You can listen to the DOGE kills its first bill, Zuck vs OpenAI, Google’s AI comeback with bestie Aaron Levie using Speak’s shareable media player:
DOGE kills its first bill, Zuck vs OpenAI, Google’s AI comeback with bestie Aaron Levie Podcast Episode Description
(0:00) Bestie intros
(3:07) The Besties welcome Box CEO Aaron Levie!
(5:40) Thoughts on Sacks’s new role, what areas he can have immediate positive impact on in crypto and AI
(18:42) DOGE’s first casualty and its paradigm-shifting potential
(48:25) Conspiracy Corner: What are the drones over New Jersey!?
(57:36) Zuck joins team Elon against OpenAI, AI’s competitive landscape and downstream impact on business software
(1:27:29) Google’s AI turnaround, future of AI physics and video models
Follow the besties:
https://x.com/chamath
https://x.com/Jason
https://x.com/DavidSacks
https://x.com/friedberg
Follow Aaron Levie:
https://x.com/levie
Follow on X:
https://x.com/theallinpod
Follow on Instagram:
https://www.instagram.com/theallinpod
Follow on TikTok:
@theallinpod
Follow on LinkedIn:
https://www.linkedin.com/company/allinpod
Intro Music Credit:
https://rb.gy/tppkzl
https://x.com/yung_spielburg
Intro Video Credit:
https://x.com/TheZachEffect
Referenced in the show:
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/government-shutdown-continuing-resolution-march-14
https://x.com/Jason/status/1869816646954823916
https://docs.house.gov/billsthisweek/20241216/CR.pdf
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/government-shutdown-house-vote-continuing-resolution
https://x.com/KobeissiLetter/status/1869730547851051029
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/continuing-resolution-government-shutdown-2024
https://x.com/VivekGRamaswamy/status/1869407887983821089
https://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/fed58.asp
https://x.com/patrickc/status/1869422495985750459
https://x.com/chamath/status/1869773044832718917
https://x.com/SpeakerPelosi/status/1869871681830879256
https://x.com/RepJayapal/status/1869823494588162475
https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1869485580276629975
https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1869482581181554704
https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1869487359420727338
https://www.wsj.com/politics/biden-white-house-age-function-diminished-3906a839
https://www.cnbc.com/2024/12/19/faa-drone-flights-are-temporarily-banned-new-jersey.html
https://x.com/KanekoaTheGreat
https://x.com/AutismCapital
https://x.com/Geiger_Capital
https://www.cnbc.com/2024/09/27/openai-sees-5-billion-loss-this-year-on-3point7-billion-in-revenue.html
https://www.axios.com/2024/12/19/openai-bret-taylor-nonprofit-restructuring
https://openai.com/index/scale-the-benefits-of-ai
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/09/25/technology/mira-murati-openai.html
https://apnews.com/article/elon-musk-openai-lawsuit-sam-altman-chatgpt-36bc55dbb8b4f9e1e5675ff7564e5fa0
https://www.theverge.com/2024/12/13/24320880/meta-california-ag-letter-openai-non-profit-elon-musk
https://x.com/DailyPalantir/status/1869097046889882057
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-10-28/openai-cfo-says-75-of-its-revenue-comes-from-paying-consumers
https://x.com/GoogleDeepMind/status/1868703624714395907
https://x.com/_philschmid/status/1869639246434246966
This interactive media player was created automatically by Speak. Want to generate intelligent media players yourself? Sign up for Speak!
DOGE kills its first bill, Zuck vs OpenAI, Google’s AI comeback with bestie Aaron Levie Podcast Episode Top Keywords
DOGE kills its first bill, Zuck vs OpenAI, Google’s AI comeback with bestie Aaron Levie Podcast Episode Summary
In this episode of the All In Podcast, the hosts discuss a range of topics, from cryptocurrency investments to the evolving landscape of technology and governance. A notable experiment proposed involves investing 5% of a treasury, approximately $30 million, into Bitcoin, with plans to revisit the results in two weeks. The episode also highlights the acquisition of the allin.com domain and the launch of an email list for updates and event notifications.
The conversation touches on the concept of stablecoins and the potential for AI to transform various job roles, such as accountants and podcast producers, by creating AI-driven agents. The hosts discuss the implications of these technological advancements on business efficiency and pricing models, suggesting that companies could charge more for AI-enhanced services due to increased productivity.
A significant portion of the discussion revolves around governance and the role of technology in making legislative processes more transparent and accessible. The ability to quickly analyze and summarize large documents is seen as a way to empower citizens and create a more active form of government. The episode also addresses the controversy surrounding Elon Musk’s legal actions and the shifting market dynamics in the tech industry.
Recurring themes include the impact of AI on job markets, the importance of transparency in governance, and the cultural shift towards fiscal responsibility and efficiency. The episode concludes with a light-hearted acknowledgment of the hosts and a call for more candid discussions on hypocrisy in politics. Overall, the podcast emphasizes the transformative potential of technology in both business and governance, while also highlighting the need for accountability and transparency.
This summary was created automatically by Speak. Want to transcribe, analyze and summarize yourself? Sign up for Speak!
DOGE kills its first bill, Zuck vs OpenAI, Google’s AI comeback with bestie Aaron Levie Podcast Episode Transcript (Unedited)
Speaker: 0
00:00
JKEL, what just happened? Did you just have
Speaker: 1
00:01
a moment, an emotional moment?
Speaker: 0
00:02
I don’t know. You know, I’ve been trying to get over, Sai, and, it’s hard to get over your ex.
Speaker: 1
00:08
Even when they didn’t treat you well?
Speaker: 0
00:09
We were in a codependent relationship, and we were working on it.
Speaker: 1
00:13
You have no one to fight with anymore.
Speaker: 0
00:15
Who are
Speaker: 1
00:15
you gonna fight with, J. Cal? That’s the emptiness you feel inside because you’re a fighter. You’re a street brawler, and you have no one to brawl with anymore. So you feel
Speaker: 0
00:22
well, you’re the first guy to jump under the table in a bar fight. I mean,
Speaker: 1
00:27
there you go. There you go. As I was saying, it’s always worth
Speaker: 2
00:30
a certain amount.
Speaker: 0
00:31
If the if shit goes down, I feel like Sachs and I would have, like we would have thrown down. We’re bulldogs. We would fought ai tooth and nail. Okay. We’d be on the table to ai.
Speaker: 3
00:40
I have this I have this I have this image. It’s like we’re in a bar. Okay? And all of a sudden You
Speaker: 0
00:46
talking to me?
Speaker: 3
00:47
A fight is about to break out. Four thought bubbles appear. Okay? Ai like Jkow’s like, let’s go get him. Sacks is like, this guy this guy’s a dip let’s roll. I’m like, look at that chick. She’s so good looking. And then Friberg’s like, what will happen to my invite duck?
Speaker: 0
01:06
Freebird’s like, oh,
Speaker: 2
01:08
how do
Speaker: 0
01:08
I get out of
Speaker: 1
01:09
this unscathed? Yeah. That’s
Speaker: 0
01:12
perfect. Strike. You’ll
Speaker: 4
01:14
let your winner ride.
Speaker: 0
01:29
Alright, everybody. Welcome to the number one podcast in the world. With me again today, for better or worse, your sultan of science, David Friedberg, is back. How arya you doing, Friedberg? I see you’re a pawn, only a pawn in their game. What’s going on
Speaker: 2
01:46
with the
Speaker: 0
01:46
pawn background?
Speaker: 1
01:47
The imposter syndrome.
Speaker: 0
01:49
Pawn or queen? What is that from? Is that from a movie? What movie is that from?
Speaker: 1
01:54
It’s called the imposter syndrome. By
Speaker: 0
01:58
Just like some French new wave I’m not aware of, but somehow I
Speaker: 3
02:01
I’ve learned that Freebird’s background is some, like, weird secret communication language. There’s a small but fervent group of people that are really into these backgrounds. They’re always trying to figure something out. Absolutely.
Speaker: 0
02:13
Of course, with us again, Shamaf Palihapitiya, your chairman, dictator. How you doing, Shamaf? Nice to meet her.
Speaker: 3
02:19
Thank you, sir. Good to see you.
Speaker: 0
02:20
You ready for
Speaker: 3
02:22
Excited to see you.
Speaker: 0
02:23
I know. Look at this. 3 or 4 besties will be hitting the slopes.
Speaker: 3
02:26
3 or 4 besties will be skiing together.
Speaker: 1
02:28
Might be there. Aaron, where are you going for the holidays?
Speaker: 5
02:30
Oh, actually, I’m I’m, we’ll be in next week.
Speaker: 0
02:34
What? Well, there you go. New bestie in
Speaker: 3
02:36
Aaron, are you staying in the town? In the
Speaker: 5
02:38
Yeah. Just at the hotel.
Speaker: 3
02:40
Okay. This is perfect. We’re all gonna be there, bro.
Speaker: 0
02:43
It’s $2,000 a night. How many rooms you got with the kids and the fam? Do you have 3?
Speaker: 1
02:46
Bro, she
Speaker: 3
02:47
boxes at all time highs.
Speaker: 0
02:48
Make it easier. What did you do? Did you start buying Bitcoin with your treasury? How what do you mean boxes at an all time high? Are you, doing a Michael Sailor or something?
Speaker: 5
02:57
You know, it turns out if, if you were if you didn’t get crushed during the post COVID period, you can just keep keep cranking. So that’s what we’ve been doing.
Speaker: 0
03:06
Oh, you’ve been building a real business. Of course, with us now, our new 5th bestie, Aaron Levy. He is the CEO of the publicly traded company Box, which means he’s got the most to lose by coming here. So welcome
Speaker: 2
03:17
back to
Speaker: 0
03:17
the ram,
Speaker: 1
03:20
Centra Sai.
Speaker: 5
03:21
Based on what you guys were just talking about before this recording started, I have no idea what what, what we’re in for.
Speaker: 0
03:28
Yes. Listen. We’re living in an age of meme stocks and people selling convertible notes to buy Bitcoin for their treasury and and and then becoming a Nasdaq 100. It’s that simple. Aaron, when you see a company buy 1,000,000,000 of dollars worth of Bitcoin and get added to the Nasdaq 100, what method of suicide do you think of taking your own life with?
Speaker: 5
03:49
There was a there was a brief week in, in 2021 where, where where the thought kinda crossed my mind. So
Speaker: 0
03:55
Yes. Tupuku, you’re just gonna use the sword, the short blade?
Speaker: 5
03:59
We have a very, sophisticated audit committee that that prevented the action. So I,
Speaker: 2
04:05
Will you
Speaker: 0
04:06
do this for me? Yeah. Just do this for me. Take how much cash does Box have on the books? Ballpark.
Speaker: 5
04:12
Well, we just did a convert, so we’re probably 6, 700 6 or 700,000,000.
Speaker: 0
04:17
Okay. Here’s what I wanna do. A little experiment for next week. Just ai put 5% of the treasury, 30,000,000 in Bitcoin. And then you we’ll invite you back in 2 weeks. We’ll see what happens. Okay? Just put 5% of the treasury in Bitcoin. Hey, everybody.
Speaker: 0
04:29
Here’s another announcement, a little housekeeping. As you know, we successfully got the allin.comdomain. That was a big victory for us and, we now have an email list. So 4 years into this, Meshuggana, we now have the ability to take your email address and spam you with all kinds of great information ai a notification when the pod drops.
Speaker: 0
04:51
Wow. So compelling. Insights from the besties who you’ve had enough of and, first dibs on ai event tickets to come hang out with us. Wow. Do you this is the compelling pitch we have for giving us your emails.
Speaker: 0
05:07
So if you’d like to give us your email and get spam, go to all in.com and let the spam begin. Alright. That’s out of the way. Sachs is out again this week. I don’t know what’s going on. We’ve been trying to figure out where he is. He’s MIA.
Speaker: 0
05:21
If anybody knows
Speaker: 1
05:22
He’s in DC this week. Yeah?
Speaker: 0
05:24
Oh, is that what’s going on?
Speaker: 1
05:25
Did you see all the meetings?
Speaker: 0
05:28
I know. I’m being facetious. He’s he’s, he’s in meetings. Mister Sachs went to Washington. He’s creating waves, but mister Sachs is in Washington. And have you guys seen the photos? Aaron, what do you think of what do you
Speaker: 1
05:42
think of Sachs in this role?
Speaker: 5
05:45
I think it’s, I I think it’s a strong pick. So so sai
Speaker: 0
05:50
Let the genuflecting begin. Good. Same for, Aaron.
Speaker: 5
05:54
So crypto I’m a little bit indifferent on. You know, I I I I haven’t, you know, sort of we haven’t spent spent much time there or leaned in meh, but there but but on AI, I think it’s a very strong speak. And, I think you want somebody that is, you know, has a general sort of deregulation, anti regulation bent at this stage in the evolution of the technology.
Speaker: 5
06:21
I think there’s risk of of sort of slowing down too much progress right now, and I think that I think he’ll provide, you know, some good ai of parameters and principles around, around how to avoid that. So I I think very strong. And then, you know, crypto, again, don’t know don’t know too much about, and then we’ll we’ll see the rest of the topics.
Speaker: 1
06:38
As a software CEO
Speaker: 0
06:39
Yeah.
Speaker: 1
06:40
Of a public company, when the Biden administration was putting forward their proposals on how to regulate AI and have definitions on the size of a model and what the models could or shouldn’t do and the regulatory authority they would have over the software that’s written, What was your reaction? And you were supporting Harris at the time, I believe, or Biden at the time. Right? But, like, how did you react to that when you saw those proposals?
Speaker: 5
07:04
And just to be clear, are you talking about the EO that that went out?
Speaker: 1
07:08
Yeah. The there was the EO, but then they were also drafting. They they published a lot of detailed drafting. And then, obviously, California had its bill, which you probably saw as well, which specified, like, the number of parameters in a model, the size of a model, and
Speaker: 5
07:20
Yeah.
Speaker: 1
07:20
So vatsal kinda constraint.
Speaker: 5
07:22
In reverse order was was, against sai 1047. It it it felt like, you know, you had 2 big issues. 1, you probably don’t want state by state legislation on this topic. That that’s gonna be you’re in a world for of hurt if every state has a different approach to this. And then saloni secondarily, if you just look at how it evolved from the very first proposal to the final proposal, and unfortunately, the kinda underlying philosophy that was in the the bill, it was it was very clearly a sort of, like like viewing, you know, basically Ai progress as inherently risky right now.
Speaker: 5
07:54
And so it just ratcheted up the the different, you know, levels of consequence for the AI model developers. And and the risk is is is sort of the saloni or third order effects of that, which is like, does Zuck then wanna release the next version of llama if you’re taking on, you know, that much risk and and, you know, even the incremental updates, the liability you have Yeah.
Speaker: 5
08:16
A in terms of any of the model advancements. And so right now we’re benefiting from just an incredibly competitive market between 5 or 6 players, and you want them running as fast as possible, not having to have sort of this, you know, a whole council before every model gets released because they’re, they’re, you know, in fear of getting sued by, you know, the government for 100 of 1,000,000 of dollars, if one person does something wrong with the model.
Speaker: 5
08:38
So that was the problem with SB 10 47. That’s been the problem with some of the, the proposals on national legislation. I felt like the first CEO, it didn’t have a lot of teeth in it, so so it kinda was more ai let’s watch, you know, this space and continue to study it. The actual current head of s OSTP, Arya, Prabhakar, a lot of folks in Silicon Valley know her.
Speaker: 5
08:57
She’s actually very strong, very technical, understands the valley well, is not a sort of, does not lean into overregulation. So I actually think OSTP has had a pretty good steward, even under Biden. But but I think, you know, the the efforts that that Sai would, you know, clearly be leading, I think, would would lean even more toward AI progress and and and sort of not accidentally over regulating too early in, in this journey.
Speaker: 0
09:24
So let me ask you a question then about crypto. You’re not into crypto. Crypto is a little bit harder to regulate. So with Sachs being there, what do we think the 1, 2, or 3 things he could do to actually make crypto not a scam, not have consumers get left holding the bag, obviously, sandboxing projects, maybe having people know your customer, you know, some basic regulation there.
Speaker: 0
09:52
The sophisticated investor test comes to mind. Chamath, what do you think SAC should do in terms of crypto regulation in the short term and the near term?
Speaker: 3
10:01
That’s a really good question. I think that today, there are a lot of really valuable use cases that can sit on top of crypto rails. I think the most obvious one is how you can have real time payments using stable coins. I think the United States government is already using some of these stable coins for a bunch of purposes.
Speaker: 3
10:26
The number of companies that are beginning to adopt and use stable coins is actually growing very
Speaker: 0
10:32
Take a second to quickly ai stable coins for the audience just to to catch people up.
Speaker: 3
10:36
Let me define what a stablecoin is, which is that you put a dollar into a wallet somewhere, and in return, you get a digital token of that dollar. There are 2 big purveyors of stable coins. There’s Tether and then there’s USDC, which is this company called Circle. I think the easiest way to to disambiguate them is Tether is abroad. I think it’s run out of somewhere in the Caribbean. And USDC is American.
Speaker: 3
11:07
It’s run by this company called Circle. The other difference is that there is some ambiguity around how these assets are secured. So what a Stablecoin is supposed to do is when you give them a dollar, they’re supposed to go and buy some short term treasury security sai that that dollar is always guaranteed, right?
Speaker: 3
11:28
Because if they, if you had a $1,000,000,000 of Stablecoins, but only $900,000,000 of assets to back them up, there’s an insolvency risk there. There’s a run on the bank risk. Right? So theoretically, a $1,000,000,000 of stable coins should have a $1,000,000,000 of cash in some short term fungible security.
Speaker: 3
11:47
What’s incredible is at the scale in which these stable coins operate, that has turned out to be an enormous business. Why? When you give them a $1,000,000,000 and get a $1,000,000,000 of stable coins of return, they just go and put it into the bank. And, you know, when interest rates are 2, 3, 4, ai, they’re making 1,000,000,000 and 1,000,000,000 of dollars.
Speaker: 0
12:08
They get the float.
Speaker: 3
12:09
They get the float. So these businesses have turned out to be incredible, but that’s beyond the point. The point is that a lot of companies that you would never think so for example, SpaceX uses these stable coins. How how do you think they collect payments from all the Starlink customers when they aggregate them in all of these long tail countries?
Speaker: 3
12:27
They don’t wanna necessarily take the FX risk, the foreign exchange risk. They don’t wanna deal with sending wires. So what they do is they’ll swap into Stablecoin, send it back to the United States and then swap back to US dollars. So it’s a very useful utility. So number 1 is I think we need to make those rails the standard rails in the United States.
Speaker: 3
12:48
And what that does is it allows us to chip away at all of this decrepit infrastructure that the banks use to sort of slow down and tax a process that should never have been taxed.
Speaker: 0
13:01
So there’s good competition in a way, Chamath. It’s incredible. Now the banks have somebody to challenge them for money transfer and money storage, and it could be regulated and stable, but I guess
Speaker: 3
13:13
the
Speaker: 2
13:13
question yeah.
Speaker: 3
13:13
But that’s the that’s the first thing. But then the second thing it allows you to do is you you start you can see a world where now you can have real competition against the traditional rails, specifically Visa, Mastercard, American Express. Because when you look at great companies like Stripe, I use Stripe, I pay them 3%.
Speaker: 3
13:30
If I use Stablecoins from Stripe, I I don’t pay 0, but I don’t pay 3%. It’s ai somewhere in the middle. If I was technically adept at implementing stable coins through the entire stack of, of my product. So I, I use it for this learn with me thing where we publish research. I would save a lot of money.
Speaker: 3
13:51
So the idea that you can take that 300 basis points you pay to these companies and crush it to 0 would be a boon to global GDP because that’s 3% on many tens of 1,000,000,000,000 of dollars.
Speaker: 0
14:06
Aaron, you’re shaking your head. This is, something that you’re you’re experimenting with at Box or you’re aware of or a problem that you, recognize. No. No. Just the I
Speaker: 5
14:14
mean, the credit card rails is I mean, the tax on on transactions is obviously insane. So so the the stable coin being the intermediary for that in the future makes total sense if you could get everybody to kinda coordinate against that. So yeah.
Speaker: 0
14:28
Well, in regulating, it would get people off of Tether, hopefully, which has a checkered, colorful, sorted pass. You can go look it up. But they’ve had many, many legal
Speaker: 3
14:37
But I think, again, I think it looks
Speaker: 2
14:39
like ai
Speaker: 1
14:39
against them. I’ll leave it at that.
Speaker: 3
14:40
Yeah. Yeah. But in fairness to them, I think, again, both of these two companies look as of today. Again, you have a jurisdictional issue difference. But as of today, it looks like they’re both pegged one for 1. But anyways, the point is if if Sai can really push the adoption of stable coins, number 1, and then number 2 is to incentivize much, much cheaper transactional rails, then I think he can go to Bitcoin and these other more long tail crypto projects off of the back of momentum.
Speaker: 3
15:13
Because these first two things, I think everybody will embrace and he won’t get caught in a political quagmire. These other things, you have these opponents always coming into the system and they have even Bitcoin. Like when I said this thing about encryption and quantum, and even though I, I thought I was very clear, the crypto community on the Internet went absolutely crazy all last week.
Speaker: 3
15:38
Yeah. Shah on arya and yeah. But the thing is ai some of the maxis piled on, then when they actually took time to understand the technicalities of what I was saying, other people realized that was right, that they were tweeting it. My point is that world is so Religious. Animated and energized that I think it’s hard to use them as the first place where you find progress.
Speaker: 3
15:59
So I would tell Sachs Got it. Go to stable coins, then disrupt the Visa rails and then go to the other stuff.
Speaker: 0
16:05
I would go stable coins and I would go even before that the accreditation test that I’ve been talking about because the Sai has that mandate. If people were educated, Aaron, they could buy crypto and know they’re gonna lose their money or know that something’s so fugazi or fugazy, whatever it is.
Speaker: 5
16:22
Yeah. I mean, Sai, I I’m I’m sure we sana move on, but I I guess the so there there’s a there’s a a a parallel universe where where so no matter what, like, obviously, Gensler did not get his arms around this whole thing. So so that that was a big big mistake. But there’s sort of ai like ai slash financial crypto where where almost everything is is deflationary.
Speaker: 5
16:45
It it improves the rails. It you know, if you believe in Bitcoin as this, you know, store of value and digital gold, like, all of those things can actually kinda make sense and and be a bit rational and, like, improve things. And then, you know you know, unfortunately or not, depending on your views, there was this other sort of, you know, ram fractal event that happened, which was, oh, let’s also use these things as a a means of of kinda creating, a virtual, you know, currency and and and toke and equities and and tokens for anything where that then runs into basically the Meh remit of, like, are these things securities or not?
Speaker: 5
17:22
And, is there insider trading or not? And can anybody issue them at any time and promote them on Twitter or not? And so so, you know, I think to some extent, if you could get back to, like, crypto 1.0, which was like, this is a this is a financial infrastructure. I I think you would have avoided a lot of the sort of noise and challenges with, with crypto. Now, I don’t know.
Speaker: 5
17:40
You can’t put the, you know, you can’t put it back in the bag, but, but there’s like, I don’t think you could get 10 crypto people to agree on how you regulate that saloni category, because some people, some people believe I should be able to issue an NFT on anything and I should be able to bryden that.
Speaker: 5
17:55
And, and, and at the same time they would obviously, they would sort of claim, well, that’s just the same as, as an aftermarket, you know, seat to a concert. And yet another group would, would be treating this as, as effectively, you know, a security. And so you you’ll I don’t know how you’re ever gonna reel that in without some people being upset, you know, within the crypto community.
Speaker: 0
18:15
Alright. Well, more to come, and Sachs will be back. Sachs will be back, and we will be rotating the 5th seat amongst, you know, friends of the pod and newsmakers.
Speaker: 5
18:25
Sorry. Did I already did I already get rotated out, based on
Speaker: 0
18:28
Well, yeah. Basically, the energy was a little low, but, you know, I mean, it’s just I think well, what’s your
Speaker: 5
18:34
You already had to warn me.
Speaker: 0
18:35
What’s your resting heart rate? What’s your resting heart rate versus Brebois? And then we’ll just make a decision. Okay. I got it. I got it. Alright. Listen. Doge is fully operational. Elon and Vivek have helped kill the last minute omnibus spending bill. Wednesday night, the bill had been killed, and we were looking at the government shutting down starting Friday, December 20th, today when you were listening to this.
Speaker: 0
19:01
For some quick background, in September, Congress approved a bill that would keep the government funded through December 20th, the day this episode published. Keep that December date in mind for a second. This Tuesday, December 17th, 3 days before the deadline, leaders in Congress unveiled what was presented as a bipartisan stopgap bill that would keep the government funded through March 14th.
Speaker: 0
19:23
That kind of bill is called a continuing resolution. Basically, it’ll give you more time for the incoming GOP majority to reach an agreement on the funding for the government. But there are 2 major problems with the bill. It’s a rush job. It had to pass the house and the senate by Friday night after being presented on Tuesday.
Speaker: 0
19:41
It’s absurdly long, 1500 pages with $340,000,000,000 in spending, including pay raises and better health care benefits for the members of Congress. My lord, read the room, gentlemen and ladies. Funding for a global engagement center for another year. That’s the, disinformation watchdog group that was wrapped up in the Twitter ai, a 130,000,000,000 to renew the ram bill for another year, a $110,000,000,000 in hurricane disaster aid, just money being thrown everywhere, a 1,000,000,000 to replace the Francis Scott Key Bridge in Baltimore.
Speaker: 0
20:13
Vivek had some spicy comments on it. Congress has known about the deadline since they created it in late September. He said the urgency is a 100% manufactured and designed to avoid serious public debate. But serious public debate is exactly what’s happening on Twitter. People are screenshotting and using chatgpt and Claude and and, Gemini to work their way through these documents, and it looks like this is not gonna happen. Freeburg, your thoughts?
Speaker: 1
20:41
So the proposed bill made no real change to the current spending level of the federal government at roughly $6,200,000,000,000 on an annualized basis, which ai the way is roughly, call it, 23% of GDP. Just to give you some context, in 18/60, nearly a 100 years after the founding of the United States government, federal spending to GDP was less than 1%.
Speaker: 1
21:07
And it took off during the civil war, for a couple of years. But, you know, we’re at these kind of, like, unprecedented levels year after year now, really speaking to how the federal government has grown as we talked about many times so much in our life. And, you know, at some
Speaker: 5
21:25
Our roads were really bad back then, though.
Speaker: 1
21:27
Meh. Yeah. Our our roads were were really bad back then, but Lots
Speaker: 0
21:30
of problems. Yeah.
Speaker: 1
21:31
But meh, the objective of the republic was to have the states make local decisions about how to take care of their infrastructure. The national highway effort obviously changed that in the, the the mid 20th century. But this was kind of the original intention of the republic.
Speaker: 1
21:47
It wasn’t to have the federal government come in and employ people, provide, insurance to people, provide energy markets to people, own football stadiums, etcetera, etcetera, etcetera. You go through the list of things in this bill. I think the $100,000,000,000 of natural disaster relief, everyone says that seems very reasonable.
Speaker: 1
22:07
That’s something the federal government should do. When we have a natural disaster, we need help. We need support. That’s a great thing for the federal government to do. But think about the incentive it creates. It distorts markets. So we’ve talked about this in the past.
Speaker: 1
22:19
In areas where you have a higher probability of natural disasters and people have paid a lot of money for their homes, pay a lot of money for infrastructure, should the federal government come in and rebuild those homes and provide capital to those individuals and those businesses to help them rebuild those homes if there’s a high probability of natural disaster events happening again in the future.
Speaker: 1
22:38
It means that the cost of insurance doesn’t matter and the cost of real estate doesn’t matter because the federal government effectively can come in and support those prices. In the same way, the federal comes in government comes in and supports the prices in agricultural products through the work in the farm bill and through the biofuels mandates, which were also proposed to be extended in this thing.
Speaker: 1
22:56
So the federal government’s playing both a market role and, you know, also kind of this role that I think fills the gap where people wanna have a customer where there isn’t a customer and an employer where there isn’t one. So, like, how did we get to this point? So to reverse principles perspective, we’ve kind of, I think, lost the narrative on what the federal government was meant to do.
Speaker: 1
23:16
If you think about the simple rubric in a bill, like, just go back some period of time and someone says, hey. I I want something. I wanna have this in this bill. And you’re the representative that’s supposed to vote on that bill and say yes or no. It’s very hard to just say no.
Speaker: 1
23:30
We are not gonna spend that money. What’s the incentive to say no? The alternative is you say yes, but give me x as well. There is an incentive in that response. And the incentive there is to get something for your electorate, the people that voted you in as a representative of the house, which is how we ended up at this point where everyone sai, I want something if you’re gonna get something.
Speaker: 1
23:53
And eventually, the government the federal government swells to spending roughly 24% of our GDP. Now the biggest mistake Ai think the founding fathers made was that they didn’t create constitutional limits on spending and enrichment. And this was because they had these deeply held philosophical beliefs that relied on the house of representatives to provide a check by the people.
Speaker: 1
24:14
If you read the federalist papers, and I went through a couple of these recently, and I used chat gpt to help me kind of, you know, bring out some ai, I think, the the key points. But in The Federalist Papers 10 51, James Madison emphasized that the structure of government was meant to ensure that both state and federal governments would limit each other’s excesses, including their financial ones.
Speaker: 1
24:34
And then in The Federalist Paper number 58, he said, the house of representatives has control over the, quote, power of the purse, which gives the people’s representatives authority over taxation and spending. But they also warned saloni with Alexander Hamilton of the dangers of unchecked government power through burdensome taxation and excess spending, which would ultimately erode individual freedoms.
Speaker: 1
24:58
So they ai that there were gonna be limits, but their expectation was that the house and the individuals that were electing people to the house that were members of this republic would come in and say, we’re gonna keep that from happening. And clearly, something went wrong along the way that we got to this point where, again, spending is 24% of GDP.
Speaker: 1
25:16
And I think that the biggest thing they got wrong was that they didn’t create these constitutional limits on federal spending or taxation through either a balanced budget, structure, spending as a percent of GDP, no federal debt or term limits, or all of these other mechanisms that could have been introduced at the beginning that could have created some structural limits.
Speaker: 1
25:36
Instead, they assume that there was this natural limit that would emerge as a function of the democratic process because of how they formed the government. But, unfortunately, I think they failed to realize that the electorate would eventually not want the freedoms of the people of the time.
Speaker: 1
25:53
Back then in 17/76, this was a pioneering country where everyone wanted to come here to have freedom to do anything they wanted, everywhere they wanted to build a business, to homestead, to be, rugged individuals.
Speaker: 0
26:06
It was entrepreneurial.
Speaker: 1
26:07
Yeah. It was. And over the last 250 years, we’ve gotten used to an increment in lifestyle every year and discovered that we have a mechanism to force the increment in lifestyle through the actions of government. And so the electorate has stood stood up and said, I want more each year and I want the government to provide it for me if the free markets are not doing it.
Speaker: 1
26:28
And that’s really where we kinda got to this point where I think we elected people to the house who ultimately had this incentive that said, if I give you this, I need to get this. And we ended up swallowing this. So I I don’t know if it cracks with Doge. I really don’t know if people step up and recognize the limits of of government and what the limit should be of the federal government on an electorate basis.
Speaker: 1
26:48
It’s an amazing moment to see that Elon went on Twitter and said, hey, guys. This is nuts. And everyone said this is nuts. We’re not gonna elect you if you do this. If that momentum and that transparency can keep up, I hope that people start to connect the dots that this isn’t a free lunch, that the federal government spending is not limitless and it’s not unaccountable.
Speaker: 0
27:05
Aaron, I think we have enough people who are notable now speaking up about this excess spending and the out of control debt, that it’s now in vogue to talk about austerity, to talk about inefficiency. And that really all comes back to Doge and, dare I say, you know, the conversations we’ve been having this podcast for 2 years that this is becoming acute.
Speaker: 0
27:30
What are your thoughts on this vibe shift, this complete pivot Yeah. Where we’ve gone ram, my lord, everybody’s saying, I gotta get mine. You got yours. I’m getting mine. To name and shame. They’re naming and shaming now very specific pieces of pork in these bills, you know, including stadiums for the NFL.
Speaker: 0
27:51
And people are like, why is the NFL getting this if they’re worth 20, 30, $40,000,000,000?
Speaker: 5
27:55
2 just quick thoughts. 1, Patrick Carlson had a had a tweet yesterday that basically said this sort of this the this big misinformation kinda created by by people that wanna be slow is that you you you have to sort of choose 2 of fast, good, and cheap. And and I think basically, you know, Elon’s companies have sort of always effectively ai of proven the opposite, which is, which is actually, if you just like start to ask the question, like, why does that thing have to cost as much?
Speaker: 5
28:23
You know, if you’re building a rocket or or designing a car or developing batteries, ai, why, you know, if you just do ground up, why does that have to cost as much? And so so what’s interesting is is that that probably if most people looked at what the government was spending on, they wouldn’t even feel like like, you know, it’s not even helping them in, like, the disaster relief sense of of, you know, I think, like, that either are probably actually people that actually do experience the benefits of disaster relief.
Speaker: 5
28:47
It’s actually just all of the all of the overhead that we’ve created to getting anything done in the government that could actually make the government better serve the all of all of the constituents. I was talking to, you know, sort of a nameless in individual in the government the other, the other week where by congress, they have to hire contractors to do work.
Speaker: 5
29:06
And the contractors the contracting firms charge them 2 and a half times the the the sort of cost of of an individual employee that they could otherwise hire. And so, and so now, now they have to outsource the work and they don’t have, any accountability mechanism for that contractor.
Speaker: 5
29:22
And so I think there’s not a single American that could look at that and say, and say, this is like actually working well. Like w ai we arya spending more money to do less and the ultimate outcome is actually lower quality. And so, so you have to, at some point, just kind of do a little bit of a reset moment.
Speaker: 5
29:40
And that’s obviously the ai of doge is like, it’s like it breaks every rule of us thinking about how, how you would actually go and attack this problem. We thought you’d attack it through meetings. And, and we would do it through, through congressional, you know, sort of processes and research.
Speaker: 5
29:54
And it’s actually just, it is, you know, obviously a much more sort of founder startup oriented way to approach this. There’s gonna be lots of things that are broken glass around the edges. There’s there’s no question. But I think what’s interesting about this week’s event is Ai think that there’s been this underlying kind of notion of like, you know, e Elon and and and whatnot at all, you know, don’t understand the the government enough to be able to change it.
Speaker: 5
30:18
And it might actually be the case that the government doesn’t understand Elon in the sense of of, like, he will just see this thing through, And the tools at his disposal and Doge’s disposal is is sort of, you know, completely unprecedented in terms of the ability to put any anybody in congress on notice if, you know, if basically they’re promoting things that that are not making the the country better.
Speaker: 5
30:40
So so that, that, the re you know, the thing that we saw this week was actually that playing out, everybody’s been wondering, well, what are the vatsal, you know, what, what are the formal mechanisms Doge has to accomplish and enact change? And it’s like, you just saw it. Like they can just, they can just create enough visibility and spotlight on the problem that it, it causes it a level of discomfort in, in supporting moving forward with, with whatever that thing is.
Speaker: 5
31:03
And so I think it’s interesting. Ai no opinion on the actual elements of the bill other than from a a a process standpoint and a and a new kind of case study of of how this is gonna play out is I think we’re seeing some early indication of what Doge will will be able to do.
Speaker: 1
31:17
Aaron, how do you feel about this Doge effort as someone who is a public Harris supporter? So you you’ve come out. I think you’ve you’ve been public about this. But I wanna understand, like, why people wouldn’t be supportive of this effort. Right? Like like, what is, like, what is the motivation for people saying this isn’t a good thing. We shouldn’t be doing this.
Speaker: 1
31:38
Like, because there’s a lot of folks that have gone on these shows. It’s ai they they they blast Elon. They blast Vivek. But, like, aren’t these principles like, shouldn’t they just be universal that we should not be wasting money and stuff?
Speaker: 0
31:51
Sure. Of course.
Speaker: 5
31:52
The Ai meh, so to give some credit, you know, you have Ro Sana, supporting it. You have, Fetterman supporting it. Bernie Sanders. Everybody has their Yeah.
Speaker: 1
32:01
Bernie Sanders had a good call out for Elon.
Speaker: 5
32:03
You have everybody has their thing in the government budget that they don’t ai. So assuming that they see that as something Doge can contribute to, you could probably get actually broad support. You know, there’s a classic, you know, sort of reflex within within probably Democrat party on on at this point, just because of Elon’s support of Trump, that that if something is a is an Elon project, they’re gonna the they’re certainly gonna instantly respond no matter what the thing is, as a negative without, you know, kind of actually saying, is this does this actually support actually something I do agree with?
Speaker: 5
32:33
And so that’s
Speaker: 0
32:34
all far to say none of its first principles. Right? Yeah. Which is which is people.
Speaker: 5
32:38
But For this group of
Speaker: 0
32:39
people, which isn’t everybody.
Speaker: 5
32:40
That’s gonna be true of both sides. Like, Michelle Obama Michelle Obama was ai, let’s get kids healthy, and all of a sudden, now it’s en vogue to do that. So so I I think I think we’re just in an environment where where any anything will become partisan. What’s interesting is is that because of the, you know, some of the the cross party elements of of of Trump and now his cabinet is it might pull in more more of the Democrat party than than would usually happen.
Speaker: 5
33:05
And and I think because of Elon and the people that are sound surrounding Trump, you probably have a bit more air cover for the Roanas of the world to also step up. Because if it was ai Steve Bannon and Trump doing Doge, it would be like, ah, okay. You know, maybe this is not the thing to to, you know, lend credibility to for for pure political reasons.
Speaker: 5
33:23
If you have, you know, some of the best entrepreneurs that are that are out there actually, like, literally in the cabinet driving this, vatsal some point, you know, it’s it is an IQ test if you’re if you’re on board or not.
Speaker: 0
33:34
Chamath, this is a a sea change that we’re seeing. And to Aaron’s point, this administration gets to pick their priorities, but everything can’t be a priority or it’s not a priority. Therefore, they’ve picked the priority of smaller government, more controlled spending over, say, mass deportation or removing more rights from women to choose when they have an abortion, etcetera.
Speaker: 0
33:55
So this seems like a distinctly different focus for Trump 2 point o, the saloni term. What are your thoughts on what we saw this past 730 minutes in relation to this bill?
Speaker: 3
34:06
It was the most incredible change in how politics will be done going forward. I think that people are probably underestimating what happened here. This was a $100,000,000,000 grift that was stopped on a dime over 130 minutes of tweets. You would have never thought that that was possible.
Speaker: 3
34:33
The point is to put a dagger in something that big that had so much broad support just a few hours earlier, I think it’s so consequential in how the United States can run going forward.
Speaker: 0
34:48
So building on what you said, Chamath, also very interesting here is the fact that Trump hasn’t taken office yet and they’re having this huge impact. This is occurring a month before he’s even in office. If they can stop this, what will they do when they actually are in power?
Speaker: 3
35:04
I think right now you’re seeing the first order reaction, which is about the bill itself, and I think that misses the point. The bigger issue is going forward, you will have the ability to and part of it is because we have a set of tools now that allows us to do this, to read 1500 pages in a matter of minutes, to summarize it into the key essential elements, to really understand what’s being asked and what’s being offered, and then to put it in a digestible format that normal people can consume.
Speaker: 3
35:37
Yes. Then all you’ll have to do is just connect the dots and tell your congressman or congresswoman that you’d like or dislike this thing, and what you’re gonna see is a much more active form of government. And I think that’s the really big deal. The fact that it’s it really becomes the voice of the people. Now the alternative can also happen.
Speaker: 3
35:56
Imagine there is a piece of legislation that is very controversial, but it turns out that people actually want it. Then the opposite will also happen and can also happen now. So I think that it’s a very nuanced and interesting way that governance can happen. The other thing that I’ll say though, which is funny is we should have a segment called today in hypocrisy.
Speaker: 3
36:18
And if I was running the segment, what I would say is today in hypocrisy, you have a group of people, Ai e the Democrats, who are very upset and who now point to Elon as sort of ai some shadow cabinet minister or some shadow president-elect or some shadow first buddy. Right?
Speaker: 0
36:39
First buddy. Yeah. I love
Speaker: 3
36:41
that. Except then I thought to myself, well, hold on a second. Like, there was, like, some something untoward happening in the shadows, and I thought, well, actually, this is the exact opposite. The guy is tweeting in real time his stream of consciousness. You absolutely know everything that he wants because he just lays it all bare.
Speaker: 3
36:58
And at the same time, I thought it was really interesting. The same people who were saying that were the ones that finally admitted that they were hiding Biden for the last 2 years. Mhmm. And I thought, did we just miss this? Like, the same people that are like, hold on, Elon.
Speaker: 3
37:12
I don’t like the fact you’re telling us what you actually want on Twitter transparently ai we hide our president of the United States in a box.
Speaker: 0
37:21
Well, yeah. So you’re referring to a Wall Street Journal story that broke, more
Speaker: 3
37:26
This week in hypocrisy, Jason. Take it away.
Speaker: 0
37:28
Yeah. I mean, it was just as we said on this pod, we knew that they were hiding him. Now the cover up is worse than the crime and the cover up is a cover up. They were not letting him take meetings. They were limiting access to him. Dean b Phillips came on this program. Shout out to him. Congratulations ai a great run. You know, he he just told tyler the truth here.
Speaker: 0
37:50
He’s not up for it. He’s sundowning, you know, terrible situation. People get old and people have cognitive decline. The end.
Speaker: 3
37:59
Question. Hold on a second. So just to get contrast and compare. Trump is not even in office. You know? Elon is not a member of the cabinet per se. These are effectively today still private citizens. When there’s all of this noise about what happened over the last 2 days to stop an absolutely ridiculous pork barrel bill.
Speaker: 3
38:19
But when are we gonna double click into what decisions have been made in the last 2 years that were actually Biden’s versus surrogates that just ai? And who gave them the authority to make those decisions?
Speaker: 0
38:30
If they’re gonna do, Aaron, and you and I are left leaning moderates, I think that would be the most accurate way to describe us. I mean, if they sana do an investigation, there should be an investigation to did they know that he was in massive cognitive decline and let him stay in charge of the nuclear codes?
Speaker: 0
38:47
Do you agree or disagree?
Speaker: 5
38:50
This is, this is sort of not not the part of politics I I think about as much, so I’ll I’ll leave that up to you as the other less leaning moderate. So yeah.
Speaker: 0
38:58
No. I just wonder if, like, this is a crime that they like, what if it turns out he actually has Parkinson’s or Alzheimer’s? Like, a diagnosis. It’s not out of the realm of possibility that they covered up an Alzheimer diagnosis, Jamoff. And if they did, is that criminal? I mean, it’s unethical.
Speaker: 3
39:18
It’s deeply unethical. Yeah. It’s very dangerous. Yes. Again, it just goes back to the people elected Joe Biden. He won fair and square. He ran on a specific mandate that the people endorsed. I just think it it’s devious though that certain figures in that White House took a level of power and decision making authority that they were never entitled to.
Speaker: 3
39:43
If if they wanted that, they should have run and they should have been elected. That’s what we all ai up for. And so I think that that idea that we let that happen or that that happened to the American voting public is, I think, very unfair. That’s why I think you have to realize that, and you’ve said this before, we need these checks and balances going forward.
Speaker: 3
40:05
And I think the way that you had these checks and balances again is veer towards transparency. The more transparency there is. And again, this is where I’ll say you may or you may or may not like Donald Trump, but the one thing you will never have to be worried about is whether you will not be able to hear from him in first person.
Speaker: 1
40:26
You’re gonna hear from him.
Speaker: 3
40:28
That is absolutely true. I mean, simple suggestion here, Chamath. If you’re ever in doubt, you will be able to know very quickly where he stands on whatever topic is important to you. And I think that that idea is very important because then if it’s filtered through somebody else because of some health issue that’s then covered up, we’re making decisions that impact the entire world.
Speaker: 3
40:50
We’re making decisions that impacts the economy. We’re making decisions that touch 100 of millions of American lives. Who are making those decisions?
Speaker: 0
40:58
Yeah. It’s kinda crazy. I I have a simple suggestion here with these bills, by the way, when they’re 1500 pages. How about for every 100 pages you release, you have one day of review. So if you wanna release 1500 pages, 15 business days review, does that sound reasonable? Maybe 3 weeks and then just stop doing 1500 at a time. Break these things up into 2 or 300 pages at a time.
Speaker: 0
41:19
I just love the fact that people are motivated and they have the will and the desire to focus on these focus and desire because people have to have the will and people did not have the will to get in the weeds and examine the spending. And now it’s becoming, like, in vogue. It’s becoming a pastime to question the spending. This is a really great moment in time for America.
Speaker: 3
41:42
The other thing, Jason, that we haven’t done is I think that killing the bill was step 1. Mhmm. The thing that America has not yet seen and I think Aaron brought this up with the Patrick Collison tweet, which is just excellent, Nick, if you just wanna put it up there. It’s it it really is true. America still believes that the more you spend, the more you get. We do at the core.
Speaker: 3
42:05
That’s why there are 1500 pages of spending in here because people want things because they want things to be better. What we need to train people to understand is actually that it’s the lies that are told that make you think that with more money comes a better outcome.
Speaker: 5
42:22
And we
Speaker: 0
42:23
see it every day
Speaker: 3
42:23
in Silicon Valley. We all start with next to nothing as a startup and we outmaneuver and we out execute companies all day long with way more resources. So it has nothing to do with the resources.
Speaker: 0
42:35
Contraint leads to great art. Aaron, your thoughts?
Speaker: 5
42:37
No. I mean, I I can’t add that much more to this. I think it’s there there’s probably a little bit of a a disconnected times from the, let’s say, the the voting public and and, you know, broad constituents from then those that have sort of seen this in real life being in inside of a company, having to, you know, do a startup and scaling up and and just this, the the perverse incentives to build bigger teams, spend more your project then is more important, the more dollars it gets.
Speaker: 5
43:05
We have all of these systems in place, which is the stuff that gets attention are the things that you speak more on. So you have all these weird incentives to actually have your thing literally cost more, to have, you know, more overhead because you’ve brought in more contractors into the project that then, you know, you’re gonna get some, you know, kind of future benefit from in some way.
Speaker: 5
43:25
So you you have a lot that that is sort of fully broken in this and, and there’s no there’s there’s you know, it’s hard to imagine any other way to veer off from that path other than something that does shake things up, you know, as meh as Doge is doing.
Speaker: 0
43:39
Alright. Listen. We can’t do any worse than being massively in debt, so just let’s have a culture
Speaker: 1
43:44
of Yes.
Speaker: 3
43:44
We can. No. Yes. We can. You could have you could have runaway debt.
Speaker: 5
43:48
Yeah. I know ai.
Speaker: 0
43:49
Already have that. I mean, we this is for for people who maybe are rooting against Trump in the audience or rooting against this because they’re super arya. All I’ll say is I know these individuals around Trump. Root for them and root for this process, please, because this is a path to fixing the most acute existential problem we have, which is our debt.
Speaker: 0
44:09
You don’t have to like Trump to like Elon, to like Vivek, and to like these other individuals, Sachs included. There are great people who are being called to serve. Let’s judge them based on their performance. That’s all I ask for the people who hate Trump, who hate these individuals. Judge them on their performance.
Speaker: 0
44:28
They’ve come out with a bold plan. Let them cook. Once they’ve cooked, then judge their results. That is what I’m telling everybody who hates Trump and who hates this administration and who’s partisan on the other side. Let them cook, judge the results.
Speaker: 5
44:42
I’ll just throw out one more one more thing on this because I think Doge is the the branding of Doge is is often the efficiency side, which people always go to the the the spend side. But the corollary to that is the regulations that that obviously are expensive to maintain, and and that’s what creates layers and layers of overhead on reviewing everything that’s coming in then to the government.
Speaker: 5
45:04
And, and unfortunately we have great examples in California where literally we spend more to do less, And, and it’s because we’ve ratcheted up these layers and layers of regulation. And I have friends literally doing climate meh in, in like climate tech. You couldn’t imagine something more probably left leaning Democrat that they can’t actually get things done in California, the state that, that you would imagine to be the most kind of climate first friendly state because of the amount of regulation that prevents them from getting things done.
Speaker: 5
45:35
So, so, you know, it there’s, there’s actually this ai, you know, total combination of actually fewer regulations. You’ll spend less money in government. You’ll actually grow the economy faster, which will create more jobs. Like, all of the things get solved the more efficient you get, you know, kind of, you know, writ large on all of the topics.
Speaker: 0
45:54
So this is spending. Great point, Aaron. Regulation’s next. Let’s see what they do there. I was in the room when Antonio Gracias was doing 0 based budgeting at Twitter, now x, and Sachs and I were looking at roles for people. What the what this team can do in terms of making things more efficient, it’s amazing what can happen when you do 0 based budgeting and when you just think from first principles, well, do we even need to do this?
Speaker: 0
46:22
Does this need to exist? Take all these regulations, put a 20 year clock on half of them, a 10 year clock on the other half.
Speaker: 5
46:29
Can can I just get
Speaker: 0
46:30
one one more random example? Feel free to
Speaker: 5
46:31
edit it out. Chamath, you ai this because it came out of meh. Do do you have you followed the z standard compression library ram Meh? So this open source library kind of a next gen compression on, on data. And we finally, it took us probably too long, but, but the team worked insanely hard, implemented this compression algorithm. We literally, our uploads and downloads got faster.
Speaker: 5
46:52
We spend less money on, on networking and compute. And, it, you know, it took some re engineering of the system, but like it, like that’s just not a concept that people go into problem solving with, which is like, what if the thing actually was cheaper to run and it was bryden?
Speaker: 5
47:06
And so think about all the systems of government that could be that could just be upgraded, and then you would spend less money actually maintaining them. I mean, we spend, you know, 100 of 1,000,000,000 of dollars, way way too much on legacy infrastructure technology. We could automate more.
Speaker: 5
47:19
You could spend way less money and then get better outcomes. So this is just happening everywhere, and and I don’t think people realize the the scale of the the opportunity.
Speaker: 0
47:27
So Ai I’ll I’ll just give an example. When we went into Twitter, nobody was coming to the office. There were people who hadn’t committed who hadn’t come to the office, who hadn’t committed code in 6 months. So what were they doing? Right? So you start looking at the data. Then they were spending an enormous amount of money on SaaS software that nobody had logged into.
Speaker: 0
47:45
And then they had desk software to route people around. That was costing $10 per day, per desk, per, you know, location, whatever. Nobody was coming to the office, but they were paying for software to route people to the right desk in office suiteing. The waste when I tell you the waste and the grift, and I’ll just call it what my interpretation is stealing, They were stealing from those shareholders.
Speaker: 0
48:10
The government is stealing from taxpayers. It has to be fixed. Let our boys cook. Freeburg, you get the final word before we go on to conspiracy corner. You got nothing? Alright. Let’s go straight to conspiracy corner. Everybody put your tinfoil hats on. There were drones over New Jersey. Thursday morning, the FAA banned drones.
Speaker: 0
48:30
This is breaking news in parts of New Jersey until January 17th due to, quote, unquote, breaking news, special security reasons. They also warned that the government may respond with deadly force against drones posing a threat. This thing is getting crazier by the day. There have been thousands of reported drone sightings in New Jersey and bordering states over the last week. Here’s some examples. Play the clip, yada yada.
Speaker: 0
48:54
Until Thursday morning, White House officials have been dismissive, saying repeatedly that nothing significant is going on. One of the theories was that there was a that the drones were looking for nuclear material, Sana a dirty bomb or lost radioactive material or the the ultimate, a lost nuclear bomb ram, like, an actual nuclear warhead from Ukraine.
Speaker: 0
49:19
On Tuesday morning, the mayor of Belleville, New Jersey suggested the drones could be looking for that radioactive material that went missing on December 2nd. That was radioactive material, germanium 68. We’ll get details on that from Freeburg in a moment. And then, of course, conspiracy theories are going wild. It’s Iran. It’s UFOs.
Speaker: 0
49:38
And my favorite, Project Blue Beam, which is that NASA is using holograms and other technology to create a new world order and religion and projecting Jesus into the clouds. You can look that stuff up, or we’ll have Alex Jones on, in Vatsal’ seat one week. Okay, Freeberg. You’re the genius here. Tell us what’s going on.
Speaker: 1
49:56
I think there are 3 likely explanations. The first is that the government’s got some activities that can’t be disclosed. So we don’t know, and they can’t talk about it. No one can either, you know, say yes or say no to it. So, you know, that’s kind of one that that’s pretty possible.
Speaker: 1
50:10
The second is these are just individuals with a bunch of drones messing around, having fun, trying to wreak havoc. Could be fun. Bunch of ai, I think we’ve all been there. The third is what I would call kind of a bit of a more nefarious, like, this is my conspiracy theory. I think it it could be considered a psyop. Okay. So right now, the US has a significant regulatory burden on on drone utilization in a commercial setting.
Speaker: 1
50:39
And it’s very hard to use drones. You have to have line of sight to the operator. These things aren’t supposed to go on their own. There’s all these rules and restrictions and so on and so forth. Meanwhile, you’ve got countries like China rocketing ahead.
Speaker: 1
50:50
So I don’t know if you guys know the company Meituan in Ai. You know, the food delivery company? Mhmm.
Speaker: 2
50:55
Have
Speaker: 1
50:55
you ai, did you know that they do a large amount of drone delivery of their food now?
Speaker: 0
50:59
I was not aware of that. Yeah. We’re testing that here in the US. Yeah.
Speaker: 1
51:02
The drone delivery business in China is already $30,000,000,000 a year. And they’re also launching a pretty significant fleet of what we would call kind of the eVTOLs or flying cars. The expectation is that by 2030, there’ll be a 100,000 flying cars moving people around in China. And these are huge efficiency gains.
Speaker: 1
51:21
In fact, with Meituan, you can now order food while you’re on the great wall at one of the ramparts and it’ll bring the drone will bring the food to you while you’re walking the great wall as a tourist. And in the US, the reason that these things haven’t taken off and the reason we don’t have a large kind of drone industry, which is clearly emerging is gonna be a huge economic driver for China and others around the world, is simply the regulatory restrictions.
Speaker: 1
51:42
And so if you were gonna try and mess with the US’s ability to move forward with the drone economy, you would probably try and wreak some havoc, stoke some fear, and get people to say, hey. This doesn’t seem cool. What’s going on? I don’t like that there’s all these drones in the sky. I’m freaking out.
Speaker: 1
52:01
And try and get the regulators to come in and say, hey. We’re banning drones. And set up everyone, including the people in the government to say, we should take a beat. We should think a little bit before we deregulate.
Speaker: 2
52:13
We should
Speaker: 0
52:14
Who would do this? Who’s the motivation? Uber Eats and Postmates?
Speaker: 1
52:17
This No. No. No. No. It could be the the, other government. That’s my sai point. This could be Oh,
Speaker: 0
52:23
you’re saying this could be China doing this to start to
Speaker: 1
52:25
slow down our economy? Think about it. If you’re gonna pass a bill in congress to make drones more freely roamable in the skies, you’re gonna reference back this crazy story in New Jersey. Everyone’s freaking out about it. And you’re gonna say, hey, wait. What about all that stuff that happened in New Jersey? Maybe this doesn’t make as much sense.
Speaker: 1
52:41
People are kinda scared about it.
Speaker: 0
52:42
We shouldn’t rush. We shouldn’t rush.
Speaker: 1
52:44
We shouldn’t rush. That would be my psyop theory. That’s my, you know, kind of conspiracy theory tinfoil hat. I don’t often do them, but that’s what I would kinda think about. I think
Speaker: 0
52:52
the first two of them would be proud. Alex Jones would be proud. Aaron, why don’t you jump the fence and tell us your best conspiracy theory in this?
Speaker: 5
52:59
No. No. I’m a fan. Sai this is that that was all crazy polls when I just heard.
Speaker: 0
53:04
Yeah. Take some.
Speaker: 5
53:05
I think there’s, like, there’s, like, 10 higher psyops you would do if you wanted to to get us to, you know, have a collapsing economy than going after drone deliveries. But, ai. I What
Speaker: 0
53:14
would they be? What would they be?
Speaker: 5
53:16
I mean, well, first of all, I think I think you’d have AI, like like, do a robot that would Ai think you’d have a robot AI thing that goes you know, runs amok.
Speaker: 0
53:25
That’s a good idea. Rogue robot, Robocop. Yeah.
Speaker: 5
53:27
Yeah. I I think vatsal be way sooner than you worry about food delivery.
Speaker: 0
53:30
No. You have 10 self driving cars, hop the, you know, hop the curb and and crash into a storefront. Self driving is on ice for 2 years. That would be, you know, an example. Chamath, your thoughts? You you got some conspiracies here. What do you think is going on here?
Speaker: 3
53:45
No. But I thought that the most credible thing was that they were they were looking for radioactive material that somehow some got lost and
Speaker: 0
53:56
Why would they only look at night? Actually, it’s interesting you say that. There was somebody on Twitter, x, who claims to be an expert in this field, and there’s a startup actually that I just talked about
Speaker: 3
54:07
on Which one? Kankoa the ai?
Speaker: 0
54:08
I think it might have been Kankoa the great. Shout to Kankoa the great in his mom’s basement eating pizza bites.
Speaker: 3
54:12
I hate Kankoa.
Speaker: 0
54:13
He’s a nice man. Kankoa.
Speaker: 5
54:15
I told you.
Speaker: 2
54:16
You always Kankoa. Kankoa. Kankoa.
Speaker: 1
54:16
You always Kankoa. Kankoa.
Speaker: 0
54:17
Trying to get me back because he said I was trying to dox him.
Speaker: 3
54:20
You always Kankoa. He’s great.
Speaker: 1
54:22
No. I just
Speaker: 0
54:22
think it’s his that people are retrading Kankoa the great as if he’s, like, this great journalist, and he’s in his mom’s basement eating hot pockets or he’s working for Putin.
Speaker: 3
54:33
He’s a really good
Speaker: 1
54:33
I don’t know. Do I want my news to judge J. Cal or Kankoa? I don’t know. I don’t know.
Speaker: 0
54:38
Who do you take? I mean, your first generation pretty good. I subscribe. Kankoa?
Speaker: 3
54:42
I subscribe to Kankoa.
Speaker: 0
54:44
Yeah. Aaron Levy, you have a favorite? Who are you? You autism capital or Kankoa? What do you ai by the name
Speaker: 3
54:49
of the Capital too. I think he’s really Absolutely.
Speaker: 5
54:51
I’m I’m liking Geiger these days.
Speaker: 3
54:53
Oh, you’re ai Geiger capital. Geiger capital is big.
Speaker: 5
54:56
I Ai
Speaker: 2
54:56
that.
Speaker: 5
54:56
I read him all.
Speaker: 0
54:57
I ram that. Brex.
Speaker: 5
54:59
Ai think the nighttime thing would be it would be at least typical of this government to do a Streisand effect of of just, like, maybe if we cover it up, nobody will sai, and then, obviously, it’s the biggest thing. So So
Speaker: 1
55:09
Yeah. And they’ve got all
Speaker: 0
55:11
these lights on them. Yeah. Like, we’re putting, like, lights on them. That is exactly Arya. But if they there is a startup that makes we really looked it up, and there is a startup that makes drones to do this specific task to look for dirty bombs in ports and ports obviously look for these things.
Speaker: 0
55:27
It’s a known threat. It’s this is not rocket science.
Speaker: 3
55:30
I’m sorry. And and why and why only at night to free boosters?
Speaker: 0
55:33
That they can read the signatures better was the theory. That at night, you can read the signature, which doesn’t make sense to me. Science guy, you wanna come in here? I don’t see how Ai
Speaker: 1
55:43
don’t see how ai you’d get a better read on radioactive material. It doesn’t make any sense.
Speaker: 0
55:48
So That made no sense. That ai like a crazy thing. But, anyway, we’re living in crazy times. Speaking of crazy By
Speaker: 1
55:55
the way, that was my first conspiracy theory in 208 episodes of the All in Pod. So
Speaker: 0
55:59
Very nice. Yeah. I actually can participate in conspiracy corner now. I’m coming back next week with a better one.
Speaker: 1
56:07
Okay, Jake. I’ll read
Speaker: 0
56:08
read us
Speaker: 1
56:08
some more news. Go to Google News and read us some more news so
Speaker: 0
56:10
we can do another doc. Jesus Christ, man.
Speaker: 3
56:12
Read read a
Speaker: 1
56:13
shingle for us. Go ahead. No.
Speaker: 0
56:14
You do it. Go ahead.
Speaker: 2
56:14
No. No. You get
Speaker: 0
56:15
the docket in front
Speaker: 1
56:16
of you.
Speaker: 0
56:16
Dip your side. Today, the Dow Jones Industrial Average is up 23,000 to 44,000 viewers. I tried to highlight these guys.
Speaker: 1
56:23
Make you look good. Said he’s super happy
Speaker: 0
56:25
with you. Skiing. That’s enough. I’m going skiing.
Speaker: 1
56:29
Ai thought
Speaker: 0
56:29
it was cool how he
Speaker: 5
56:30
read the entire congressional bill, earlier.
Speaker: 1
56:32
Yes. All 1500. J. L. Loves to filibuster.
Speaker: 0
56:36
Ai not filibustering. Alright. Listen. Here. Let’s do another story. Let’s see if you can contribute something. OpenAI update, Madison. Your contribution was amazing. Oh, I was actually using chat gpt to go into the to go into the founding fathers’ papers, and, yeah, I was reading these federalist papers with Gemini.
Speaker: 3
56:55
13 and number 44.
Speaker: 0
56:57
I would like to quote take the the the musical.
Speaker: 1
57:03
Hamilton the musical.
Speaker: 0
57:05
I was comparing the lyrics from Hamilton the musical. Oh my god. Hey, Nick. Can you send JKL another Yahoo News article? Let’s get going.
Speaker: 1
57:13
Come on. Let’s go. Yahoo News. Let’s
Speaker: 0
57:16
go. Come on.
Speaker: 3
57:20
Let’s go. Stop.
Speaker: 1
57:21
Let’s go. Can’t can’t wait can’t wait to see you in tomorrow. Let’s go now.
Speaker: 0
57:25
Oh my god. Wait. Wait. Just can we just end it here? Yeah. No.
Speaker: 2
57:30
Do it.
Speaker: 3
57:30
Do it. Because I wanna talk about open air.
Speaker: 0
57:32
You wanna talk about OpenAI? You do?
Speaker: 3
57:33
Yeah. Yeah.
Speaker: 1
57:34
Give him his meh meat. Give Chamath his red meat.
Speaker: 0
57:36
Alright. Here’s an update on closed Ai flipping and, Sam Altman, supervillain Sam Altman securing the bag.
Speaker: 3
57:44
Meta wrote a letter
Speaker: 0
57:45
to California’s attorney general. Open meh? On OpenAI for profit conversion 2 months ago, OpenAI announced a $6,600,000,000 funding round, $157,000,000,000 valuation. They’re projecting 3,700,000,000 in revenue this year. Pretty great revenue growth. But there’s a poison pill in the deal.
Speaker: 0
58:07
OpenAI must convert to a for profit within the next 2 years or investors can ask for their money back. And right before they announced this round, you remember CTO Mira Maradi and 2 other top researchers resigned. Many people saw this as a protest. Elon, who put the first 50,000,000 in and cofounded OpenAI, is currently suing the company and seeking a court order that would stop the for profit conversion.
Speaker: 0
58:33
Now Zuck is joining team Saloni. Elon and Zuck are in some weird pairing up. They’re not in the ring, not in the octagon. No. Last week, Meta sent a letter asking California’s attorney general to stop opening eyes for profit conversion. What do you think of this?
Speaker: 0
58:51
We’ve got them now not in the octagon, but they’re in the political arena. Chamath, your thoughts.
Speaker: 3
58:57
I think that this is so interesting. So I was looking at all of these things. If you if you put them all together, it paints a really interesting story. So you have Elon filing an injunction which basically says you should not allow this conversion to happen until we sort out all of these details because if you allowed it to convert and then I win, it’ll be very messy to go backwards.
Speaker: 3
59:19
I think that that’s a pretty credible legal argument. Then you have Zuck basically say, hey, Elon’s right. This company should not convert. But the more interesting thing that really got me thinking about this was a chart that Menlo Ventures put out. Nick, can you just show this?
Speaker: 3
59:37
What this shows is just what’s happened in the last year. And what do you notice? What you notice is the market share of OpenAI has changed pretty meaningfully from half to about a third. And what you see is anthropic doubled, Meh roughly staying the same, Google picking up steam.
Speaker: 3
59:59
And it started to make me think this is very similar to a chart that I would have looked at when, you know, in 2,007 when we were building Facebook, because we had this huge competitor in Myspace that was the defacto winner. And we were this upstart and it made me think, is there a replay of the same thing all over again where you have this incumbent that pioneers an idea and they start with a 100% shah.
Speaker: 3
01:00:31
And then all of these upstarts come around from nowhere. And then I thought, well, what is better today if you are a company that’s just starting versus if you were the incumbent? And I think that there’s a handful that are worth talking about. So the first is when you look at what XAI has done with respect to NVIDIA GPUs, the fact that they were able to get a 100,000 to work as, you know, in one contiguous system and are now rapidly scaling up to basically a1000000 over the next ai.
Speaker: 3
01:01:03
I think what it does, Jason, it puts you to the front of the line for all hardware. So now all of a sudden, if you were 3rd or 4th in line, XAI is now first, and it pushes everybody else down. And in doing that, you either have to buy it yourself or work with your partner. And I think for the folks like Meta, that translates and explains why they’re spending so much more. Sort of like this arms race.
Speaker: 3
01:01:25
If you can’t spend with my competitors, I’m just gonna prefer my competitor to you. So I I think that that creates a capital war. In a capital war, I think the big companies like Google, Amazon, Microsoft, Meh, and brands like Elon will always be able to attract effectively infinite capital.
Speaker: 3
01:01:45
And their cost of capital goes to 0, which means they’ll be able to win this hardware war. Okay. So put a pin in that. Then the second thing is what happens on the actual data and experience side on the training side. If you listen to Ilya Sutskever, if you listen to Andre Karpathy, what they effectively are saying is there’s this terminal asymptote that we’re seeing right now in model quality.
Speaker: 3
01:02:08
So what happens? A lot of these folks are now experimenting on the things around the model. Right? The user experience, how you use it. Can I keep things in memory? Can I cut and paste these things from here and there?
Speaker: 3
01:02:19
Because what it says is ai the data’s kinda static and brittle, but it’s actually not as what we sai before because you have this corpus of data on x that’s pretty unique. I suppose if Elon fed in all this kinetic data that he controls through Tesla, that’s very unique. Does that all of a sudden create this additive pool of information?
Speaker: 3
01:02:41
Possibly. And then the third thing is when you look at that chart, what that chart says is, hold on a second. Why are corporates moving around? And what I can tell you just through the 80, ai lens is we are completely promiscuous in how we use models. And the reason is because these models offer different cost quality bryden offs at different points in time for different tasks.
Speaker: 3
01:03:06
And so what we are seeing is a world where instead of having 2 or 3 models you rely on, you’re gonna rely on 30 or 40 or 50, and you’re gonna trade them off and you’re gonna use effectively like an LLM router to disin, you know, to
Speaker: 0
01:03:20
Load balance them. Yeah.
Speaker: 3
01:03:21
And to route them. Or just to manage and route them. And then there’s an intelligence above that that’s constantly tasking and figuring out prompt optimization across these models. So it’s this thing where we were very reliant on OpenAI. Now we’re reliant across 3 or 4. Ideally we’ll be reliant on 30 or 40.
Speaker: 3
01:03:38
And so I just see this world where it’s all getting commoditized quite quickly. And so I’m just, like, sort of scratching my head, like, where is the market value here?
Speaker: 0
01:03:48
Aaron, your thoughts. I know you’re very promiscuous when it comes to LLM ai well.
Speaker: 5
01:03:53
I I mean, I, we have a very similar model as what which Moss said, which is we’re agnostic, so we work with multiple AI vendors. But the, I I think the a a friend deep in Ai land a couple years ago, right before Chatmuti sai there’s no secrets in Ai. And I didn’t totally understand kind of at the time it it hadn’t registered what that meant, but very quickly, it kinda became obvious, which is the research breakthroughs sort of propagate insanely quickly across the AI community.
Speaker: 5
01:04:21
And so back back to this Moss framework, if you just think about it as as if if the research effectively becomes open at at some point in time quickly enough, because either the researchers move or people publish it or whatnot, then it really is a compute game and then maybe a data access game.
Speaker: 5
01:04:36
And that means that there’s 4 or 5 at scale players that can that can fund this. And and I think as we’ve seen in other areas where it’s an infrastructure play, you eventually have the underlying service with with enough competition, you have the underlying service eventually trend toward the cost of the infrastructure.
Speaker: 5
01:04:53
So, so what we should expect is that the price of a token in AI land, you know, basically will be whatever the price of running the computers are. And maybe with like a, you know, plus 10, 20% margin Arya
Speaker: 0
01:05:07
you see the same thing happen with storage? I remember in the early days,
Speaker: 5
01:05:10
a 100%.
Speaker: 0
01:05:10
Box and Dropbox and YouTube, y’all had this major innovation with storage. And and how did that play out?
Speaker: 2
01:05:16
Let me
Speaker: 5
01:05:16
give you a fun stat. We give our customers unlimited storage. We have 82% gross margin. So, so the, the, what, what happened was the price of the underlying storage has gone down by 100 of times since we started the company. And then our, all our value is in the software layer on top of the storage.
Speaker: 5
01:05:34
So we’ve benefited by this incredible, just, you know, ruthless competition between Western digital speak gate, other players that are just trying to pack more, more, more, you know, basically more, storage density into these drives. And every couple years, they have a new breakthrough. We’re now, you know, upcoming we’re we’re heading toward maybe a a 50 terabyte hard drive.
Speaker: 5
01:05:53
When we started the company, they were kinda 80, 80 gigabytes.
Speaker: 0
01:05:56
Meh of your time in the early days was spent on dealing with this infrastructure issue, and then how much of your time and your leadership team’s time is spent on this issue now?
Speaker: 5
01:06:06
Yeah. So so back in the day, like, if we had, you know, 10 10 people in in engineering, you know, 80% of them was doing, you know, pure infrastructure work. Now if we have a 1000 people, you know, be inverted in terms of the ratio. So you just get you get more leverage, both as the the, you know, as as you get the advancements in the technology, but then also as you get scaled.
Speaker: 5
01:06:26
But all of this is to sai, you should basically anticipate a world where, and I think Zuck is this interesting counterbalance on all of this because of open source. If at any moment, you know, that that Zuck will, will basically provide an open source model that is at, at kind of best in class benchmarks.
Speaker: 5
01:06:42
Sana, and at the, at the frontier, then there is a limit on how much you can charge for the tokens of your hosted model, because anybody will then be able to go host the open model meh, and be able to provide infrastructure around it. So, so if you always have that counterbalance and the tokens eventually kind of look the same, the output tokens kind of look
Speaker: 2
01:06:59
the same Isn’t it
Speaker: 0
01:07:00
yeah. Always. Isn’t it also the truth that major enterprises, fortune ai 100, 200, you know, 20 years ago weren’t interested in open source, and now that’s kind of their default. They want to buy into open source because they don’t wanna be locked into a vendor.
Speaker: 5
01:07:15
It’s actually not even necessarily the case that the that the customer has to pick the open source vendor. They might buy it through an abstraction layer that that is letting them get the benefit of open source Got it. But but still buy through a proprietary So
Speaker: 0
01:07:26
you believe open source wins?
Speaker: 5
01:07:28
I Ai believe in the Ai?
Speaker: 2
01:07:30
No. No.
Speaker: 5
01:07:30
No. So sai I I believe open source causes pricing to always be extremely low.
Speaker: 0
01:07:34
Right. But okay. But in this case, do you think o do you think open source is gonna ultimately win the day in models?
Speaker: 5
01:07:40
No. Not necessarily. You
Speaker: 0
01:07:41
don’t. No.
Speaker: 5
01:07:42
Ai. Because only only Meh has the has the the scale to be able to provide ai
Speaker: 3
01:07:47
what Aaron is saying here. Let me let me maybe try to frame it. I think what he’s saying is there’ll be open source models. There’ll be closed source models, but the price that Aaron or me or anybody else pays these model makers will effectively go to 0. Got it.
Speaker: 5
01:08:02
And it’ll it’ll go to the cost of the compute to be to be clear with a little bit of margin for for the work of hubby.
Speaker: 0
01:08:08
The physicality of that compute. Got it.
Speaker: 5
01:08:10
Now it it’s important to step back and say, I still think you could probably have the entirety of the model providers make 10 times more revenue than they do today because we’re just literally in, like, the first percent of the total ram. So, so it’d be a mistake to think that that has, you know, some kind of downward pressure in, in terms of the long term economics of these businesses, especially because I think open AI’s revenue stream is increasingly looking like a Sai revenue business, as opposed to just, you know, just the API kind of token pricing.
Speaker: 5
01:08:36
So, so none of this is, is to provide any, any sort of color on, like, what would you bet on today? I agree with you, Martha, you’re going to have maybe not 30 providers, but let’s say you at least have ai to 10 good choices, all, all competing heavily for the next breakthrough.
Speaker: 5
01:08:48
Like, literally this morning, Google had a breakthrough in in sort of this reasoning oriented model from from their flat from their Gemini family.
Speaker: 0
01:08:56
They’re 2.0. Yep.
Speaker: 5
01:08:57
Yep. And, and and so what’s what’s incredibly, you know, kind of great is it’s it’s sort of the best time ever to be building software, assuming, you know, assuming that that you have a play in the market that lets you remain differentiated. And the key there is just do enough on top of the AI model that there’s enough value there.
Speaker: 3
01:09:14
How much the world spends on software and software related things every year? It’s about $5,000,000,000,000. So there’s, ai, call it, like, a 1,000,000,000,000 and a half of software licenses, a 1,000,000,000,000 and a half of IT folks inside of companies, plus or minus a little bit more, you get about 5,000,000,000,000.
Speaker: 3
01:09:34
And that’s compounding 13% a year. I I’m pretty sure that the market here shrinks by an order of magnitude. And instead of fighting over 5,000,000,000,000, I think we’ll be fighting over 500,000,000,000.
Speaker: 0
01:09:50
What do you ai, Aaron? You you buy that?
Speaker: 5
01:09:52
No. Not at all. I mean, I don’t know if you wanna make the case more, but
Speaker: 3
01:09:57
but Well, the only reason is that I think that as as we delever the software development process from humans, I think the unit cost of creating code effectively becomes so cheap that it’s gonna be very hard to differentially price these products the way that they are. So an an example would be that let’s say you use, I don’t know, pick your favorite piece of software. I I don’t wanna pick on anyway.
Speaker: 3
01:10:23
That’s why I’m not I’m not saying anything.
Speaker: 0
01:10:25
Office suite. Let’s pick an office suite. Everybody’s got one.
Speaker: 3
01:10:28
Sure. Actually, let let’s pick let’s pick on Excel because maybe that’s ai
Speaker: 0
01:10:31
Sure. Excel, Google Sheets.
Speaker: 3
01:10:33
Yeah. It’s not it’s not that Excel isn’t valuable. It’s incredibly valuable. It’s what is the marginal cost of creating the Excel equivalent that is good enough that people switch. The marginal cost today is very expensive. And you can see that because it’s what it costs Google to make sheets, but that’s humans.
Speaker: 3
01:10:50
So the real question is if you have a legion of bots that works 247 incrementally and increasingly more accurately every day, the question is what is the marginal cost? And I think the marginal cost of that is going to be very cheap. And when you do that, it’s very difficult to price it anywhere near the same.
Speaker: 3
01:11:12
And the reason is that other companies will then replicate it and say, hold on, if Excel wants to charge $100 I’ll charge 50 and I’ll take a lower margin. That’s just supply demand economics.
Speaker: 5
01:11:24
Yeah. Yeah. So so so so I I think Sai I I think there’s I I just don’t agree with the TAM compression because I think there’s another kind of counter event that’s happening that that AI is, is really going after like services. And, and so that then then conversely expands the, the ram of software where it budgets weren’t usually applied to those types of things, but we can get in that in a second.
Speaker: 5
01:11:44
But I think we’ve already seen, I think we’ve already seen this though, and it hasn’t exactly played out as, as you’re saying. So you already have like a ZO, like, so, Zoho is this really interesting business. It’s probably a couple of 1,000,000,000 in revenue at this point.
Speaker: 5
01:11:56
And it’s basically a suite of, of extremely low cost affordable Right. Software products by category.
Speaker: 3
01:12:02
The cycle time of Zoho is poor. But it’s not that’s
Speaker: 5
01:12:05
not been that’s not been the reason people don’t switch though. They they don’t It’s all
Speaker: 3
01:12:08
it’s all levered to humans. Ai just think it’s not a good product. It’s it’s decent enough.
Speaker: 0
01:12:13
Why do you think people don’t switch, Aaron? But
Speaker: 3
01:12:14
I’m sorry. Yeah. Ai do agree with you, Aaron, by the way, that when you bring that whole offline services category online and you automate them with AI, I agree with you that that TAM could be ginormous. All I’m saying is the traditional software TAM today, what people spend $5,100,000,000,000 on, I think people will spend $500,000,000,000 on and barely if that.
Speaker: 1
01:12:37
There are
Speaker: 3
01:12:37
there may be other things that people spend money on that that are that are wrapped in AI.
Speaker: 5
01:12:41
Yeah. I I guess the the the the counter and maybe you’d look at an ERP system or a CRM system or something else ai like it that that is sort of Like
Speaker: 3
01:12:51
those things are totally screwed.
Speaker: 5
01:12:52
No. But ai but but this is my point. The opposite, like the last thing you wanna touch is the system that is, ai, like, powering your supply chain.
Speaker: 2
01:13:00
The
Speaker: 3
01:13:00
companies the companies I talk to, they’re consistently, like, rip it out. Get us to a point where we can rip it up. And the reason is because what they’ve realized is they’ll spend 50 to a $100,000,000 a year for ai features. And they’re like, just give me these ai features as workflows.
Speaker: 0
01:13:14
Yes.
Speaker: 3
01:13:14
Give me a simple CRUD database and just get meh get out of the way. And it’s like the trade off for that makes a lot of sense because look, let’s face it. Like when you have to build one piece of software that has to sell to 50,000 companies, the reality is that that piece of software is trying to do everything and then some, and it’s trying to solve 2 or 3 use cases plus around, you know, 5 or 6 common use cases that are generalized
Speaker: 0
01:13:39
Yep.
Speaker: 3
01:13:40
For 50,000 customers. So you end up with 50,000 features.
Speaker: 0
01:13:43
You know, it’s really interesting because, Aaron, you ai of alluded to there’s a TAM expansion moment there, and I’m seeing this on the front lines. We run a program found in university. I’ve talked about it here before where we see people pitching us. They’re year 0 startups, 2 or 3 person teams.
Speaker: 0
01:13:59
And what they’re doing is they’re not going after existing legacy software. They’re kind of going after jobs. They’re looking at a position or a job somewhere. This is an accountant. We’re gonna take an accountant. We’re gonna make the number one accountant in the world. That’s an AI agentic, an agent.
Speaker: 0
01:14:15
We’re gonna make a podcast producer with Podcast AI. We’re gonna make a virtual assistant with Athena. We’re just seeing it over and over again. That’s a whole another category where you study a person’s behavior as they work, a social media manager and what they do, and then you replicate it with AI.
Speaker: 0
01:14:33
And that’s something that just hasn’t previously been done. So there could be 2 things occurring here, Jamoff and Aaron, at the same time, which is a deflation in legacy systems, and they’ll be replaced. And then, additionally, human capital and jobs that are easy enough for AI to do as an agent will also expand the Ram.
Speaker: 1
01:14:53
You are
Speaker: 0
01:14:53
two things at the same time. You are
Speaker: 3
01:14:56
completely right about the usage. All I’m debating is when you have to price something
Speaker: 2
01:15:01
Mhmm.
Speaker: 3
01:15:02
You have to look at the total cost of what it took to make it. And then you wanna try to build in a reasonable amount of margin and some reasonable expansion and you discount it back, and this is what you think it’s worth. Even though you may not think you’re doing that when you implicitly price something that way, that is what’s happening underneath the hood
Speaker: 2
01:15:20
Yeah.
Speaker: 3
01:15:20
To the unemotional buyer of that good. And all I’m saying is if what Aaron says before, which I agree with is true, which is the cost of using a model to get to an output effectively goes to 0. But it’s sort of somewhat what I’ve been saying before. The marginal cost of compute goes to 0. The marginal cost of energy goes to 0.
Speaker: 3
01:15:42
The real question is what does it take to make a good in the digital world?
Speaker: 0
01:15:46
Let me ask Freeburn question here. You’re back in the CEO slot at Ohalo. You’re doing it every day, Dave. You’re making these choices as to what SaaS products and how you’re gonna solve problems. Are you looking at it saying, I’m gonna hire developers who can work 10x because of all these new tools and I’m gonna build my own internal systems or are you looking and saying, I’m gonna buy off the shelf SaaS products?
Speaker: 0
01:16:08
What are you doing when you make your own decisions every day, David Friedberg?
Speaker: 1
01:16:13
Well, I try and encourage the teams to build stuff that better meets our needs, and then it can actually be a better solution, and it can be built in house. And I think we did a I think I mentioned this the last episode, but we did a hackathon where we brought in people to learn how to use Cursor and ChatGPT to build software that had never done it before to try and create this as a capability for people broadly in the organization, and there were great tools that came out of it.
Speaker: 1
01:16:41
So I think that that’s really the future. As and this is kind of like, you know, I’d say early generation, but as we get to further later generation capabilities, you could see the instruction to a chat gpt or, like, interface. Hey. I’d love to do the following things with a piece of software. It shows you a couple options. You pick 1. It shows you a couple UX.
Speaker: 1
01:17:00
You pick 1. It does user testing automatically for you. It does QA for you. And, ultimately, it puts it into production for you, which is the biggest challenging step right now. You still need engineers that can load stuff into production and do QA.
Speaker: 1
01:17:11
But if all of that gets automated as well, now any user in a company can actually stand up software to do something for them.
Speaker: 0
01:17:19
Un A non developer, you’re saying for your Non developer. You stand
Speaker: 5
01:17:22
up software. May maybe, sai, Jamonta, just to clarify, are you there there’s 2 different ways to approach the lowering the cost of developing software. One is that it just creates more competitors in each of these categories, which then lowers my price because now there’s there’s some downward pressure.
Speaker: 5
01:17:34
Dave’s bringing up sana different example, which is I’m going to build my own software at effectively the price of 0. The, the, the challenge on this, especially the second one is, is ai, when you like most organizations don’t want to be in the business of having to think about, about building their own software.
Speaker: 5
01:17:49
They just like want it done for them. Ai, it’s like not a core part of, of their, like, so, you know, your, your business would be very unique relative to the broad economy, which is like, I just sana, like, just like Ai want sana place to put my CRM records. I want a place to like, just like have my HR get managed. And I think the downward ai. Due to software costs lowering makes total sense.
Speaker: 5
01:18:08
I don’t think it’s a 10 X factor. But, but, but you know, I think that we’ve always had a long tail of applications that, that enterprises build. You do that at Microsoft Access. Now you do it in retool. So the next era of that will be obviously AI built, and there’ll be 10 times the amount of that software.
Speaker: 5
01:18:26
But it it’s not obvious to me why that would go after the kind of core the the core systems of running a business, cause just most companies are ai not looking to re reinvent the wheel of that.
Speaker: 3
01:18:34
We’re working with an aerospace partner. Won’t say who it is. And we sat there and they walked us through what they deal with to make the things that they’re making. It’s convoluted. And this is not a software problem. It’s that there is no piece of software that understands how they wanna run their company.
Speaker: 3
01:18:53
And so instead they have to morph their org chart to the tools that are available. So I think what Freeberg is saying some is some version of that as well. He’s probably there were probably people there using the tools that were available. And as a result, at some point, some HR person said, we need to hire this other person and this other person.
Speaker: 3
01:19:10
And instead, what, what it allows companies to do is just completely reimagine. How do you want your company to work? And what is the business process you actually need to implement? And then let’s just get that built. And, you know, I I I don’t know if you guys saw this, but Satya Nadella had this clip that’s gone pretty viral in the last couple of days where he effectively said the same thing.
Speaker: 3
01:19:33
And what he’s effectively saying is all these big software systems are business rules wrapping a database plus an incredible go to market team.
Speaker: 2
01:19:44
Mhmm.
Speaker: 3
01:19:45
You know, and this is what Alex Karp points to as sharp knives, steak dinners, and basketball game tickets. I don’t know if you guys saw that clip.
Speaker: 0
01:19:55
I did see the clip. Yeah. He likes to win based on product, not on sales effort.
Speaker: 3
01:19:59
Nick, you should find this clip.
Speaker: 6
01:20:01
We don’t play golf. What we do do is we play software. We will put if you wanna actually compete, compete on your product. And what’s very special and and, yes, do I enjoy humiliating people who have better steak dinners and sharper ai and better golf suites? Yes. I do. You know what?
Speaker: 6
01:20:17
I really I really like that we win in that way. It makes me very happy, and it makes our clients happy.
Speaker: 3
01:20:22
But it really points to the heart of how the software industrial complex, that’s what I call it. This $5,100,000,000,000, this software industrial complex, how has it evolved? I think it’s people that build Goodpoint products, but when the market, meaning the shareholders and the public investors demand growth, you have this natural expansion.
Speaker: 3
01:20:43
And what do they do? They inflate the feature sai. They inflate the cost. And then in order to sell that they inflate the set of incentives that they give to the buyer. So the CIO inside of these large organizations, they control budgets.
Speaker: 3
01:21:01
They’re equivalent to like state level budgets in some cases, you know, what do you think the CIO of a top ai bank is spending? It’s probably 15 to $20,000,000,000 a year. They are getting wined and dined to a way that you could not even imagine. I don’t even think the CEO probably understands.
Speaker: 3
01:21:18
And that filters down through the org. And so they make
Speaker: 5
01:21:22
these don’t ai totally ruin our whole game here.
Speaker: 0
01:21:24
Well, I’m I’m it’s not it’s
Speaker: 3
01:21:25
not I’m just pointing it out like it’s a
Speaker: 0
01:21:27
I mean, I’ll I’ll say the camera, which is but here but here’s another part of the game in the field. If these tools make your team Yeah. 10, 26%, whatever you can quantify more effective at their jobs, then it’s a de minimis amount for most organizations who have created very profitable businesses.
Speaker: 0
01:21:46
I see this where Ai was mentioning some companies earlier and their SaaS pricing is broken because the number of employees at a company has been going down because people are getting more efficient. So now they’re looking at saying, well, what value do we provide with this podcast, you know, producer in a box and whatever it does?
Speaker: 0
01:22:04
They say they were starting with, like, $99 a month or $49 a seat. I said, listen. Just charge a minimum of $500 to get the software. Nobody complained. And they got rid of the bottom tiers.
Speaker: 0
01:22:15
So there’s a value being created here that is so great that Ai don’t think everybody’s gonna roll their own like Friedberg because they’d be like, you know what? This is so great. It’s 6000 a year. It, Yolo. I’ll just buy it.
Speaker: 1
01:22:29
It is today. And in 5 years, just like we’re all gonna and we’re all using chat like interfaces more frequently. Yeah. You go to your chat like interface and, eventually, you realize you can ask it to build some tool for you that does something. And it renders the tool, and it makes it possible, and it stands it up in production. And suddenly, you’re using it at your company.
Speaker: 1
01:22:51
And then you ask it to do another tool, and it does it exactly to speak. And you define the UX you want, you define what you want it to do, and it works. And it interoperates by you and really clearly and really cleanly with the other tool. And there’s a big aspect of this where you can start to build all of the software infrastructure that you as an organization want. Right.
Speaker: 3
01:23:12
But I think you and Aaron you and Aaron mentioned this though. The extreme difficulty is not that front end part. That’s easy. It’s ai, I think it’s less than 3 or 4% of the work. The 96% of the work is how you actually integrate it in the back end and how do you provision it, how do you have controls, and how do you do security?
Speaker: 3
01:23:31
Because if those things fail and those are implemented in a bot in a highly regulated market as an example, you may not actually be allowed to operate.
Speaker: 1
01:23:41
Let’s go through that example and let’s say that you’re in a bank and you tell the Ai, figure out all the security and permissions and and authority rules that are necessary for me to operate as a bank, and they can actually render it. It sounds Farfetched today, but there’s no reason that in 7 years, that is not the standard Azure, that I don’t have the ability to sai, go look at all the software that’s out there in the world today So that will be build a tool that meets compliance standards, that meets all of my security standards.
Speaker: 1
01:24:06
And you can actually instruct the AI to operate like a large number of software engineers No.
Speaker: 3
01:24:10
I think so.
Speaker: 1
01:24:11
Need to operate today.
Speaker: 3
01:24:12
The practical issue where the rubber meets the road there is when there is a penetration and a regulator who’s a human, because it will not have been a bot, comes and knocks on your door. And you’re like, well, here’s this immutable log of the things that I did. And they’re like, I don’t want an immutable log. Who the hell tested this?
Speaker: 3
01:24:30
Show me the unit test that you created and signed off on. So there’s a there is a critical human in the loop problem on that other 95%, which is weird. I agree with Aaron that’s
Speaker: 1
01:24:40
In in in reach in in ai stage 1, like we’re in stage 0.
Speaker: 3
01:24:43
No. No. No.
Speaker: 1
01:24:43
No. You will need no.
Speaker: 3
01:24:45
But you’ll I think it’s in stage ai and 6. I think you’ll need governments to take an entirely different risk posture for highly regulated markets. I don’t see that happening in any in any time in the near future.
Speaker: 5
01:24:54
In in ai sciences, if you want anything in a in a clinical system, I don’t need to tell you guys this, but you have to you have to do a QA test on every single change that ever happens and be able to prove that you tested every single thing. So so the idea of a probabilistic AI system generating the the kind of code for you, you know, in a clinical trial, you know, workflow, like, I just think, yeah, it’s gonna take a lot of change from from regulators.
Speaker: 0
01:25:17
Another decade of evolution here to make these things sustainable and have a high quality.
Speaker: 1
01:25:23
Sai think it’ll happen faster than everyone thinks.
Speaker: 5
01:25:25
Yeah. And Sai think actually that’s that’s
Speaker: 0
01:25:27
that, like, there’s actually no reason why that wouldn’t be
Speaker: 5
01:25:29
a good thing if that did happen to be clear. I think though, back to, to, you know, Jason’s earlier point though, like, and that’s the counterbalance on the ram compression is, is just now the sort of thing that we think of as software, that market now is, is much larger. So if you’re, if you’re selling, if you’re selling,
Speaker: 3
01:25:45
yeah. Yeah.
Speaker: 5
01:25:46
Sai, but like, but like that means that if you’re selling, let’s sai, $50,000 of security software, you know, maybe that goes down a little bit to, you know, $25,000, but
Speaker: 0
01:25:54
but you ai, yeah, but you might sell Exactly. Right. And the agent
Speaker: 3
01:25:57
of of the new agent. Yeah. That I so I agree a 100% of that. My only comment is the software industrial complex today has to shrink because the stranglehold that it has on how companies run
Speaker: 0
01:26:08
Mhmm.
Speaker: 3
01:26:09
Is incredibly high for an experience that’s incredibly poor. Nobody, nobody raises their hand and says, gosh, this piece of enterprise software that I use in my day to day life is as good as Instagram or TikTok. Nobody says that.
Speaker: 0
01:26:23
Well, I mean, except about Box. I was leading the reviews earlier today. Good.
Speaker: 2
01:26:26
Good. Good.
Speaker: 0
01:26:26
And I was on, G2 or one of those sites and it’s just Box was just a rating for a tremendous so
Speaker: 3
01:26:32
I love Box.
Speaker: 0
01:26:33
I love Box. It’s incredible. Well, Sai mean I mean, just the It’s a
Speaker: 5
01:26:37
ticker symbol. Is it Dollar Box? Very simple for people. So Is
Speaker: 0
01:26:41
it Dollar Box? Is that what it is? It is. I’m putting a j bryden in here because, I may have to j trade this. It sounds like a really great opportunity for me. Alright. Listen.
Speaker: 3
01:26:50
Aaron, you just got craven.
Speaker: 1
01:26:52
What was your last j yeah. Yeah. You got craven.
Speaker: 0
01:26:54
My last j trade is I’m just I’m I’m loading up on, MSTR and Bitcoin. I’m doing a I’m shorting Bitcoin, and I’m buying meh s I don’t know what the I’m not I’m not trading stocks right now. I’m focused on investing in a 100 startups per year. 100 new startups per year. I’m putting the first check into them. That’s what I do. Alright. Listen. Enough.
Speaker: 0
01:27:13
This has been a great episode. Aaron, you’re amazing. Thank you for coming on constantly. Everybody follow. What is your Twitter
Speaker: 1
01:27:20
ram on AI? Can I just tell you ai,
Speaker: 0
01:27:21
are you at Levy or at Aaron?
Speaker: 5
01:27:23
L yeah. Yeah. At Lavia.
Speaker: 0
01:27:25
Levia. Is that the French pronunciation? L e v I ai. L e v a.
Speaker: 1
01:27:29
Have you guys seen the VO model from Google?
Speaker: 5
01:27:31
Yeah. Have have you guys talked about how Google has, like, gotten some It
Speaker: 3
01:27:35
was incredible. They are Yeah.
Speaker: 0
01:27:36
They are. They’re firing on all cylinders. I literally paid
Speaker: 3
01:27:39
Shout out to Sundar.
Speaker: 0
01:27:40
Yeah. Yeah. And Sergei is going to work every day, by the way. He’s at work. What can
Speaker: 3
01:27:44
Brown do for you, J. Kelsey? Sundar back in the group chat. Okay.
Speaker: 1
01:27:47
By the way,
Speaker: 2
01:27:47
did you
Speaker: 1
01:27:47
guys see Genesys yesterday? Well, okay.
Speaker: 0
01:27:49
Let’s let me just put this up here, and then I’ll tee it up to you for your work. Google has been putting out new models. They have this new Google Gemini, and they have one with deep reasoning and their 2 point o model. I did a side by side test, same prompts with our friends in Deep Mudra on This Week in Startups. Just this week, we did multiple tests.
Speaker: 0
01:28:08
He was he has the o one pro, the $200 per month. Gemini was beating that, hands down, for me. And I think he conceded that with their free model and their $20 model, if we just gave it decent prompts, I think Google now has reached parity and they have an app out. Freeberg, what are your thoughts? Because people were counting them out and here we are. I think not only have they caught up, I think they’ve exceeded.
Speaker: 0
01:28:33
What are your thoughts?
Speaker: 1
01:28:34
They were late. The compounding effects are playing out, and it’s only gonna continue to compound. And I will say the data repository at Google, the engine that they have, the infrastructure, the team, all everything down to components is advantaged. And so everyone’s been kinda counting them out, but it’s clear they’re in it to win it. They’re here to play.
Speaker: 3
01:28:50
70% of the usage of OpenAI is consumer.
Speaker: 0
01:28:53
70% is consumer.
Speaker: 3
01:28:55
What does that mean for them as as Gemini and Google get get momentum?
Speaker: 1
01:28:59
I think you’ll end up having a Gemini that has ads eventually. And you could pay and have no ads, or you could not pay and have ads.
Speaker: 3
01:29:08
No meaning. Do you provide enough value and have enough quality where folks don’t need to then folks stay on Google?
Speaker: 1
01:29:16
Ai Google.com?
Speaker: 3
01:29:17
I’m asking you whether it impacts OpenAI, the quality of Gemini as it increases, or do you think that these usage cohorts are roughly set?
Speaker: 1
01:29:25
I jump back and forth personally. My experience is I don’t feel like I’ve got embedded data on OpenAI or on Gemini that makes me stick with 1. I’m just like with Google, I’m gonna go to the best interface, the best engine. So I do think that there’s fungibility here, and people will move over as they realize better results, better performance.
Speaker: 1
01:29:42
But I will say that what we’re seeing now with the data advantage at Google so, you know, the Internet, all these LLMs arya are language models trained on text from the Internet. Right? There’s, call it, 50,000,000,000 words on the Internet. And I think if you estimate the data repository in these training sets, it’s, like, probably a couple ai, 1 to 5 terabytes or something like that.
Speaker: 1
01:30:01
But if you look at the the the the video data that’s out there, there’s 100 of billions of hours or 1000000000 plus hours of video data. A large amount of that is sitting on YouTube. And by some estimates, there’s a 1,000 ai of video data on the Internet. So about a 1000000000 times more video data than there is word or text data.
Speaker: 1
01:30:20
And I think we just saw that play out with the Veo model that launched yesterday, but here’s some examples of Veo. Google has all of this YouTube data. You know, whether or not they’re using it to train, I don’t know the answer.
Speaker: 2
01:30:30
I
Speaker: 0
01:30:30
don’t think they’re allowed to is what I heard from the insiders. They have to review the terms of service, to get explicit permission to use it. But you’re right. These models are tremendous.
Speaker: 1
01:30:40
They’re using. And and and it’s basically rendering physics or it looks like it’s rendering physics. Now Genesys came out yesterday, and it’s open source. So you can actually go play with this Genesys model, which similarly renders the actual 3 d objects into a 3 d environment.
Speaker: 1
01:30:55
So you so rather than rendering a 2 dimensional set of pixels to look at a video video visual, with Genesys, you as you can see here, you can type in a prompt, and it renders this extraordinary video that that also has ai it the three-dimensional objects that make up the video.
Speaker: 3
01:31:12
Banana. So
Speaker: 0
01:31:13
you could change the angle. Right? And you could work with it.
Speaker: 1
01:31:16
And and also with Google and this, you can start to implement three-dimensional models based on some prompt that says something ai, I wanna have the camera angle at this point in the room.
Speaker: 7
01:31:27
Yes. I wanna
Speaker: 1
01:31:27
have the room look like this. I wanna have this color, this wallpaper. And suddenly, everything starts to prompt in a way that you can actually render in real time a video game, a movie, a visual experience. And it goes to this point that we’re unleashing the capacity for human imagination and creativity with these systems because it’s no longer just a look ai two dimensional image.
Speaker: 1
01:31:48
It’s now an actual three-dimensional object that then renders the visuals to make this happen. So we’re starting to see, I think, the next era of these models that goes beyond just text prediction.
Speaker: 0
01:31:57
What do you think, Aaron? Meh.
Speaker: 5
01:31:59
There was another release last week of, experimental project for browser use by Gemini, which is another advantage because YouTube has obviously an incredible amount of screen sharing data and and videos. So so you have, you know, like like we used to think about vatsal as just like, okay, it’s it’s gonna be, you know, for for developing, you know, CG characters or something, but it’s it’s actually just ai like just all of the use cases of a computer are also on YouTube.
Speaker: 0
01:32:24
Project Mariner is the name of it. Right? Where your Chrome extension AI can control your browser to do things.
Speaker: 5
01:32:30
And then if you go to the AI studio from Gemini, they they have a mode where you can turn on your webcam and and then you you basically it has full visual, kind of access to anything. And and so they’re they’re cranking. And it’s super exciting because, like, just you can tell that Google’s woken up, and and they are just on full assault.
Speaker: 5
01:32:53
So the I mean, just in 10 days, the quantum, the AI, open source, Gemini updates, it’s like every morning you’re waking up to a Sundar tweet that is that is some new breakthrough. So Well,
Speaker: 0
01:33:03
yeah, it’s amazing when you fire 20,000 people who weren’t doing any work and were involved in Ai nonsense, and then you Yeah. Sai, hey. And then surrogates shows up.
Speaker: 1
01:33:13
That’s not the point. Point the point is they’ve had this compounding, you know, infrastructure advantage, data advantage, personnel advantage. And now they were just a little late to the game. But when you
Speaker: 0
01:33:23
But they were all distracted is my point. They were distracted with nonsense. You know that’s true. Come on. The first version of this came out, it was making Abraham Meh Remember a African American and Okay. That’s right. True. Asian. You know? Like, they were distracted.
Speaker: 1
01:33:36
Okay. A big part of Google’s orientation historically has been don’t mess the don’t mess up the machine. A classic ai of big company dilemma where if I do something that’s either disruptive to my core business or if I do something wrong where I will invite regulatory and consumer scrutiny, I’m gonna get wrecked.
Speaker: 1
01:33:52
And so they avoided launching stuff early. And what they’ve done is they’ve changed the posture in the last 2 years. Yes. And now the posture is launch early, launch aggressively, push hard. We have to win this battle or we’re gonna get eaten alive.
Speaker: 1
01:34:04
And it’s amazing to see the founders and and Sundar lead this organization. Yep. I think there were a lot of question marks a year ago, but I think that the questions have been answered.
Speaker: 0
01:34:13
I agree. I I I’m saying it right now. I think we’ve hit peak OpenAI in the market. I think they’re gonna be the number 3 or 4 player. I think Gemini, Meta, and XAI are going to lead them. If we’re sitting here in 3 years, I think OpenAI is number 3, 4, or 5, not 1 or 2. I don’t think they get the 1 or 2 slot.
Speaker: 0
01:34:34
What do you think, Aaron? OpenAI, who’s in the 1 and 2 slot?
Speaker: 5
01:34:38
Ai. I don’t think you wanna bet against Sam and Greg. You don’t wanna bet bet against Elon. You don’t wanna bet bet against Sergei now, you know, in in office with, with Sundar, you don’t wanna bet bet against Sai. So I think Ai think the rankings are kind of less interesting as much as just the fact that that it’s like game is on.
Speaker: 5
01:34:53
You do not have you do not have incumbents that are sleeping at this point. That’s just gonna push everybody forward. Sai, yeah, ai just an incredible time for everybody.
Speaker: 0
01:35:02
What a time to be alive. Alright. For the, sultan of science, David Friberg, the chairman dictator, Chamath Ai Pattaya, and I don’t have a nickname for you, Aaron Levie, but we will have one soon. This is the All In Podcast. We miss you, Saloni Pooh. We miss you, say, come back soon, Saxxy Pooh.
Speaker: 3
01:35:19
Come back soon, Sax.
Speaker: 0
01:35:20
We miss you. Ai, everybody. Have a great Christmas break and we’ll see you shortly. Go sign up for our spam, at allin.com. Sign up for the spam newsletter. We’ll send you some, updates on ai. No. It’s what you think to sign up
Speaker: 2
01:35:32
for. I’m
Speaker: 0
01:35:32
joking. I’m talking.
Speaker: 2
01:35:33
Sign up
Speaker: 0
01:35:34
for Halloween dot com.
Speaker: 2
01:35:34
Love you, guys.
Speaker: 4
01:35:38
We’ll let your winners ride.
Speaker: 0
01:35:41
Rain Man David Cyrus.
Speaker: 4
01:35:45
And it said, we open sourced it to the fans, and they’ve just gone crazy with it.
Speaker: 7
01:35:49
Love you, Westy. Queen of quinoa.
Speaker: 2
01:35:58
Besties are gone.
Speaker: 0
01:36:01
That is finding a dog thing.
Speaker: 7
01:36:09
We should all just get a room and just have one big huge orgy because they’re all just useless. It’s like this, like, sexual tension that they just need to release somehow.
Speaker: 0
01:36:17
Wet your Let your feet. Let your
Speaker: 4
01:36:19
feet. Feet. Feet. Feet.
Speaker: 2
01:36:21
Feet. Feet. Feet. Feet. Feet. Feet. Feet. Feet. Feet. Feet. Feet. Feet. Feet. Feet. Feet. Feet. Feet. Feet. Feet. Feet. Feet. Feet. Feet. Feet. Feet. Feet. Feet. Feet. Feet. Feet. Feet. Feet. Feet. Feet. Feet. Feet. Feet. Feet. Feet.
Speaker: 0
01:36:22
Feet. Feet ai
