open source project
01:06:27
well no i think the i think the issue
01:06:29
practically speaking in this would be
01:06:31
that
01:06:31
you would see those resources getting
01:06:33
organized meaning
01:06:34
you'd see silicon being bought in volume
01:06:37
by
01:06:37
some centralized player and then you'd
01:06:40
have to see water and power come
01:06:42
together as well
01:06:43
and this is where i think it's just not
01:06:44
realistic where today
01:06:46
that i think the horse has left the barn
01:06:48
because if you try to basically capture
01:06:50
enough hash rate to kind of like
01:06:51
overpower this network
01:06:54
it's it's it's like the scene in austin
01:06:56
powers where
01:06:57
he's screaming in front of a a
01:06:59
steamroller but the steamroller is
01:07:01
moving at like one foot a minute
01:07:03
right you see it coming it's just like
01:07:05
you just see it coming well would you
01:07:07
have a black swan freeberg you asked the
01:07:08
loaded question so
01:07:09
do you have one i think about it a lot i
01:07:11
don't really i mean it's a black swan
01:07:13
it's
01:07:13
because it's a black swan so you don't
01:07:15
really see it coming but like
01:07:18
you know the the thing about bitcoin
01:07:22
which has always given me pause
01:07:26
is the fact that the only way it works
01:07:29
is if everyone believes that more people
01:07:31
are going to believe in it tomorrow than
01:07:32
believe in it today
01:07:34
well that's the only way it appreciates
01:07:37
yeah but the
01:07:38
for a variety of reasons it's also the
01:07:41
only way that it works because
01:07:43
um if it starts to depreciate it becomes
01:07:46
almost like this unwinding
01:07:47
circumstance and there are moments where
01:07:49
it unwinds but then people kind of say
01:07:50
well you know what more people are going
01:07:51
to get on this there's the chinese
01:07:52
argument there's the argentinian
01:07:54
argument there's all the reasons why
01:07:55
people will
01:07:56
try and store wealth in this system
01:07:59
and that becomes a rationale for
01:08:01
continuing to bet on it and
01:08:02
my observation is so many people that
01:08:05
are active in bitcoin
01:08:07
compare bitcoin to the price of the
01:08:08
dollar which to me
01:08:10
seems like it doesn't make sense
01:08:12
relative to the intention of bitcoin
01:08:14
which is to not be part of the monetary
01:08:16
system that uses the dollar as kind of
01:08:18
the de facto
01:08:19
you know system of value and so
01:08:23
why have the comparison to the dollar as
01:08:26
the objective for bitcoin
01:08:27
why is the objective not transactions
01:08:30
use cases
01:08:31
number of people that are active on the
01:08:32
network et cetera et cetera and nobody
01:08:34
buying it is buying it as a subsidiary
01:08:36
they're buying it as a lottery ticket so
01:08:39
yeah that's that that's right and so
01:08:40
then it becomes this rationale that it's
01:08:42
like it's an investment that you put
01:08:43
money in
01:08:45
in the form of dollars or your local
01:08:46
currency with the intention that you
01:08:48
will be able to get more of your local
01:08:50
currency out at some point in the future
01:08:52
and the only way that works is if you
01:08:53
expect someone else will buy it from you
01:08:54
at a higher price in the future
01:08:56
therefore it's all about propagating the
01:08:58
uh you know the marketing around the
01:09:00
bitcoin
01:09:01
whereas if your objective was really
01:09:02
about making this become a replacement
01:09:04
currency system or replacement monetary
01:09:06
system you would ultimately care less
01:09:09
about
01:09:10
you know what's the dollar value per
01:09:11
coin and you would care more about how
01:09:12
many people are using it
01:09:14
you know how active let me build on that
01:09:15
question so
01:09:17
saks or chamoth if the cbdc
01:09:21
and americans currency you know starts
01:09:23
to move towards a bitcoin
01:09:25
blockchain-like experience what would
01:09:28
america start to look like if 10 or 20
01:09:30
of your dollars instead of being held in
01:09:32
a bank we're on a
01:09:34
blockchain with an american a government
01:09:36
a government-backed blockchain
01:09:38
doesn't accomplish anything it's still
01:09:41
people are
01:09:41
it's centralized and not only is it
01:09:43
centralized but also
01:09:45
it's still prone to debasement right
01:09:48
yeah and so look human beings have used
01:09:51
everything from
01:09:52
gold coins to seashells as money we can
01:09:55
make anything money that's easy to
01:09:56
transact if we all agree
01:09:58
on it that's the sense in which bitcoin
01:10:00
is the bubble that becomes true
01:10:01
if everyone believes in it that provided
01:10:04
provided the number of bitcoins today at
01:10:05
21 million and that
01:10:06
the technology enforces the scarcity the
01:10:10
problem we have with the us dollar is
01:10:11
the government can just print as many of
01:10:12
them as they want
01:10:14
yeah you change the denominator problem
01:10:15
yeah and
01:10:17
so i think there's a positive black swan
01:10:18
as well for positive for
01:10:20
bitcoin which is stanley druckenmiller
01:10:22
thinks that the next 15 years
01:10:24
the u.s dollar will no longer be the
01:10:26
world's reserve currency well what's
01:10:27
going to replace it
01:10:28
the positive black swan would be that
01:10:30
bitcoin becomes
01:10:31
if not the a world reserve currency
01:10:35
an unofficial world reserve currency why
01:10:38
because people trust it they trust the
01:10:40
decentralization
01:10:42
more than they trust any government and
01:10:44
that would that would be absolutely
01:10:46
is that in is the united states and
01:10:48
china are they going to
01:10:50
let bitcoin become the world's reserve
01:10:52
currency
01:10:53
well it's not a choice that they have
01:10:56
you sure so
01:10:57
yeah there's nothing they can do
01:11:00
but what about the law and guns in jail
01:11:02
and tax
01:11:04
i don't i don't know what that means
01:11:05
there's there's nothing that they could
01:11:06
there there was nothing that they could
01:11:07
do to stop it before there's nothing
01:11:09
that they can do to stop it now
01:11:11
well you can't get the new york times in
01:11:12
china and you can't practice religion
01:11:14
there so they have a pretty easy system
01:11:15
they put you in jail they want to stop
01:11:17
bitcoin they could just put you in jail
01:11:19
how by finding out that you have bitcoin
01:11:22
and just well because they have a
01:11:25
hundred percent
01:11:26
uh view into the internet there they
01:11:28
have how on
01:11:29
because they have routers that's how
01:11:30
they capture all the uyghurs is they
01:11:32
know their location because they have
01:11:34
mobile phones and when they use signal
01:11:36
or any other encrypted technology
01:11:37
they catch them no i don't i don't think
01:11:39
that's how it works but
01:11:40
that's how they catch all the dissidents
01:11:42
there as they they have them
01:11:43
and they also have apple's entire data
01:11:46
center is controlled by the chinese
01:11:48
government
01:11:49
there's no ledger somewhere that says
01:11:51
this specific wallet address
01:11:52
equals david sacks and there's not going
01:11:54
to be one anytime soon
01:11:57
and so you'll have these centralized
01:11:59
wallet authorities that actually
01:12:00
you know have a lot of account
01:12:02
information but the reality is the
01:12:03
sophisticated actors you know
01:12:06
use tumblers they they washed sort of
01:12:08
like their
01:12:10
their paths in a way where it's very
01:12:11
difficult to figure out who these people
01:12:12
are now
01:12:13
if you if you don't if you use a site
01:12:15
that doesn't have kyc that's always
01:12:17
going to be the case and
01:12:18
you know people with huge amounts of
01:12:20
bitcoin are sophisticated enough to know
01:12:22
how to stay anonymous
01:12:23
if they want to for everybody else who
01:12:26
doesn't care
01:12:26
because for them it's sort of an
01:12:28
investment asset class and an in
01:12:30
you know a hedge then they're not going
01:12:33
to care either
01:12:33
and the point is when enough people own
01:12:35
it governments aren't in a position the
01:12:38
track record
01:12:39
of them just waking up one day and
01:12:40
pulling the plug on anything is zero
01:12:42
that's not
01:12:43
how people do things you have to have
01:12:45
like centralized policy and support
01:12:47
and i don't see it one way or the other
01:12:49
of all the things that china and the
01:12:51
united states will face over the next 30
01:12:52
or 40 years
01:12:53
this is like 50th on the list hmm
01:12:57
saks what do you think any closing
01:12:59
thoughts
01:13:00
i mean i think we've said it so
01:13:03
yeah i mean look i think i think if
01:13:05
you're going to stay in a place like the
01:13:06
united states you need to comply with
01:13:08
tax law you're absolutely going to
01:13:09
report your bitcoin holdings if it's
01:13:10
required but if the reason
01:13:12
you're buying bitcoin is because you're
01:13:13
fleeing a country or you're worried
01:13:15
about fleeing a country
01:13:16
you're obviously not going to report it
01:13:18
and that's the that's the advantage of
01:13:20
it is that it's a portable
01:13:22
money supply that again you can just um
01:13:26
you don't have to carry anything with
01:13:27
you you just put a password in your
01:13:29
brain wallet
01:13:30
tell me about ufos before we leave i
01:13:32
mean can you believe this thing this is
01:13:33
the craziest thing i
01:13:34
i so there was a yeah there's a 60
01:13:37
minutes episode that just happened
01:13:39
uh deputy assistant uh secretary of
01:13:41
defense for intelligent literally said
01:13:43
the crafts we're seeing are and then in
01:13:45
quotes far beyond
01:13:47
anything that we're capable of there's
01:13:48
nothing we could build
01:13:50
that would be strong enough to endure
01:13:51
the amount of force and acceleration
01:13:53
imagine a technology that can do 700
01:13:55
g-forces fly 13 miles per hour
01:13:57
evade radar and has every no obvious
01:14:00
signs of propulsion and yet can clearly
01:14:02
defy
01:14:02
the effects of earth's gravity that's
01:14:04
precisely what we're seeing
01:14:05
from the director of advanced aerospace
01:14:07
threat identification program i mean is
01:14:09
this real
01:14:09
like how is what what do we do what
01:14:12
our government says there are crafts
01:14:14
that outstrip our arsenal by at least a
01:14:15
hundred years to a thousand years at the
01:14:17
moment and we're like
01:14:19
meh what do you think fredberg you're
01:14:21
the scientist here
01:14:22
there's a if you read the original um
01:14:25
uh treatment written by arthur clarke
01:14:28
for the movie 2001 as space odyssey
01:14:31
which was written before the movie and
01:14:32
then the book was written after the
01:14:34
movie
01:14:35
um he makes a really compelling point
01:14:38
and the point he makes is that when
01:14:41
civilizations achieve
01:14:43
um a sophisticated enough level of
01:14:46
technology
01:14:47
there's no longer a need to physically
01:14:49
transport yourself from start a star
01:14:52
and transport yourself around the
01:14:53
universe think about this for a second
01:14:56
take what we have from virtual reality
01:14:58
today and fast forward
01:15:00
200 years and then take what we have in
01:15:02
terms of you know the ability to print
01:15:04
and create anything we want on demand
01:15:06
and fast forward two or three hundred
01:15:08
years
01:15:09
those two conditions alone might give us
01:15:11
the ability to strap
01:15:13
on something to our brain and literally
01:15:15
and remember
01:15:16
our brain is simply sensing what our
01:15:18
body is given
01:15:19
and if you can control what your brain
01:15:21
is sensing through some strap-on device
01:15:22
or whatever
01:15:23
you don't actually need to physically be
01:15:25
in the place where that happens so
01:15:27
if we can remotely sense what's going on
01:15:29
somewhere else in the universe or some
01:15:31
other part of our planet
01:15:32
and we can remotely pick up those
01:15:34
signals and view them or experience them
01:15:36
you don't need to physically be there
01:15:38
and then secondly all this sorry all
01:15:39
this via strap-on
01:15:41
okay yeah and then secondly i shouldn't
01:15:42
use it i shouldn't use the term
01:15:44
and then secondly if you could print it
01:15:46
you'd be honest yeah
01:15:47
but think about if you guys ever watched
01:15:49
the tv show star trek next generation
01:15:51
which i would guess maybe one of the
01:15:52
replicator
01:15:54
or the replicator or the holodeck and
01:15:55
you could watch it number three on my
01:15:57
list of star trek
01:15:58
yeah seriously if you walk in and you
01:16:00
could literally recreate the physical
01:16:02
space that you want to be in to
01:16:03
accomplish anything the holodeck and
01:16:05
then you could print anything why would
01:16:06
you use all the energy
01:16:08
and all of this work to transport
01:16:10
physical matter
01:16:11
from one part of the universe to the
01:16:12
other when all matter is transmutable
01:16:15
and the only thing that differentiates
01:16:16
things is the photons coming off that
01:16:18
matter which is just to sense it so if
01:16:20
you can sense things remotely
01:16:22
while you're physically here why do i go
01:16:23
through the trouble why go through the
01:16:24
trouble and so these are
01:16:25
the same reason that we go to hawaii and
01:16:28
not just watch a movie
01:16:30
no because we don't have enough of the
01:16:31
sensing capabilities today to truly
01:16:34
recreate being in hawaii
01:16:35
but imagine if we did and and we are
01:16:37
very much on the path to doing that
01:16:39
and in two three hundred years we have
01:16:41
the ability to physically recreate what
01:16:42
it's like for our body to be in hawaii
01:16:44
in every form
01:16:45
smell taste color everything about being
01:16:48
there physically and our body
01:16:49
experiences it
01:16:50
why the hell would you fly to hawaii you
01:16:51
could meet people you could socialize
01:16:53
so in a world short hawaii in a world
01:16:55
where that technology exists which could
01:16:57
by the way be neural link right where
01:16:58
you can you know put these signals
01:17:00
directly into the brain etc
01:17:01
moving physical matter from one part of
01:17:03
the universe to the other makes zero
01:17:04
sense
01:17:05
all matter is transmutable you can
01:17:06
convert one atom to another using a
01:17:08
technology locally so you wouldn't do
01:17:10
that and so that's the premise of 2001
01:17:12
is that you've got these local
01:17:13
communication pods
01:17:14
that just transmit information from
01:17:16
different parts of the universe you
01:17:17
don't need to physically transport
01:17:19
yourself
01:17:20
so that's the that's the the macro kind
01:17:22
of argument against
01:17:23
this notion that ufos or aliens are in a
01:17:25
physical spacecraft visiting it's so
01:17:27
old-school technology that it makes no
01:17:30
sense it's like saying
01:17:31
you know oh my gosh all these people are
01:17:32
coming over to the united states on
01:17:33
horses
01:17:34
from europe you know like it just like
01:17:36
why would they do that why would they
01:17:37
use a horse
01:17:38
uh so so i think that's the argument
01:17:40
against ufos being aliens and spacecraft
01:17:43
now is there a really cool technology
01:17:44
that has this advanced capability and
01:17:46
there are
01:17:47
these crafts that are in our sky and
01:17:49
someone has that technology maybe
01:17:51
um but i'm not sure about this general
01:17:54
thesis i mean you blew my mind with that
01:17:56
so
01:17:56
yeah saks uh i i you obviously don't
01:17:59
care
01:18:00
so we i just i have no way
01:18:04
for this to increase the irr of my fund
01:18:06
or
01:18:07
to get me another home beep boop bop
01:18:09
boop on planet earth why would i want to
01:18:12
go
01:18:12
i just somehow feel like if they're
01:18:14
really ufos it'd be like an even bigger
01:18:16
story like we'd all know it
01:18:18
you know it's not going to be some like
01:18:20
weird fringe conspiracy thing here's the
01:18:22
here's the thing
01:18:23
i do not care about emotions like humans
01:18:25
tell you why would i care
01:18:27
about the emotions of others every
01:18:29
single
01:18:30
photograph that's been taken in the last
01:18:32
year is
01:18:34
absolutely recognizably better than the
01:18:37
one taken 10 years ago
01:18:39
and every single photo or video of these
01:18:41
aliens
01:18:42
looks like it was shot in a on a camera
01:18:45
from 1950 on the film that was left in
01:18:47
somebody's basement
01:18:48
and meanwhile meanwhile pixar movies can
01:18:50
recreate literally the ocean
01:18:52
glimmering get me a clear shot there's
01:18:56
not one clear shot of this
01:18:57
show me the alien in 4k high def
01:19:00
and then i'll believe it okay
01:19:05
by the engine and we can see the engine
01:19:07
like why can't we get a shot of the
01:19:08
until then i will be traveling between
01:19:10
my homes
01:19:13
i am living my best life not in san
01:19:15
francisco we will get chesapeaden
01:19:17
recalled
01:19:17
i will tell you sex i don't think you
01:19:19
need to harp on the chessa
01:19:20
point anymore because i don't hear
01:19:22
anyone making the case on the other side
01:19:24
anymore
01:19:24
dustin moskowitz yes
01:19:28
what from us yes yes nick pull up the
01:19:31
tweet so
01:19:32
you know i'm basically because look
01:19:34
there oh we fired him up here we go
01:19:37
then we can take off so insert quarter
01:19:40
here
01:19:41
and now my range upgrade before the
01:19:44
station inserted yes run rage function
01:19:48
now
01:19:49
no look we're taking all this heat from
01:19:51
these stupid reporters who are talking
01:19:53
about our donations
01:19:54
you know like asking what are we up to
01:19:56
uh look we're very public about
01:19:58
what we're up to but this is a terrible
01:20:01
tweet from dustin
01:20:02
there there have been these tech
01:20:04
billionaires dustin mossovitz
01:20:06
reed hastings and mike krieger and
01:20:09
they've been donating money
01:20:10
to to chase a boudin and gasco
01:20:14
that's disappointing yeah horrible so i
01:20:16
asked i just said why are you donating
01:20:18
money this insanity
01:20:19
and dustin's still defending it
01:20:22
and he said i'm going to mute you now
01:20:24
because you know you didn't want to you
01:20:25
didn't want to
01:20:26
wait wait just in fairness let me pull
01:20:28
this up dustin's quote is i live in the
01:20:30
city and i'm not going anywhere crime
01:20:32
happens to me too
01:20:32
trust me we write extensively about why
01:20:35
of our grants here
01:20:36
you know here's the thing i think dustin
01:20:38
reed hastings
01:20:40
um and their spouses are very involved
01:20:44
in criminal justice reform
01:20:45
and what we have to do is give somebody
01:20:47
like dustin or reed hastings to benefit
01:20:48
the doubt here and say
01:20:49
we understand your donations were
01:20:52
meaningful
01:20:53
to you and you wanted to
01:20:56
maybe lower the incarceration of black
01:20:58
people in jail for
01:20:59
crimes that were not violent and we
01:21:02
agree
01:21:03
let's reverse this conversation because
01:21:06
we're not giving them the benefit of the
01:21:07
doubt let me explain why okay so read it
01:21:09
so this is a good example this read
01:21:10
hastings thing
01:21:11
is a good example by the way just today
01:21:13
was announced that he donated three
01:21:14
million to gavin newsom
01:21:16
um in any event so you know he keep he
01:21:19
look he's on that side of the spectrum
01:21:21
by the way there's a little back story
01:21:22
there
01:21:22
i don't know if you guys remember when
01:21:24
there was pressure uh
01:21:25
on the facebook board to kick peter
01:21:27
thiel off but back in 2016.
01:21:29
it was really nice that was from reed
01:21:31
hastings okay so the guy is very
01:21:33
close-minded i think it's his wife is
01:21:35
actually handling this one
01:21:36
he was the board member who pushed to
01:21:38
get peter off because he couldn't handle
01:21:40
the fact
01:21:40
that there might be another board member
01:21:42
who disagree with him politically so
01:21:44
it's a very close-minded
01:21:45
point of view but let's take let's take
01:21:47
this example of crime
01:21:48
in la okay so we had this uh election
01:21:52
where george gascon who was a failure as
01:21:54
d.a
01:21:55
in san francisco he goes down to la and
01:21:58
runs against the
01:21:59
the veteran d.a down there jackie lacy
01:22:02
who it happens to be a black woman a
01:22:05
veteran
01:22:06
seasoned d.a compton nobody had a
01:22:08
problem with her i think she's a
01:22:10
democrat okay it's not like this is a
01:22:11
right-wing person
01:22:13
and so george gascon basically fails his
01:22:15
way out of san francisco goes down to la
01:22:18
and he basically um dislodges her from
01:22:21
that seat with 15 million dollars
01:22:23
an unprecedented amount spent a day
01:22:25
election where did that money come from
01:22:27
5 million came from source 5 million
01:22:29
came for reed hastings
01:22:30
5 million came from blm now
01:22:34
you know in any other context the idea
01:22:37
that you're gonna fire
01:22:38
a talented competent seasoned veteran
01:22:42
black woman and replace her with an
01:22:44
incompetent
01:22:45
white male that would be seen as
01:22:48
institutional racism
01:22:49
but nobody complained about it at all
01:22:52
but it's outrageous
01:22:53
yeah what is there what is the most
01:22:55
charitable what's behind that
01:22:57
what is the most charitable view of
01:23:00
why they're supporting gascon and
01:23:02
chesapeake well
01:23:03
there's this decarcerationist agenda and
01:23:06
so yes
01:23:07
you're right that they see mass
01:23:09
incarceration is a problem
01:23:11
but the problems it is but the solution
01:23:13
is not mass decarceration
01:23:15
that we need something in between and
01:23:18
the problem with gascone and chase of
01:23:20
boudin they just want to let everybody
01:23:21
out
01:23:22
they don't want them they also don't
01:23:23
want to add anybody so i think if their
01:23:25
agenda is to lower the number adding
01:23:27
people is against that
01:23:28
there are people who need to go to jail
01:23:30
murderers now people
01:23:32
dying every day in san francisco
01:23:35
by at the hands of repeat offenders
01:23:38
who chaser boudin has made the decision
01:23:41
to let them out of jail
01:23:43
even though they should be in jail these
01:23:44
are dangerous violent felons
01:23:47
the problem with this is i think chamath
01:23:48
i would like to get your feedback on it
01:23:50
is
01:23:51
you know you when a person gives these
01:23:53
kind of donations
01:23:54
and they make it their public persona
01:23:57
and
01:23:58
it doesn't go well how does one
01:24:03
you know i don't know disentangle or
01:24:07
reconcile they made a bet that
01:24:10
had a bad outcome because this is
01:24:11
obviously a bad outcome you don't want
01:24:13
the city
01:24:14
to devolve into chaos i don't
01:24:17
particularly care about san francisco
01:24:19
and i think i think the two the two of
01:24:21
you guys can
01:24:22
talk about it all no i'm done i'm going
01:24:24
to get rid of my place in this one colin
01:24:25
but i
01:24:26
i could i couldn't care less about how
01:24:27
that sounds well closing
01:24:31
i got nothing to say okay i want to add
01:24:33
just one thing look i
01:24:34
so i care because i live there but but
01:24:36
this trend this is not just san
01:24:37
francisco this whole idea of these
01:24:39
radical
01:24:39
decarcerationists they are running for
01:24:42
d.a
01:24:42
in every major city this is going to be
01:24:45
a national trend
01:24:46
and they're going to cause a lot of
01:24:49
carnage a lot of death and destruction
01:24:51
until the people realize
01:24:53
and there will inevitably be a backlash
01:24:56
to this
01:24:57
and hopefully just not too many people
01:24:59
fair enough i i don't want to be too
01:25:00
flippant my point is
01:25:01
it's a really important debate it's
01:25:03
going to happen in every city
01:25:04
but folks need to get engaged in those
01:25:07
cities and do something about it if
01:25:09
if you want to hear the argument of why
01:25:11
this is happening
01:25:12
you can go watch the ted talk on youtube
01:25:14
of adam foss
01:25:15
foss he was the original like proponent
01:25:19
of the da's coming in to drive the
01:25:21
incarceration
01:25:22
decarceration movements um and you know
01:25:26
i just think it's important to be
01:25:26
informed of the other perspective
01:25:29
uh uh in evaluating where folks are
01:25:31
coming from that are that are their
01:25:32
proponents for this movement
01:25:34
yeah i'm trying to be charitable towards
01:25:36
their position dustin
01:25:37
and reed if you want to come on the pod
01:25:39
and be a bestie guestie i guess maybe
01:25:41
dustin doesn't respond to me and said
01:25:43
listen we don't know what the
01:25:44
counterfactual is if we had a more
01:25:45
aggressive d.a that was his arguments we
01:25:47
don't know the counterfeits
01:25:48
so i of course so i posted a list of
01:25:51
people of innocent victims
01:25:53
who've died okay because directly
01:25:56
because
01:25:57
of a decision that chase abu deen made
01:25:59
that's your counter factual
01:26:00
yeah that's your counter factual all
01:26:03
right listen it's been an amazing
01:26:04
episode
01:26:05
and uh no plugs no ads no nothing
01:26:09
if you like the show great and if you
01:26:11
don't like it
01:26:12
how the hell did you make it to the
01:26:13
minute 75 for
01:26:15
the queen of quinoa the dictator himself
01:26:18
chamoli papatia
01:26:19
i'm having steak tonight
01:26:23
[Music]
01:26:32
eggplant tonight you've never eaten fish
01:26:35
in your life
01:26:36
never had sushi and saxons
01:26:42
jack can we even talk about saks as hell
01:26:44
where's your first second and third
01:26:46
dinner tonight i'm on a seafood diet i
01:26:48
eat i see the food
01:27:09
this is your twilight zone episode i
01:27:11
just bought i'm going i decided i'm
01:27:12
going twice a week with the trainer and
01:27:14
i just bought the hydro
01:27:16
so now i have tonal peloton tread and i
01:27:19
got the hydro i'm going from smart
01:27:21
machine to smart machine
01:27:22
hey are you spa oh i got it oh good
01:27:25
question
01:27:27
no no no no comment comment okay sorry i
01:27:30
just want some tweet people have other
01:27:32
things to do guys
01:27:35
i gotta go i gotta go all right
01:27:36
everybody love you guys
01:27:38
yeah get a salad okay we love you bye
01:27:41
besties
01:27:43
and of course the dictator
01:27:52
[Music]
01:28:03
it's hard to make good investments it's
01:28:04
hard to build a company
01:28:14
[Music]
01:28:33
people think money is free and it's not
01:28:36
i pick up
01:28:43
[Music]
01:28:52
billionaire has brought the french
01:29:01
i just can't stand them
01:29:11
it's hard to make it it's hard to make
01:29:12
good investments it's hard to build a
01:29:14
company
01:29:14
because if it was easy everybody would
01:29:16
be doing it all the time
01:29:17
[Music]
01:29:20
this one man for yourself it's all about
01:29:22
you you can figure it out
01:29:24
the rugged individualism that's just not
01:29:26
realistic
01:29:28
anybody who want who's listening to this
01:29:30
who wants to go to the french laundry
01:29:31
stay at home pour a bunch of salt on
01:29:34
whatever you're gonna eat
01:29:36
okay
01:29:50
it's hard to make it it's hard to make
01:29:52
good investments it's hard to build a
01:29:53
company
01:29:54
because if it was easy everybody would
01:29:55
be doing it all the time
01:29:56
[Music]
01:29:59
this one man for yourself it's all about
01:30:01
you you can figure it out
01:30:03
the rugged individualism that's just not
01:30:05
realistic like
