E23: Radical DAs, breaking down FB/Google vs. Australia, sustained fear post-vaccine & fan questions!

Follow the besties: https://twitter.com/chamath https://linktr.ee/calacanis https://twitter.com/DavidSacks https://twitter.com/friedberg Follow the pod: https://twitter.com/theallinpod https://linktr.ee/allinpodcast Intro Music Credit: https://rb.gy/tppkzl https://twitter.com/yung_spielburg Intro Video Credit: https://twitter.com/MikeSylvan Referenced in the show: WSJ - Lake Tahoe Property Sells for $1.6 Million in Bitcoins https://www.wsj.com/articles/lake-tahoe-property-sells-for-1-6-million-in-bitcoins-1407534997 The Changing World Order by Ray Dalio Chapter 2: The Big Cycle of Money, Credit, Debt, and Economic Activity https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/money-credit-debt-ray-dalio/ Show Notes: 0:00 Reflecting on the controversial Robinhood interview, iterating on the show format, getting back to basics 10:52 Chesa Boudin cancelled on us, radical DAs & local prosecution in SF & LA, why criminal justice reform resonates 34:44 Breaking down the Facebook/Google situation in Australia, understanding fair use, potential saving grace for traditional media? 47:26 Vaccine update, conditioned fear sustaining post-vaccine 58:58 Fan Q&A: what the besties are investing in over the next decade, anti-portfolio, biggest current portfolio risks, what would you teach every 12-year old

Speaker names marked ? are inferred from speaking time and the show’s known hosts — they are not voice-verified.

• 0:00David Friedberg?

  Jake, are you gonna do your Trump impression? We're gonna do your, your-

• 0:02Jason Calacanis?

  Okay.

• 0:03David Friedberg?

  Yeah.

• 0:04Jason Calacanis?

  Everybody, I'm getting my Twitter handle back next week.

• 0:06David Sacks?

  Don't give him derangement syndrome right before we start the pod.

• 0:09David Friedberg?

  I wanna warm him up.

• 0:09Jason Calacanis?

  Ted Cruz.

• 0:10David Sacks?

  This doesn't warm him up, it gets him deranged.

• 0:12Jason Calacanis?

  Get your show notes up, bitches.

• 0:16Speaker 03

  Let your winners ride.

• 0:19Speaker 03

  Rain Man David Sacks.

• 0:23Speaker 03

  And I said, we open source it to the fans and they've just gone crazy with it.

• 0:27Jason Calacanis?

  Love you, guys.

• 0:28Speaker 03

  Queen of Kinwa.

• 0:33Jason Calacanis?

  Hey, everybody. Hey, everybody. Welcome to another All In Podcast. With me today, of course, the dictator Chamath Palihapitiya, the queen of Kinwa, David Friedberg, and of course, yeah, definitely the Rain Man is here, David Sacks, who's an excellent driver in the driveway. Yeah. Okay, boys, uh, I guess we made it to episode 22.

• 0:59Chamath Palihapitiya?

  Your intro becomes one second longer for every episode we do. It's just so-

• 1:03Jason Calacanis?

  People love it and people-

• 1:04Chamath Palihapitiya?

  It's so laborious, actually. You know, they don't. They think it's so stupid.

• 1:08Jason Calacanis?

  I am, you have to understand persuasion. What I'm doing is I do the same intro and it warms-

• 1:13Chamath Palihapitiya?

  Okay, see, we're still, we're still talking about the intro. Okay, let's just-

• 1:16Jason Calacanis?

  You're, I see, everybody's obsessed about it. You proved my point. Alright, guys, are we gonna address-

• 1:22David Friedberg?

  Elephant in the room.

• 1:24Jason Calacanis?

  The elephant in the room, or do we just move on to topics?

• 1:26David Friedberg?

  I will say-

• 1:27Chamath Palihapitiya?

  Elephant in the room.

• 1:28David Friedberg?

  After the last show, um, I fought very hard with the three of you to not post that episode.

• 1:37Jason Calacanis?

  You wanted to can't, you wanted to spike the episode.

• 1:39David Friedberg?

  I wanted to spike the episode, and I'll tell you why. Um, I thought it was not good content. I don't think Vlad said anything new or remarkable or interesting. I don't think we had good analysis, and I think the whole thing kind of felt flat and felt like a PR stunt. And I felt that truly and honestly, and I, you know, I made the case to you guys that we should cancel. Um, obviously, I lost. Uh, and I think going forward, we should have a veto right, but you know, we can talk about that offline.

• 2:04Jason Calacanis?

  Did you quit the show, or did you threaten to quit the show?

• 2:07David Friedberg?

  I threatened to quit the show. I'm, I'm gonna, after this, I'm gonna propose to you my rules, my ground rules for, for going forward. One of which I think should be no more PR bullshit from Jason's portfolio, but, um, you know, besides that, I think I might be able to-

• 2:21Jason Calacanis?

  I think I hear a bestie guestie. Is that com.com at the door? Ding dong.

• 2:27David Friedberg?

  And I don't think that we're journalists. And by the way, I don't, I don't think that the journalism thing works for us. I think we're like analysts and commentators and, you know, we have opinions. And so to bring someone on and try and interview them with a four on one format, it just feels weird. It doesn't seem to work. It doesn't create an opportunity for discourse. And frankly, you know, um, when you try and do journalism in this context, you either appear like you're softballing or you appear like you're doing gotcha journalism. And I think both are bad. And so I think it works really well when the four of us just kind of chat and analyze and shoot the shit and have opinions and talk and debate. Um, and so my vote is to kind of avoid doing bestie guesties unless, you know, it's something pretty amazing and critical and we can all kind of build a dialogue with that person around a topic.

• 3:12David Friedberg?

  But, um, yeah, so that's kind of where I'm sitting and how I feel about it. But we've had a lot of debates, obviously, since, uh, since the last episode about it.

• 3:20Chamath Palihapitiya?

  Can I, can I, can I build on what you're saying? Um, you know, it, this is like, kind of like that really, uh, famous Teddy Roosevelt quote about sort of like the man in the arena with the dust on his face, right? Um, I feel like all four of us are in the grind doing things. And I think what makes the podcast good is it's almost like there's like, you know, in a basketball game of four quarters, there's a timeout and you come off the floor and you can actually just take a second to observe what you're seeing. And then the ref blows the whistle and you go back into the game. And I think for me, what makes this thing so fun is I feel like every Friday for these two hours, you know, it's basically the ref calls a timeout or the coach calls a timeout

• 4:02Chamath Palihapitiya?

  and we can just kind of take a breath and just observe, all right, what's happened? Before we get back in the arena. And so, you know, just to your point, um, I don't think we're journalists and I don't think we should try to be, cause I don't think that's the point of what this is. It should be four friends talking about things that are important. And then to the extent that it's important and interesting for other people, they'll listen or not listen. And I think these last few weeks, we got caught up a little too much in, you know, ratings, where's it ranking? How can we go higher? And it's that, the gamification of people's reactions that I think caused us, you know, to do that. Um, whereas the episode before, I actually kind of liked because Draymond is legitimately one of our really good friends, you know? He's a bestie. We see him, we see him many, many times, obviously less during basketball season,

• 4:47Chamath Palihapitiya?

  but a ton when he's outside, we play poker together, we all hang out together. So it's that to me, I think is sort of in bounds. Last week, and then also, you know, last week, I was, I think we were all supposed to be on point. I'll just tell you personally for me. I had an extremely crushing two weeks of work. I was extremely tired. I ended up literally unplugging and not doing anything for three days straight and sleeping. And so I didn't even do my best, even just to be either supportive or, you know, argumentative with Vlad. So I don't think I got anything out of it myself.

• 5:22Jason Calacanis?

  Okay, coming around the horn, Sax, do you, how do you feel? That episode stands on its own. Obviously, it's very polarizing. We got barbecued in the comments. We got barbecued on Reddit. We got barbecued on social media. But then there were a large number of people who said they really liked it. My mom.

• 5:38Chamath Palihapitiya?

  Javelin.

• 5:40Jason Calacanis?

  Robin Hood PR. My portfolio manager. I mean, there were people who liked it.

• 5:45Chamath Palihapitiya?

  Sequoia thought it was excellent.

• 5:47Jason Calacanis?

  Right. There's 12 people in the lodge. Pardon. Sax, give us your candid assessment because you weren't as hard as these other two on it.

• 5:56David Sacks?

  Yeah, I wasn't as hard as these other two. And I do feel like that if they felt they, that we were soft on Vlad, then they should have brought it harder. And they should have gone after Vlad and challenged him more. That being said, I completely understand and agree with what Friedberg is saying that, look, we're not journalists. We're not playing a game of gotcha. It's not our job to go after Vlad. I think a lot of the, you know, the comments on Twitter, that's what they wanted us to do. But that's not who we are, you know?

• 6:27Jason Calacanis?

  It's difficult for business too, Sax. I mean, if you're attacking Vlad and then the next day we have to go into supporting founder mode, it's kind of a bad look, isn't it?

• 6:38David Sacks?

  Yeah, I mean, it's not what we do, right? I mean, we, we are, like Jamar was saying, we are in the arena. We're doing things. We're not critics sitting on the sidelines, pointing out, you know, what the doers of deeds did wrong, you know? And so it's not our job to, you know, run an inquisition on, on Vlad, you know? And so we're not really equipped to do that. I think, I think Friedberg is right that it doesn't really make sense to have guests on the show if the job is to, you know, to get to the bottom of something as investigators, you know? We're not, we're not investigators.

• 7:12Jason Calacanis?

  It was, you know, a big story. Just to sort of put a cap in it from my perspective, you know, I'm always supportive of my guys. I try to be supportive of whoever I invest in, and I try to give them the benefit of the doubt. And this is a situation where, you know, people are upset. There were mistakes that were made. And so I think anything other than demolishing Vlad is considered by some constituency as a failure, right? And so what are we supposed to do here? I can't be trashing my own company that I'm an investor and a supporter of and founders who I believe in. It just would that wouldn't be authentic either.

• 7:45David Sacks?

  There was a moment, there was a moment in the pod, Jason, where I think actually, so on the whole, I thought Vlad did it, did a good job in accomplishing his objective on our pod, which was the same objective he had in front of Congress, which was basically to run out the clock without saying very much, you know? And, you know, he actually, whoever prepped him for for Congress did a pretty good job because he testified for five hours and said nothing quotable, you know, which, which is pretty much the best you can do in that situation. It's kind of the goal for for him.

• 8:15Jason Calacanis?

  Keep your head down.

• 8:16David Sacks?

  Yeah, exactly. So, but there was a moment in the pod last week where I think Vlad got himself in a little bit of trouble. Friedberg did ask actually a pretty tough question about the guy in the street who who had lost all of his life savings. How would Vlad respond to that? He made this claim, well, I saved that person money because I shut down trading at the high. And then we pointed out, no, I mean, it was a high because you shut down trading. You have the causation backwards. And then you you ran and said, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, you know?

• 8:47Jason Calacanis?

  Well, my guy was on the floor. I gotta pick him up. What are you talking about? I called a timeout. I got in there, but let's.

• 8:53David Sacks?

  Yeah, exactly. Yeah. All right. Let's move on. Let's.

• 8:55Jason Calacanis?

  Do we talk about the insanely high profile guest that was planned for March 5th that just canceled on us?

• 9:02Chamath Palihapitiya?

  No, no, we should, we should talk about that.

• 9:03Jason Calacanis?

  Do we put it on the table? Because I, you know, this is the other thing about Protocol, I'll just say Friedberg is, if we have a guest on, you cannot just spike the guest if they took the time to be on. That was my.

• 9:13David Friedberg?

  Unless you tell them before they come on, I may spike you.

• 9:16Jason Calacanis?

  We might spike it if it doesn't go their way.

• 9:18David Friedberg?

  If we don't like it. Yeah, I think

• 9:20Jason Calacanis?

  Do they get that right?

• 9:21David Friedberg?

  None of us do this for a profession. None of us are getting paid to podcast. We don't have any advertisers like.

• 9:26Chamath Palihapitiya?

  I completely agree.

• 9:27David Friedberg?

  We're not here to be a PR machine for people. I mean, Vlad had his frigging PR woman sitting on the Zoom call while we were doing it last week, you know, I like, I just don't think.

• 9:34Jason Calacanis?

  That's a little inside baseball that got interesting, I think. Explain what happened when.

• 9:38Chamath Palihapitiya?

  Well, no, we don't need to go there, Jason. I just think, I just think what Friedberg says is right. Like, we, we do this, we don't make any money from it. We do it because we like to talk. We, I think we all learn from it. I think other folks enjoy it. They learn from it. But I do think that Friedberg's right. We're not going to be used as a show. I think we're learning as this goes. I think we're, we're learning what the ground rules should be, just like any other business. Vlad's made mistakes, he's going to change. We've made some mistakes and we're iterating. And I think one positive iteration that Friedberg has proposed is if any one of us don't like an episode because we think it's basically moving away from our values, we should be able to spike it. And I, I support that.

• 10:16Jason Calacanis?

  I support it generally, but I don't like the idea of inviting a guest on and then it doesn't go well. And then telling, you know, from our perspective, it makes us look bad. And then we tell the guest, well, you came out good and we came out down, therefore we're killing your.

• 10:29Chamath Palihapitiya?

  No, no, no. I don't think that's the point. I think what Friedberg says is like, look, this is not for, to be a marketing thing. And so we're going to ask things that are exposed, that are about having a real conversation where there's real honesty. And if you're going to just be there and bat around, as Sacks said, to run the clock out, then we're just going to spike it.

• 10:48Jason Calacanis?

  Fair enough. Fair enough. I think if that's communicated ahead, I'm okay with it.

• 10:51Chamath Palihapitiya?

  By the way, come with your A game. And this is a great segue to talk about what actually we were a person that was going to come on and realized that they probably were going to get so pilloried, um, that they basically spiked themselves, uh, is.

• 11:06Jason Calacanis?

  Yeah, they opted out.

• 11:07Chamath Palihapitiya?

  Chesa Boudin, the, the district attorney of San Francisco. Tell, tell the guys what happened, Sacks.

• 11:11David Sacks?

  Well, no, we, we invited him to come on the podcast.

• 11:14Jason Calacanis?

  No, no, we didn't invite him to come. He. An intermediary said that she could get him on the pod. Would we like to have him on the pod? We said, we discussed it. We said, sure, have Chesa Boudin on and then go from there, Sax. We didn't like seek him out. He was

• 11:28David Sacks?

  Well, okay.

• 11:28Jason Calacanis?

  Back down to us.

• 11:29David Sacks?

  So he, he, great. So he, but he agreed to be on the show. And then you, our scheduler, got an email out of the blue, like a day or two ago, saying, sorry, he's not coming on the show. No explanation. Right? Isn't that what happened?

• 11:42Jason Calacanis?

  Yeah, that's basically it.

• 11:43David Sacks?

  I mean, so, look, here's what I would say is, Chesa, Mr. District Attorney, you don't have to come on the show, but I will challenge you to a debate, anytime, anyplace, any format, on your policies in San Francisco. So if you have, if you have the wayvose to engage in a debate, I am ready. And I thought Chesa was a guy who had a little bit of courage. I mean, there was that night where people were discussing the situation in San Francisco and on Clubhouse, and he jumped into the room. So I thought this was a guy who had some cojones. So Chesa, if you have, if you have the chutzpah, if you have the cojones, if you have the wayvose, let's debate.

• 12:28Jason Calacanis?

  Let's debate.

• 12:28David Sacks?

  Let's talk about your policies. And by the way, he's an expert. This is what he does. You know?

• 12:35Jason Calacanis?

  For a living.

• 12:36David Sacks?

  He's an expert.

• 12:36Jason Calacanis?

  Isn't he a defense attorney, Sax? You're gonna have a

• 12:38David Sacks?

  He was a public defender. He should, he should mop the floor with me. I'm just some shallow tech bro.

• 12:45Jason Calacanis?

  Yeah, tech bro.

• 12:47David Sacks?

  Who doesn't know anything, who he can easily demonize. So I would say, come on, let's go, let's do a debate. I'll agree to whatever format you want, but we need to talk about what's happening in San Francisco, because crime is out of control and it's his fault.

• 13:02Jason Calacanis?

  Trigger the Young Spielberg Rain Man song right about

• 13:04David Friedberg?

  Here we go. Drop it. Boom.

• 13:09David Friedberg?

  With me cackling.

• 13:11David Sacks?

  Should we, should we talk about it? Let's talk about it. We should talk about what's happening in San Francisco. Okay, so since, since the last pod, there, there was been another victim. Sheria Mas, Masjoka, who was a, a young, a young man from, from, originally from Kenya, who, he came to the United States for college, just like Hannah Abe, uh, who, who was killed on New Year's Eve. He went to Dartmouth, all of his advisors said he was brilliant. He had a young wife and a three-year-old baby. He was in San Francisco for 10 days, goes out running and gets hit, gets, gets killed by another drugged-out,

• 13:49David Sacks?

  hit-and-run driver who had been, uh, named, um, uh, let's see, I think it was, uh, Jerry, Jerry O'Leary Adams, or something like that. I don't have the, the guy's name, but he was arrested four or five times in the last year, and he was released every single time by Buden's office. It's, it's just like the New Year's Eve story where you had this repeat offender, Troy McAllister, hit, you know, he was, he had stolen a, a car, he was fleeing another crime he had committed, he was on drugs, and he killed Hannah Abe and Elizabeth Platt. And this was, this was another case where he was caught five times over the past year, and every single time he was not charged by Buden, he was just let go.

• 14:34David Sacks?

  And so we have this case, we have a, a district attorney who doesn't want to prosecute people. His agenda is decarceration. It's like a fire chief who doesn't believe in using water.

• 14:44David Friedberg?

  Yeah.

• 14:44David Sacks?

  And it.

• 14:45David Friedberg?

  He, he is part of the burn-it-all-down party. Let me challenge you with the argument he might make, which I think I've heard him make a few times, which is really, um, a, a position on the criminal justice system, not necessarily on local prosecution, but really what he says is, once, um,

• 15:06David Friedberg?

  You know, once someone ends up in the criminal justice system in the United States, it causes this cycle of recurrence and the cycle of repeat that is very difficult to get out. It basically minimizes the opportunity for reform for an individual, for a criminal, to reform themselves and to have a shot at being a successful member of society again in the future. And the objective is find other ways to kind of accelerate reform and not use incarceration as the only tool in the toolbox. What is, you know, what is the argument back to him when he makes that point? Because I've heard him make that point a number of times. And how do you kind of move past that point with him?

• 15:44David Sacks?

  Yeah, so, so I'm not saying that incarceration is the only answer, but Buden's only answer is decarceration. He doesn't want to prosecute anyone. He doesn't want to lock anybody up. And we see the results immediately in this community. You have these repeat offenders now killing people. They should have been locked up. It's, you know, Buden's always putting forth these elaborate theories. This is, you know, the San Francisco Chronicle had an article about it, about why these crimes occur. And he never wants to put the fault on the people who are actually perpetrating the crimes. It's always economic desperation. He just put forward a theory that a decline in tourism is causing people to commit more home invasions.

• 16:29David Sacks?

  You know, he never wants, yes, this was in the San Francisco Chronicle article. Here, I'll put it up on the screen.

• 16:34Jason Calacanis?

  I mean, it's crazy. I mean, the other thing you left out, David, I'll say is, and this was really, you know, hits home to anybody with kids, is a food driver for DoorDash, not that it matters which service, but was in San Francisco's Pacific Heights neighborhood, which is the safest and most elite neighborhood in, you know, the Beverly Hills or Bel Air of San Francisco. And his car was carjacked with his four-year-old daughter and two-year-old boy inside. Now, of course, you should not be leaving two kids in the car. Putting that aside, that mistake, which I'm sure this father is suffering over, but he needed to make deliveries, obviously. He made a mistake of leaving the kids in the car, but...

• 17:15Jason Calacanis?

  We all got an Amber Alert last week on our phones. I mean, this is the law level of lawlessness. It's turned into Escape from New York level Gotham City level chaos here. And the criminals know they will not be prosecuted. And this is the key criminal justice problem here. If you say you are not going to prosecute crime and you demonstrate to the hardest core faction of criminals that you don't prosecute, they're going to take advantage of that weakness. And, and that's what's happening.

• 17:45Chamath Palihapitiya?

  Let me take the counterpoint just for a second, just so we can construct what the other side of the argument looks like. The other side of the argument says, okay, these folks are largely, you know, engaged in an enormous amount of petty crime to support their drug habit, right? I think that's probably the, and that, you know, underneath that is just an explosion of opioids and fentanyl and whatnot. Underneath that is sort of economic uncertainty that's been compounding and just basically cresting over. And so folks would say, okay, these guys are a victim of a much broader economic malaise that needs to get fixed. I'm just, I'm just, you know, you're shaking your head, Jason, but I'm just saying, I think that that's where the trail of breadcrumbs grows in the counter, in the counter, in the, in the counter argument. So.

• 18:30David Sacks?

  Well, the, the, the, these are, these are the types of arguments that Chesa makes in order to obfuscate and disguise that his real agenda is basically radical decarceration. You know, he's got this, this childhood background where his parents went to jail when he was just a baby and he grew up. He says his earliest memories are visiting his parents in jail and it profoundly affected his political views.

• 18:55Jason Calacanis?

  And now we have to suffer through this.

• 18:56David Sacks?

  We're suffering for.

• 18:57Jason Calacanis?

  Through his childhood trauma.

• 18:59David Sacks?

  There's his childhood trauma. And so, so Tirmath, you're right about deeper causes, but it doesn't excuse the need to lock people up when they are dangerous to the community. And it's not just petty crime. I mean, let's, let's go through the, the actions he's taken as DA. Okay? So first week on the job, just about, he abolished the whole cash bail system. Okay? Which voters in November just voted with Prop 25.

• 19:25David Sacks?

  To affirm. So voters of California want the cash bail system because it keeps criminals locked up. What Chase has said is that he would replace cash bail with an algorithm. Well, what exactly is that algorithm? He won't explain. Well, he wants to submit to third-party audit. There is no algorithm. They're just letting people go. Okay, then the next thing he did was fire seven veteran prosecutors in the DAs office. Who weren't on board with his agenda. These are people who have spent their whole lives prosecuting murders, rapes. I mean hardcore crime and it takes years of experience to learn how to be a prosecutor like that. So for him to just purge this office of these veteran prosecutors is a disaster for the city.

• 20:09David Sacks?

  I've been talking to people who used to work in the DAs office and they tell me that the problem goes much deeper than that. That in addition to these seven veterans he purged, over thirty prosecutors, which is about a quarter of the whole office have left. Under his reign because they don't like working for him. So, you know, and he complains about being short-staffed. He says a lot that he can't, you know, prosecute everyone he needs to prosecute. He's so short-staffed. The reason he's short-staffed is no one wants to work for him, you know?

• 20:36David Friedberg?

  By the way, I think it's worth highlighting, this guy was elected, right? So the, the, the city, the voters in the city.

• 20:42David Sacks?

  In a runoff, I understand, right? He, he won by something like 2,000 votes. It was a tiny, tiny number of votes.

• 20:47David Friedberg?

  Regardless, people voted him in on a platform that he very clearly articulated and is now realizing in office. So there was something about that platform that I think is worth noting was and is appealing. Uh, and, and probably is to a large number of people.

• 21:03David Sacks?

  Large number.

• 21:04David Friedberg?

  Right? And.

• 21:05David Sacks?

  No, the, the, the, the part of it that's appealing, okay, is that, is that, is that we, we do believe that there are too many people in prison. And that a better, and a better way to deal with a drug addict who commits, say petty theft is to send them to treatment. Okay. As opposed to putting them in prison.

• 21:22David Friedberg?

  Right.

• 21:22David Sacks?

  So I think we can all agree on that. But, but his agenda is so much more radical than that. He just doesn't want to lock people up. Take, um, take Troy McAllister, okay? This is a dangerous person who, uh,

• 21:36David Sacks?

  He was facing trial for his third strike, okay? He committed armed robbery. He robbed a store with a gun, okay? He was facing a third strike for that robbery. And one of the first things Chesa did when he came in was basically release him for time served. He basically pleaded that down. That was someone who's facing a life sentence. That is the reason why Hannah Abe and Elizabeth Platt are dead is because he didn't want to prosecute. That's a violent offender.

• 22:03David Friedberg?

  Tex, I'm not disagreeing, by the way. I think like what is interesting to me is that so many people have an eye on and agree with the notion that criminal justice system needs reform. The problem is realizing that reform with a radical district attorney doesn't really resolve to a solution. It resolves to more problems on a local level.

• 22:24Chamath Palihapitiya?

  Here's what's

• 22:25David Friedberg?

  And even Chesa said this publicly, which is like, you can't just solve this problem from the DAs office. It is a much bigger and broader problem. And the radical action he's taking isn't solving any problems. It's creating far more. And I think it is worth noting, though, that there is, should, and likely will be, especially with Kamala Harris as vice president, some attempts at reforming on a federal level, you know, how criminals are treated, how the system realizes opportunities for them to reform and come back into society as productive members. But to your point, you lose all sense of safety and security if you try and do it solely on the local level.

• 23:05Chamath Palihapitiya?

  Well, let me ask a question. Like, look, now we have basically political activism and judicial activism on not just the right, right? People used to pillory Trump for putting in all these, you know, extremely conservative judges who felt they were going to just sort of like legislate their own point of view. You know, Supreme Court nominees who were going to try to overturn Roe v. Wade. But it turns out it's happening on the left as well, I guess, just more at the local level. How pervasive is this? Like, meaning the issues of San Francisco, are these the same issues of other cities and towns in America?

• 23:38David Sacks?

  Well, I mean, you've got Gascon in LA who's running the exact same agenda as Chesa Boudin. He's not prosecuting third strikes. He was just sued by an organization of deputy DAs, and the judge is now requiring him to uphold the law, which is three strikes. He will not bring third-strike charges on his own. He's also, this is both Gascon and Boudin now, have prohibited prosecutors from attending the parole hearings of dangerous convicts, murderers, rapists, whatever. And victims groups are up in arms because they need a prosecutor to go there and explain to the parole board why this person does not deserve to be released. And so you now have recall movements forming.

• 24:21David Sacks?

  By the way, they've also done stuff like take death penalty off the table. They've taken gang enhancements off the table. They're like voluntarily, they're unilaterally disarming their prosecution teams. They're taking away weapons at their disposal to lock people up. And this is why you're already seeing recalls forming around Gascon in LA. There's now a recall of Boudin forming in San Francisco.

• 24:43Chamath Palihapitiya?

  David, David, David, go back to what Freebro just said. They're probably not doing a bait and switch on their platform. So let's just like, what do you think it is about what they are saying that resonates on the way in with the plurality of people?

• 24:57David Sacks?

  Yeah. Here's the thing that resonates. And it's not that, again, it goes back to this idea that incarceration is definitely not the only answer. This is where I agree. The problem is Boudin is on the other side of it where decarceration is his only answer, right? We need to use multiple weapons or tools in our toolkit here. So, so hold on. So for example, okay, let's take the, let's take the drug addict who commits a petty theft. We all agree that person should go to treatment, not to jail or prison, right? A nonviolent offender. Okay. But how are you, how are you going to get that person to go to treatment? Because right now, there is no leverage whatsoever to get that person to go to treatment because Boudin's just not bringing charges. He's not prosecuting.

• 25:41David Sacks?

  The choice should be given to that person. Listen, you can either go to jail or you can go to treatment.

• 25:46Chamath Palihapitiya?

  Yeah, carry a stick.

• 25:47David Sacks?

  What's it gonna be? That's right. Now, we have all these social services. Guess what? Nobody uses them because a hardcore addict is not going to avail themselves of those services.

• 25:56David Friedberg?

  I would make the argument that we have a broader, bigger problem with the criminal justice system as it operates. And it is deep and it is complex and it is friggin awful. There's a book from a few years ago that this guy named Shane Bauer wrote. Um, I'm just trying to remember the name. I think it's called American Prison. And the guy goes undercover and he goes and works in a, in a, in a, in a penitentiary in Louisiana. Um, and he reports on what the conditions are like. And these are these, these prisons that are run by private companies that are contracted by the state locally. And what it's like to be an employee at one of these companies and what these employees do and how the prisoners are treated. There is no system for reform. Once you end up behind bars in most prisons in the United States.

• 26:38David Friedberg?

  And that is, um, you know, he makes the argument, others have made the argument that is a, uh, has a long history that dates all the way back to slavery in the United States. And in some cases, it's just about ineptitude. In some cases about unions, especially in California where we have a huge cost for, for corrections. And for the, uh, the healthcare and the pensions for corrections officers. Um, and so there's a lot of complex, competing interests and history that relates to why this criminal justice system doesn't largely work on a moral and ethical basis as we might all kind of, you know, wear our hearts and look at like, at how things are working. And so the problem is everyone sees this or a lot of people will see this. Voters will see this system. Treating people poorly, being inept, being corrupt. And racist.

• 27:21David Friedberg?

  Being racist and they want to fix it. And the way they fix it is they see a guy who shows up and he's like, I'm a sledgehammer. And I'm going to fix it. I'm going to take care of all these people. And the reality is when you try and take a shotgun and shoot it inside of a room, it's going to cause more problems than good. And I think that's really what he is. He is a manifestation of the anger of voters and the anger of people that look at how complex and racist the system is and how difficult it is to resolve these problems. And we're all looking for a simple, big hammer answer. And he's got the biggest mouth around and the biggest hammer. And that's, and that's why people vote for him.

• 27:54Jason Calacanis?

  All right, Chamath, and then we'll wrap it in.

• 27:56Chamath Palihapitiya?

  Absent a few words specifically racist, if you took that out, you could use that entire statement you said and describe Trump as well, meaning the left and the right are moving to these polls where it's all about authoritarian sort of strong men at the federal, state, local level, folks, to your point, David, that just want to go and take a sledgehammer to things. And depending on your political beliefs, or depending on the biases, or depending on your life lived, you're going to gravitate to these two poles. And what's crazy is, over the next 20 or 30 years, these polarizing figures will become crisper, sharper, smarter,

• 28:36Chamath Palihapitiya?

  you know, they'll find a way to foment all of, all of the support without any of the long tail shittiness that Trump figured out. Like, Trump was, you know, he's like a beta test of an idea, right? He was like, version 0.1. Wait till we see version 1.0 of the American strong man or strong woman. It's really going to be fucking scary.

• 28:57David Sacks?

  Well, yeah, and this is, this is a guy who was a fan of Hugo Chavez, long after he revealed himself to be a strong man intent on ruling for life. And so, yeah, he is very much in that mold. He is a sledgehammer to the system. But, but look, I think, and the problems are big and complicated. But look, we all have a role to play. The reformers have a role to play. Public defenders and defense attorneys have a role to play. And the district attorneys and prosecutors have a role to play. And the problem we have right now, and the role of the district attorney is to prosecute, okay?

• 29:31Jason Calacanis?

  I don't think that this, by the way, Sax, is a very difficult problem to solve. I think there are just so many misaligned incentives. It's very clear that we don't try to reform people when they go to prison, and that there's a weird incentive when it's a for-profit prison, and the customers and the revenue is based on how many people you have in the prison. So if we just get rid of that, there's no private prisons where people have an incentive to keep people in there. And then if we made treatment free for everybody and had overcapacity of treatment centers, and then we look at the Drug schedule and say, these are the drugs that are not, these are the drugs that are not harmful. And these are the drugs that are really, really, really harmful.

• 30:12Jason Calacanis?

  We're looking at a fentanyl issue like it's a cannabis issue and that that's drugs. You know cannabis versus fentanyl is like a nuclear bomb versus like a slingshot. There's no comparison between these two things.

• 30:29David Sacks?

  Right. And, but here's the thing, no one's going to treatment when they're not forced to.

• 30:33Jason Calacanis?

  Well, of course, right. But there's no treatment to go to David. The wait for treatment is six weeks, eight weeks, 12 weeks in a lot of places.

• 30:40David Sacks?

  We, we have a lot of social services that aren't being used. There are, there is a lot of treatment available. People don't want to do it unless they really have to.

• 30:47Chamath Palihapitiya?

  Let me bring it back to where we were before. Maybe the right thing is to actually have a bunch of these sledgehammer folks. Go off for the next 10 or 20 years, you know, the Trumps and the Chesapeake Dines, maybe they're all the same. And maybe what we're all just saying is enough's enough. This system doesn't work, so let's just tear it down. Every single brick of it, brick by brick at the local, state and federal level. All, all I'm saying is, um, just, I would just want to get your reaction to that statement, guys. Maybe, maybe that's what we're seeing.

• 31:16David Sacks?

  That, that is what Buden is doing is he is deconstructing the district attorney's office from the inside. He is destroying it. He is not bringing charges against people. He's driving away all the veteran prosecutors.

• 31:27Jason Calacanis?

  No, but to, to Chamath's point, Sax.

• 31:29David Sacks?

  He's bringing in all his, he's bringing in his own people who all were, uh, public defenders and have that mindset. And people are dying. Look, we can see the results right now in the streets. Innocent people are dying. Hannah Abbe, Elizabeth Platt, Cherea Mascheria.

• 31:43Jason Calacanis?

  It's an emergency, but to Chamath's point, is there any validity Sax or Friedberg to the burn it all down, cause chaos? And then people come in and say, you know what?

• 31:52David Sacks?

  That's not gonna.

• 31:53Jason Calacanis?

  This needs to be fixed. Let's have a nuanced discussion. Will nuance be added to this discussion Sax or Friedberg?

• 31:58David Sacks?

  We need to improve things incrementally. Okay. You're not going to make things better by dismantling the whole district attorney's office. I mean, come on, we need to improve things incrementally.

• 32:07David Friedberg?

  Yeah, I mean, look, everything looks exponential until it cycles back. So, you know, you're only going to have so much evolution to Gotham in San Francisco until enough people put their hands in the air and say, okay, you know, time for a change. Let's go back and let's start fixing this.

• 32:23David Sacks?

  They are. They are saying that. That's why we're having.

• 32:26Jason Calacanis?

  I mean, there's a recall Chesa Boudin movement.

• 32:28David Friedberg?

  Flexing a muscle and making it stronger. I think, you know, we're learning a lot about what approaches to criminal justice reform work and what approaches do not work. And it is clear that a local only non prosecution position is not going to work with respect to both criminal justice reform and the satisfaction of the society at large. And we're realizing that. And I think we are inevitably, I mean, there's so many people that are up in arms, we are inevitably going to cycle back the other way at some point very soon here.

• 32:54David Sacks?

  Yeah. And honestly, I think you guys are over intellectualizing this a little bit, you know, when when Sharia died because he got hit by by that repeat offender, they asked his wife, who's responsible for this? She said, very clearly, the DA. That is who is responsible. And she's right. Let's stop over intellectualizing this. I know the problems are big and complicated. Frankly, people like Chesa prey on that because they can kind of obscure what they're doing with, you know, some nice sounding obfuscation, some nice sounding words. But the reality is, he's not prosecuting the way he needs to. We got to stop this.

• 33:32Jason Calacanis?

  Yeah, and it is possible to have nuance and to hold multiple ideas in your head at the same time, David. You could, there's a practical reality to, people cannot murder people, people cannot drive in cars and run red lights on fentanyl while saying, the criminal justice system is incredibly biased and racist and people who are of color in Texas, you know, wind up in jail for five or 10 years for selling a bag of weed. And then we're investing in companies that are making weed gummies or people are buying stock in weed companies at the same time. You can't have one person who's a black teenager in Texas going to jail for decades for doing what somebody in California or Seattle or Canada is getting an IPO for. I mean, this is a fundamental injustice.

• 34:17Jason Calacanis?

  In the world and you're right, that's something that Chester prays on, but there must be nuance here where we look at each individual situation and say, what are the ways to solve the problem surgically, not with a shotgun to David Friedberg's point, but with maybe a scalpel and a sniper rifle? Do we want to move on to questions from our audience because they submitted hundreds of questions? Or do we want to move on to the Australia news and Facebook backing out of publishing news?

• 34:41Chamath Palihapitiya?

  Let's end, let's end with the Q and A, I think. Sacks, what the fuck is going on with Facebook in Australia and climate change? And this is insanity.

• 34:50David Sacks?

  Yeah, so I think what's going on in Australia is contemplating a law that would require Facebook and Google, and I think just those two companies to essentially pay royalties for hyperlinks to news publications. And I think this is mostly at the behest of some powerful newspaper magnates down there. I think like Rupert Murdoch and.

• 35:14Jason Calacanis?

  I love the way you say magnates.

• 35:16David Sacks?

  Well, they are, I mean, you know, and so, but this issue is going to be very closely watched by Europe and maybe even the US. It's basically like a wealth transfer from Google and Facebook to the traditional media and to traditional publishers. This is an issue where I actually side with Zuckerberg and Facebook on this. I mean, I kind of throw up a little bit in my mouth saying that, but, but, no, but look, Tim Berners-Lee has come out and said that it could really interfere with the open internet and the worldwide web.

• 35:56David Sacks?

  If you start to tax hyperlinks, I mean, historically, hyperlinks and the titles on hyperlinks were, were fair use. You could, you could use those things without violating somebody else's copyright or need to pay them a royalty. And so I think that it's bizarre to me that, that Facebook and Google wouldn't now be able to use hyperlinks. And I'm kind of worried about where that goes and you know, I.

• 36:24Jason Calacanis?

  Well, Facebook, Facebook said that they're not going to publish.

• 36:27Chamath Palihapitiya?

  Now for Australian news and then but then they followed that up with they were also going to start dismantling any anti-climate change content. I don't know if that's just just in Australia.

• 36:39David Sacks?

  There's labeling. So there's another thing going on, which is they've decided now to label any posts involving climate change, which is part of the whole censorship debate. And and so, yeah, I mean, well, it's separate but related in the sense that the traditional media is cheering on censorship. But then when Facebook essentially censors these links because they don't want to pay royalties to the traditional media, then the traditional media is up in arms. And so they're very selective in how they how they view these issues. My principle is very consistent, which is I want an open internet. I'm against censorship in all of its forms. And I and I, you know, and I'm worried that this new Australian law could really lead to some lead to an overall reduction or shutdown.

• 37:24Jason Calacanis?

  Here's what's really, I think, going on is that with fair use, the doctrine of fair use is a four-part test. You're a lawyer, obviously, you know all this Saks, but to sort of educate people in the audience who don't. There's no specific number of characters, no specific percentage of the original work that you can use you to clear yourself of fair use. Fair use is a test when it goes before a judge, a judge looks at this four-part test, the percentage of the work you used, is the public confused? Is there some educational or criticism version of it? So if you were to use 10% of this podcast and you were to wrap it with, you know, put us in a picture window, and you were 50% of it, and there was no confusion that you were commenting on this,

• 38:09Jason Calacanis?

  that would be fair use. Or if you were to use it in educational system, and if you were monetizing it. Now, if you were to just clip our podcast, like this one website clipped the podcast and made 60 clips of it, took our file, and I sent them a cease and desist action and said, hey, don't do this, we're doing it ourselves. They fought us, and they said, we're fans. And I said, I don't care if your fans are not, you're not linking back, you're not giving us credit, and you're doing 60 clips. If you want to do one or two clips, and you want to comment on it, that's fine. But you can't take all 60 clips and make a 60-clip version of this. And so fairness is in the word fair use. The problem with Zuckerberg and with how Google has used

• 38:47Jason Calacanis?

  Journalist content is they are clipping out specific sections of it and putting it in something called one box on Google. So many of you might have said, how many people, you know, how many pounds are in, you know, whatever, or what time is this TV show on? And then the content that was made by The Ringer or The New York Times gets clipped and they put just that section, David, with an algorithm and they give you the answer. So you don't need to go visit that website. This is tipping over into what I would call unfair use because you're eliminating the person linking. Now, let me finish. Yeah. If it was just the URL and you didn't pull the headline, you didn't pull the abstract, and you didn't pull a photo, that would be fine. There is a very easy solution to this,

• 39:30Jason Calacanis?

  which is if you want to pull the link and the headline, you pay $0. But if you want to pull anything else, 100 characters, etc., you need to get a license from that person, unless you are doing actual criticism. So there's nothing to stop anybody in Australia right now from taking a screenshot of a New York Times story or an Australian, you know, newspaper story and writing some commentary on it. You just can't wholesale take everything. And so what we're seeing here is a real-time negotiation between private parties into what is fair. And I think Google has a really rich history of sharing revenue. The App Store, they give 70% to app developers. YouTube, they give 55% to creators. And with AdSense,

• 40:13Jason Calacanis?

  they let you put AdSense on your website and they give you 68 cents on the dollar or something in that range. They never actually disclose the exact percentage, but that's what I'm told it is. Facebook has given $0 to Instagram users, $0 to WhatsApp users, $0 to Facebook. Folks, they're too greedy. And what Facebook needs to do is either not use the content or come up with some reasonable payment and come to an agreement with these folks who are now banding together. And they're realizing the traffic we get from Facebook and Google is not worth what they're taking away from with us, which is all that revenue that, you know, they earned in the free market. And so this is a free market debate, and I think the government should stay out of it to a certain extent and let the free market work, which is all

• 40:56Jason Calacanis?

  publishers should get together in the United States and confront Facebook and say, pay us unless you use anything more than the headline.

• 41:03Chamath Palihapitiya?

  But Jason, I think these things are interconnected though, right? On the one hand, if you're, if you have an economic stake in distribution of content, but then you're also then going to decide under, you know, an opaque definition, what is truth or not truth, you all of a sudden just become, I mean, the purest form definition of a publisher. Right? And I think it just becomes a very treacherous place for both Facebook and Google to end up in. So it's almost

• 41:31Jason Calacanis?

  Well, Google's paying the bill, by the way.

• 41:33David Sacks?

  Yeah, no, you're right. Google's paying for it. Facebook decided not to, but Facebook, they said something like only 4% of their, their, their posts involve this kind of content. So it's just not a big deal for them the way it is for, for Google.

• 41:47Jason Calacanis?

  Well, I think it is a big deal for Facebook. They're just trying to make a point here because Zuckerberg's

• 41:51David Sacks?

  Yeah. Yeah. And they're, they're being, they're being, they're being overly heavy-handed in their response. There's no question about it. They're, they're throwing their weight around. It doesn't look good, but I'm not defending Facebook. I'm defending the principle. I mean, look, if this Australian principle were used, you wouldn't have the Drudge Report. You wouldn't be able to create a site of, of news.

• 42:09Jason Calacanis?

  No, you could if it was commentary. You could put the link and write commentary. It's when you just rip the links, people are objecting to ripping the links without any commentary. Judge Report rewrites the headline, puts his own spin on it and then links. He would never get caught into this and there is no publication that would ever object. What they're objecting to is taking the photo, taking the first paragraph and the, the, the synopsis is 30 or 40% of the value. And so Facebook is a better and Twitter is with their algorithms are better front pages than the New York Times front page.

• 42:41David Sacks?

  Well, why isn't this applying to Twitter then?

• 42:44Jason Calacanis?

  I, I think it will ultimately. They'll, they'll go there as well. I think this will become the test case, which is if you want to take more than just the headline, And like, you know, basically that's it, or the URL. If you want to have that little snippet, pay us. Pay us something. It doesn't have to be a lot, but this could actually solve if these networks that are making tens to hundreds of millions of billions of dollars. If they just said, you know what? 1% to the news organizations to keep them viable, just like anybody else would pay in a licensing fee for terrestrial radio.

• 43:17David Sacks?

  Why is the Australian government setting the price? And why are they only applying this to Google and Facebook?

• 43:23Jason Calacanis?

  Well, I think they're going to go right down the line. I think it's just a starting point, but to my point I said earlier is I don't think the government needs to do this. I think the news organizations en masse should get together and put their foot down and say no. And if they did, they would get paid.

• 43:37David Sacks?

  It sounds like what the government should do is clarify what fair use entails. And then maybe it's just a link plus a title. I mean, look, it's never just a link, right? It's a hyperlink plus the.

• 43:48Jason Calacanis?

  The snippet.

• 43:49David Sacks?

  Plus the word. Yeah, exactly.

• 43:50Jason Calacanis?

  Yes, the snippet is the issue.

• 43:52David Sacks?

  Right, so fine. So the government should clarify what fair use is. And then if Google and Facebook or whoever want more, they got to go negotiate for it.

• 44:00Jason Calacanis?

  Exactly.

• 44:00David Sacks?

  But, but Australia is doing more than that. They're setting the price and they're limiting their overreaching policy just to Google and Facebook because they know that if they applied it to everybody.

• 44:10Jason Calacanis?

  By the way, we do that. We already do this in the United States, David, with local carriage of news organizations on terrestrial TV. So we already have, we already mix it up with the FTC doing this with licenses and the public good. So it's the extent.

• 44:24Chamath Palihapitiya?

  I think the other thing that, you know, is going to happen with all of this is like on the other, on the other side of this, the actual media organizations themselves that theoretically could benefit from this are frankly just going out of business anyways. There's a, you know, there's a Wall Street Journal alert for the owner of the LA Times who's about to sell the Times. Like, it's very likely that the Times in four or five years doesn't even exist. So I don't really know where all of this goes, except that, you know, everybody's just going to be an individual person blogging and tweeting whatever opinion they want. Right? So there'd be no money to pay anybody because it won't really matter. But what will be left is then these rules on arbitration of fact and fiction. And I think that that's where we're going to end up. That's going to be a crazy place.

• 45:10Chamath Palihapitiya?

  Because then those folks, those folks then really are the puppet masters.

• 45:14David Sacks?

  Yeah, I, I, I, I agree that these traditional publications have like a fundamental business model problem. And it's not going to be solved. Like, I think there's a, like a misplaced blame on Facebook and Google. I mean, the fundamental problem with all these publications are you go search for a news article on something. And there's like 10 versions of the same thing or more 100 versions. And you know, when, when newspapers, we used to have thousands of newspapers all across the country and they had a, a local geographic monopoly. But once it all got digitized and moved online, you realize how much redundancy there was. You have thousands of reporters creating the exact same thing. And there needs to be consolidation. It doesn't make sense to have 100 articles.

• 45:52David Friedberg?

  Not only that, but a point we made last time, which is, um, you know, facts have largely commoditized or most facts. Like, you know, remember we used to open the newspaper and look at what the stock market prices were. We, we opened the newspaper and looked at the sports scores. We looked at what happened in this place and this place. Facts about events, facts about the prices of things, facts about sports scores. That's all completely commoditized. I mean, that's like 90% of the content of what people used to read the newspaper for has gone online. And so as we talked about last time, newspapers and publications of the like have largely moved into, you know, different sorts of narrative. And, um, you know, it's created a marketplace that has a lot more competition because anyone can write that. As we are, we're seeing with Substack and Medium and.

• 46:36Chamath Palihapitiya?

  As we're seeing with our own podcast.

• 46:38David Friedberg?

  And we're seeing with our own podcast. And I think that's, um, this feels to me like, you know, I went to a media conference back in 2008. And there was this huge battle between Google and Viacom. And I, I was at the conference and I think Larry Page was on stage or someone, or Eric Schmidt was on stage. And the Viacom CEO got up and he's like, when are you going to start paying us for our content? And I think that that. And you really screamed at him in a room of like 800 people. And I feel like that same kind of point of view has persisted until there's finally some legislation that they feel kind of gets them justice. Meanwhile, the world has passed them by. And, you know, I think this, uh, this will be kind of some transitory, uh, legislation

• 47:22David Friedberg?

  that ultimately the content is going to democratize anyway, and the content creation is going to democratize.

• 47:26Chamath Palihapitiya?

  Last topic for me, because I really want Friedberg's answer to this, because I also just saw an alert, how the federal government is opening up a vaccination site in Miami-Dade County. I actually saw Francis Suarez retweet it. Um, what the hell's going on with vaccinations? Are we gonna get vaccinated soon?

• 47:43David Friedberg?

  I said it in December, and I tweeted about it, and I've repeated it multiple times since, that the US has enough supply to vaccinate pretty much anyone that wants to get vaccinated, because we are producing and delivering three to four million doses per day in the US right now. And, um, there is a, just a fundamental issue, especially like, I mean, look at California, you know, they haven't opened up, quote unquote, vaccination to people outside of tier, or what they call tier 1A. Um, and so this is much more of a kind of policy issue than, uh, an administrative issue, um, than a supply and demand issue. There's enough people that want the vaccine, and there's enough vaccine. So just let people get fucking vaccinated. Um, and so I feel like the market forces are now

• 48:28David Friedberg?

  kind of converging with policy a little bit more than they were a month ago. And the policymakers are no longer fighting and complaining about supply and complaining about constraints. You know, we've got mass vac sites now in California. The amount of money that's being wasted, by the way, in this process, makes me want to vomit every time I read about it. That's a whole nother separate issue. But it feels to me like we're probably May, June, when enough people are vaccinated that we can have, you know, a circumstance where people are going to fly without masks and be comfortable doing so. But I'm sure there will be these over, you know, constraining rules around what people can and can't do in public for a very long time. Like I mentioned, what happened. I do want to say one thing that I've noticed. We, we were, we were all, we played some poker the other night, and we were with a friend. Who got vaccinated?

• 49:13David Friedberg?

  And I was like, he said, this is my first time playing poker with people. And I was like, well, you got vaccinated. Like, why aren't you? He's like, well, I don't know if other strains are going to get me. Or, you know, if this thing's evolving and other people are going to get sick. And if you think about what's happened over the last year, people have been conditioned to be afraid. And so even though we're getting vaccinated, even though this thing is moving and working, I'm concerned that we're not going to end up in a more civil state. Schools aren't opening. People aren't flying. People aren't doing stuff even after vaccinations and science and data shows that these things are okay.

• 49:44Jason Calacanis?

  Except in Texas and Florida.

• 49:44David Friedberg?

  And maybe there's some, maybe there's some cases of it. But I, what I'm saying is like, you know, the human subconscious gets trained first, and then our conscious mind rationalizes what we feel. We've all now been trained over the past year to be very afraid. And then we all come up with these rational excuses about why I can't do X, Y, and Z. It's like, but you've been fucking vaccinated. You're fine. Like, all the data, all the science says, go do whatever you want to do. Go into a nightclub sweaty, next to people throbbing beats and music.

• 50:15Jason Calacanis?

  Go, Friedberg, yes. Tell us, tell us about the throbbing nightclub, Friedberg. I've never seen you so animated.

• 50:20David Friedberg?

  It's like that scene from Good Will Hunting. Remember when he talks to the psychologist, like?

• 50:23Jason Calacanis?

  Tell us about your rave stories again from the 90s.

• 50:26David Friedberg?

  Activating fourth emotion. Yeah. Throbbing rave, give up to the mob.

• 50:31Jason Calacanis?

  Hullsading, robbing music.

• 50:33David Friedberg?

  Bodies and?

• 50:34Jason Calacanis?

  Did the molly just kick in, Friedberg? Did you drop a molly at the start of the pod?

• 50:38David Friedberg?

  But my point is like, people are really afraid. And I think, uh?

• 50:41Jason Calacanis?

  I just got the best idea for an episode.

• 50:42David Friedberg?

  The biggest concern I have is frankly, less about are we going to get vaccinated? I feel like the convergence between market forces and government nonsense is now going to allow us to all get vaccinated. But, uh, but the issue is really going to be like, how do you break through these rules and the fear? That, that basically becomes?

• 50:57Chamath Palihapitiya?

  I want, but I don't understand. Where, where are the max vaccination sites in California? And who's eligible? Like, why aren't we just making this thing like a drive through?

• 51:05David Friedberg?

  We should, this is where we can absolutely?

• 51:07Chamath Palihapitiya?

  They're popping up right now. It's ridiculous.

• 51:09David Friedberg?

  I think we, we all have absolute violent agreement that California is so messed up with respect to how we're vaccinated. We have so much supply. We're sitting on half our frigging supply right now in California.

• 51:18Jason Calacanis?

  There's 30 million vaccines sitting on shelves. We are? Now at 75% deployed, 80%.

• 51:23David Friedberg?

  California's got like four or five million vaccines sitting in storage.

• 51:26David Sacks?

  It should be a drive through and you just get in line and you go.

• 51:29Jason Calacanis?

  In some places it is.

• 51:30David Sacks?

  What we're doing is, you know, but what we're doing now is you got to schedule an appointment.

• 51:34Jason Calacanis?

  Oh yeah, scheduling's bullshit.

• 51:35David Sacks?

  Because you first you got to qualify, then you got to schedule an appointment. And then the clinic or whatever is only open from nine to five. And so like, how many doses are they really administering when you got to make an appointment? Probably one every half hour. So maybe they get through 16 people a day or something like that.

• 51:50David Friedberg?

  Prove qualifications.

• 51:52David Sacks?

  Yeah, and they get fined a million dollars and lose their medical license if they inject the wrong person. So, I mean, you're talking about 16 people per day at a site when they could be doing a couple of hundred. I mean, it's crazy.

• 52:03Jason Calacanis?

  Well, Johnson and Johnson is coming and that's refrigerator stable, right, Friedberg?

• 52:08David Friedberg?

  You don't even need it.

• 52:08Jason Calacanis?

  We now have bought 1.2 billion vaccines.

• 52:11David Sacks?

  But let me go back to Friedberg's point about when will life get back to normal? I'm not as pessimistic as you are, Dave, about this idea that life won't go back to normal. And part of the reason why is I'm seeing so much outrage about school closures right now. California is one of the only states in the country that's still completely closed all the schools. And people are absolutely up in arms. I'd say it's as big an issue as this exploding crime issue. Crime is a big issue in the cities and school closures is the big issue in the suburbs. And if these two things don't turn around, I think Gavin Newsom's going to get recalled. I mean, people are just on fire about this.

• 52:46David Friedberg?

  Yeah. But I mean, my point was like our wealthy conservative, you know, friend that lives in Florida was afraid to go do stuff even after he's been vaccinated. And I think that's what's permeated everywhere. It's just like there's.

• 53:02Jason Calacanis?

  Friedberg, it's like a shark attack. You know, if there's a shark attack, you know, at Half Moon Bay or whatever, people don't swim there for a couple of weeks. And then somebody swims and they're like, oh, the water's great, people will jump back in. I think it's April, David, to your point of when this goes back to normal. Because if you look now, people have been saying, Friedberg, correct me if I'm wrong. Would you put a 5X multiplier on the confirmed COVID cases, a 4X multiplier?

• 53:24David Friedberg?

  Yeah, 5X, 5X I think is the right median.

• 53:27Jason Calacanis?

  So if you have 30 million people who've had the vaccine, had COVID, you're looking at five times that is 150. Now you have 60 million people who have been vaccinated. We're at 210. There were 330 million Americans, 70 million are under, are kids. So, you know, we're, we're basically getting to herd immunity. And if you look at the slopes right now, what is causing the drop in cases this massively, David? Is it herd immunity, vaccine, or are people suddenly wearing masks? What is it?

• 53:54David Friedberg?

  There, there's complexity because everyone assumes that there's one thing that affects the whole population. But remember, the way viruses work is they're hyper local. And so the local population dynamics looked at on a scale is where you see the statistical results of the scale. And so, you know, we saw this in North Dakota, a bunch of people got really sick. They got to herd immunity in communities and then all of a sudden it dropped off the curve. When you zoom out and that's happening, combined with behavioral changes, combined with vaccines, then you start to see these statistical things happen at scale. So it's not a simple answer, but the answer generally can be, we are coming down the slope. We are getting to a point of, you know, general like low case counts, low death counts, slow fatality. And we should be living a normal life, allowing our economy to kind of progress again.

• 54:38David Friedberg?

  Um, and we're still caught up in this kind of fear, fear, fear.

• 54:42Jason Calacanis?

  Pick a date, let's just do this end on this. Pick a date when you think all four besties are vaccinated. I'm going to say April 1st.

• 54:49Chamath Palihapitiya?

  June.

• 54:51Jason Calacanis?

  June, okay. What do you have for a break? I say April 1st, we're all going to be vaccinated.

• 54:54David Friedberg?

  It's literally a choice. I mean, any one of us could go get vaccinated in the next month. I mean.

• 54:58Jason Calacanis?

  How? None of us are over 30 BMI. I mean, Saks was for a minute.

• 55:03David Friedberg?

  California's opening 1B. A lot of the other states are opening broadly. If any of you wanted to get on a plane and go get vaccinated somewhere else, you could. I mean, there's enough places now that have open vax or will in the next 30 days, you can go get vaccinated.

• 55:13Jason Calacanis?

  Okay. So you say 30 days, which would be March 15th or something.

• 55:16David Friedberg?

  Yeah, I think that's a choice for the four of us. If you guys want to hop on a plane, we can go get vaccinated.

• 55:20Jason Calacanis?

  Does anybody have access to a plane?

• 55:21Chamath Palihapitiya?

  But sorry, but doesn't that, you're, you're, you're saying in an open vax state, anybody can show up without proof of residency?

• 55:28Jason Calacanis?

  You have to have a driver's license. I've looked into this.

• 55:30David Friedberg?

  There have been different ways that this has played out, but generally speaking, there are market forces at play where, you know, where there's a will, there's a way. Not saying that you're cutting line and screwing people over, but there are vaccinations that are happening all over the country now with people that want to get vaccinated. And by the way, in California, next week, tier one B opens up. So anyone- What does that mean? What is tier one B? It's a total BS definition. It is absolutely ridiculous. I absolutely think this is the biggest waste of time and money ever. But tier one B definition in California is healthcare, sorry, childcare workers. So anyone that's a teacher or works with children-

• 56:03Jason Calacanis?

  I have kids.

• 56:04David Friedberg?

  Uh, if your nanny or your daycare, uh, people, um, you know, wanted to, they could go in and get vaccinated. Oh, wait, our nanny can get vaccinated? Starting next Wednesday in California. And so all you need to do is go get to a vac site with vaccines. And by the way, they all, a lot of them have vaccination, um, supply now, uh, or they will this weekend. There's apparently a big shipment going out. Um, and also all food and agriculture workers loosely defined. So people that work in grocery stores, restaurants, farm workers-

• 56:31Jason Calacanis?

  You're saying if I have a chef, they can get-

• 56:33David Friedberg?

  If you have a chef, they can get vaccinated. No, no, just-

• 56:35Jason Calacanis?

  I think two people out of four on here might have chefs. I think two of us definitely don't.

• 56:39David Sacks?

  So, so if you take care of your own kids and cook your own food, you can't get vaccinated, but if you do that for somebody else, you can?

• 56:47Jason Calacanis?

  So wait, you're saying if you have a chef and you have nannies, you get vaccinated?

• 56:51David Sacks?

  No, you don't. That's what I'm saying is, is you-

• 56:53David Friedberg?

  Yeah. If you're a chef or a nanny for someone else, you can go get vaccinated next week.

• 56:57David Sacks?

  Right. But, but if you-

• 56:58Jason Calacanis?

  David, what do you want for dinner? I'm coming over right now to make whatever you want. I'll watch your kids this weekend, David. Get me a shot.

• 57:05David Sacks?

  It's so insane. We have all these ridiculous job categories and distinctions. It's just like with the lockdown policy. They had 10 pages of exceptions for essential workers. Listen, if you've got a policy with 10 pages of exceptions, the policy doesn't make any sense.

• 57:19Jason Calacanis?

  Yeah.

• 57:20David Friedberg?

  Like all the, like, and this caused all the controversy in LA. Like anyone that works in the movie business is an essential worker. But people that work, the people that work in restaurants and bars are not essential.

• 57:29David Sacks?

  Let's see this for what it is. It is payoff to do some political supporters. Uh, the, the, the politicians are using, they use essential worker exceptions. And now they're using vaccines as political capital. They dole them out to their supporters. So that, you know, in exchange for, you know, votes down the road.

• 57:49Jason Calacanis?

  Also, the, remember the exception, David, if you serve more than seven courses in your prefix, you can get a vaccine. So that is the French Laundry. If you add an amuse-bouss and an intermezzo, you qualify for the vaccine. There are people going to states, renting houses, and getting driver's licenses and getting vaccines. I know about this.

• 58:10David Sacks?

  It's called vaccine tourism.

• 58:12David Friedberg?

  By the way, think about it this way, in six weeks, I think a lot of those restrictions are going to fall by the wayside because the supply is going to completely outstrip the nonsensical, you know, restrictions and prioritization methods we put in place. And hopefully, God willing, these idiots who have the ability to vaccinate people, open up their sites 24/7 and drop all the bullshit questionnaires and registration requirements, let people drive in, get a shot, wait 15 minutes and leave, and have just some basic principled people on site that can take care of people if they have a adverse allergic reaction and get shots in arms. We have the shots, we have the supply, we're going to be oversupplied by May. We are going to have far more shots and there will be demand. And so, you know, we just need to get this, this kind of nonsense thrown out the window.

• 58:57Jason Calacanis?

  Straight to Q and A. This is from Videsh. He says, where are you investing your money over the next 10 years? So Friedberg, you want to start and then we'll go to Sacks and then?

• 59:11David Friedberg?

  I've talked about this pretty largely, you know, on the podcast. I mean, two areas that are super interesting to me that I'm spending a lot of time on is obviously biomanufacturing. So the idea that we can kind of move away from traditional animal-based agriculture and systems of production to systems where we use genetically engineered microbial organisms to produce molecules and materials and food, and that that, that system of production can have a radical impact on, on the environment, on the opportunity for jobs, on the cost of goods and, and things that humans want and consume. And that's, that's a primary area of interest for

• 59:53David Friedberg?

  me. And I think it's a multi-decade. I think by 2050, you know, we should see.

• 59:59David Friedberg?

  Most of our goods are manufactured rather than being made in the traditional sense, which is basically old technology scaled up, which is what the Industrial Revolution did, but really shift to a new model of manufacturing where we use a smarter machine, which is a biologic organism to make stuff. So that's my address.

• 1:00:15Jason Calacanis?

  Sax.

• 1:00:17David Sacks?

  Yeah, so I'm focused on the area of bottom up SaaS, which is basically business software that can go viral, very much in the mold of Yammer, which was a company I founded and sold back a dozen years ago.

• 1:00:30Jason Calacanis?

  It was a precursor to Slack, let's be honest.

• 1:00:32David Sacks?

  Right.

• 1:00:33Jason Calacanis?

  It could have been 27 billion, but you did not ride your winner. You took the quick Billy and that was not a mistake because it let you invest in the other 20 unicorns, correct?

• 1:00:44David Sacks?

  Kinda. I mean, so.

• 1:00:46Jason Calacanis?

  So, oh, you do have a chip on your shoulder about selling too early.

• 1:00:48David Sacks?

  No, no, it's not a chip. I would say that around the time that PayPal hit a $200 billion market cap and Slack had a $27 billion outcome, I started realizing, you know, if I just stuck with my ideas longer, you know, I probably would do better. And I'm like, you know, I don't really need to come up with a new thesis or a new idea. I already came up with the idea 12 years ago, which is to make business software viral. I'm just going to keep investing in that thesis. So it's not that original or new for me, but, but it is, you know, bottom up has become the, I would say, almost the dominant mode now of.

• 1:01:24Jason Calacanis?

  Explain that to somebody who doesn't understand what you mean, bottom up.

• 1:01:26David Sacks?

  Yeah. So, so bottom up means that the entry point for the software is any employee in the company. They can just start using it. They go to your website. They start using it. They spread to their coworkers as opposed to top down. Top down is like the Oracle sales guy who carries a bag and goes to meet with the CIO and, you know, sells them a big expensive implementation. That's the, and that's traditionally what business software used to be, is a, is a big top down IT sale. Bottom up is, is just going in through the rank and file employees.

• 1:01:55Jason Calacanis?

  All right. Chamath Palihapitiya, for the next 10 years, where are you putting your money?

• 1:02:00Chamath Palihapitiya?

  Uh, two areas. Uh, in a qual- well, it's not even 10. I would say for the next, for the rest of my life. Um, so it's, I think these arcs are multi-decade, but uh, inequality and climate change. And so, um, you know, the inequality side, what does that mean? It's any business-

• 1:02:18Jason Calacanis?

  By the way, the second you said inequality and climate change, Sax left.

• 1:02:22Chamath Palihapitiya?

  He went to throw up.

• 1:02:23Jason Calacanis?

  He was just like, what?

• 1:02:25Chamath Palihapitiya?

  He went to throw up.

• 1:02:26Jason Calacanis?

  He just read.

• 1:02:28Chamath Palihapitiya?

  He went to throw up.

• 1:02:29Jason Calacanis?

  He's like, oh God, here we go.

• 1:02:31Chamath Palihapitiya?

  Uh, there he's back now.

• 1:02:32Jason Calacanis?

  He's back.

• 1:02:32Chamath Palihapitiya?

  Sax, did you throw up when Chamath said inequality and climate change?

• 1:02:36Jason Calacanis?

  When he said his woke nonsense, did you just go throw up?

• 1:02:39David Sacks?

  No, I, I, uh,

• 1:02:41Jason Calacanis?

  You were just signaling you threw up.

• 1:02:42Chamath Palihapitiya?

  He had to polish his Glock.

• 1:02:46Jason Calacanis?

  He just called the security detail.

• 1:02:48Chamath Palihapitiya?

  He went and he kissed his gold bricks that he keeps in his house.

• 1:02:54Chamath Palihapitiya?

  No, inequality basically means, uh, anything that evens the starting line. So they, if that's healthcare software that solves a chronic condition, or if that's financial software that drives inclusion, um, and then climate change is pretty obvious, but the, the panoply of things that we need to do to basically, you know, slow the warming of the earth. Those are the two areas.

• 1:03:15Jason Calacanis?

  Huge opportunity. And uh, for Vadas, if you even care, I take a remora-like approach. Um, if you don't know what a remora is, you ever see like a big shark and then there's like a bunch of things stuck to it? And it's like following the shark and it just eats whatever. So basically what I do is I'm getting behind these three guys and I just draft on these three sharks and just try to weasel my way onto their cap tables. It's a, it's a living, you know, basically I just go to the poker game and try to, no, uh, in all sincerity, I am stay, I am vertical agnostic because I think the great companies, um, make the verticals. They create the categories and the categories don't exist.

• 1:03:50Chamath Palihapitiya?

  At your stage particularly, yeah.

• 1:03:52Jason Calacanis?

  What's that?

• 1:03:53Chamath Palihapitiya?

  At your stage particularly, yeah.

• 1:03:54Jason Calacanis?

  Yeah. And so what I do in the early stage is I am focused on the process and the process I'm trying to master here is what I do at thesyndicate.com, uh, which is find great companies and share it with now 7,000 accredited investors and let them decide, you know, how much they want to invest in each deal. And just to give people an idea, we are on a $60 million run rate this year of deploy capital via the syndicate. In other words, it'll be four times, five times what my fund will do. The fund has access to a hundred percent of deals, but the syndicate has access to 60% roughly.

• 1:04:28David Friedberg?

  So now that we've broken our no advertising rule.

• 1:04:30Jason Calacanis?

  No, I mean, we're all talking our book here. Let's take another question. And Angel is available from Harper Collins Business.

• 1:04:40Jason Calacanis?

  What? Oh, here's a good one.

• 1:04:42David Friedberg?

  By the way, if you want to save money on car insurance, metromile.com. Sorry, go ahead.

• 1:04:46Jason Calacanis?

  Absolutely fantastic. Also, the ticker symbol. What's the biggest investment venture miss? You had early starting out? That would have been a ridiculous return. What is our anti-portfolio looking like? Friedberg, we'll start with you, then go Chima, then go Sacks.

• 1:05:02David Friedberg?

  Oh, I was with Jack Dorsey. And and at this conference and he went around and did a pass the hat on who wanted to invest in his new startup called Square. Oof. That's my story.

• 1:05:18Jason Calacanis?

  What? What is that? A 50? Is that a $50 million miss?

• 1:05:23David Friedberg?

  Um, yeah, I'm not going to say it. It would have been.

• 1:05:26Jason Calacanis?

  You would have put 50K in at 10 million.

• 1:05:28David Friedberg?

  But I mean, the problem here's, by the way, an interesting thing, going back to the point Sachs made earlier and that we've said in the past. You know, when Square went public, there was a lot of questions and trepidation around its valuation. Big fund managers were poo-pooing the company. And what's the market cap of Square today? Sachs, you might know.

• 1:05:45Chamath Palihapitiya?

  Hundred, hundred and 120.

• 1:05:47David Friedberg?

  Hundred 20 billion?

• 1:05:49Jason Calacanis?

  Wow.

• 1:05:49David Friedberg?

  I mean, 125 billion today. That's incredible, right? Because like when they went public, people were kind of poo-pooing it, saying this thing is a, this is a sub-billion dollar company. You know, it shouldn't be worth anything more than a billion dollars and look at it just a few years later. Um, anyway, yeah, I missed it. I missed that one on the seed round and um, and I've just watched with awe what Jack has continued to innovate, to build that business.

• 1:06:11Chamath Palihapitiya?

  As a public company, it troughed at a $4 billion valuation.

• 1:06:14David Friedberg?

  It did, right?

• 1:06:15Chamath Palihapitiya?

  It did, like five years ago. And so within five years, it's gone from 4 billion to 124 billion.

• 1:06:21Jason Calacanis?

  I was in a venture capital fund that invested in it. They distributed the shares. I sold half and I was like, I'll just keep half. I like Jack. I sold half at 72 and now it's at 276. And so, ride your winners, folks. Uh, Sacks, anti-portfolio? Which one is the most painful?

• 1:06:37David Sacks?

  Honestly, I haven't missed that much, just to be

• 1:06:40Jason Calacanis?

  Okay, there you go.

• 1:06:41David Sacks?

  Uh, but

• 1:06:42Jason Calacanis?

  Unbelievable. What a douche. What a douche. What a fucking douche. Well, actually, um, I, I analyzed my chess game with Peter Thiel and actually my check, my castle, uh, Queen's side castle was actually a brilliant move. Uh, if he hadn't pinned my

• 1:06:58David Sacks?

  No, I mean, look, I, uh, I, I, I tend, I, I, look, I don't overthink these things too much. I mean, it's why I'm in like 27 unicorns. If the company looks good, I, I invest.

• 1:07:10Chamath Palihapitiya?

  Is this Phil, is Phil Hellmuth here?

• 1:07:11Jason Calacanis?

  Unbelievable. You have to have a Phil Hellmuth. Well, you know, I got my sixteenth ring, but I've won 29 of the last 30 sessions.

• 1:07:19David Friedberg?

  No, what would you say your total like multiple is on all your angel investing? Like, do you have a sense of what that number is?

• 1:07:24Jason Calacanis?

  That's not the question. Sax, answer the question. Come on. The audience asked what you missed. Can you just be humble enough to say you missed something?

• 1:07:30David Sacks?

  No, no, no, I'll tell you, I'll tell you. So th- th- this was a semi, sort of a semi miss is that, um,

• 1:07:35Chamath Palihapitiya?

  Oh my God, it's not even a miss.

• 1:07:36Jason Calacanis?

  Semi miss.

• 1:07:37David Sacks?

  No, no, no.

• 1:07:38Jason Calacanis?

  Well, here's how I made up for it.

• 1:07:39David Sacks?

  No, no, no.

• 1:07:39David Friedberg?

  I only put in half my normal amount.

• 1:07:41David Sacks?

  No, no, no. Let me tell you what happened. I did miss it. So, uh, back in 2007, um, I thought Twitter was going to take off. I had a, like a former employee who wanted to sell secondary. And so, you know, I had a deal worked out to buy, I think a couple hundred thousand dollars of shares at, I don't know, a $40 million valuation or something like that. And, um, we submitted it to the company and then they roffered it for, cause I think Chris Sock, for Chris Sacks, basically. I don't know if you remember, Sacks had set up like some secondary.

• 1:08:09David Friedberg?

  Secondary thing, yeah.

• 1:08:10David Sacks?

  So, yeah, the, the fact that, you know, I wasn't able to complete that transaction probably cost me, you know, a couple hundred million bucks.

• 1:08:18Jason Calacanis?

  Chamath, anti-portfolio, what sticks out? Well, I have a, I have a huge Airbnb.

• 1:08:23Chamath Palihapitiya?

  Anti-portfolio, huge.

• 1:08:24Jason Calacanis?

  Robin Hood.

• 1:08:25Chamath Palihapitiya?

  You know, Airbnb at a billion, obviously. I actually did invest. I agreed to invest, but then I got into huge public snafu with, with Chesky, cause he was taking a bunch of money off the table and then we ended up not even finalizing the investment.

• 1:08:38David Friedberg?

  And your letter was, your letter was published, your email that you sent out.

• 1:08:40Chamath Palihapitiya?

  My email was leaked, yeah.

• 1:08:42Jason Calacanis?

  It was leaked.

• 1:08:42Chamath Palihapitiya?

  So I was really pissed when they did that. But anyways, that was a decade ago. Not much has changed, I guess.

• 1:08:49Chamath Palihapitiya?

  There is one thing that above all others, which is sadly also in my portfolio. So my portfolio, my anti-portfolio is the same thing. You can guess what it is, but that's Bitcoin. At one point, you know, we controlled low single digits, mid-single digits of the entire float. And had I held on to that, that's talking about, you know, a mid-deca-billion-dollar position. So my anti-portfolio in the unrealized gains or losses, if you will, on Bitcoin is in the many tens of billions of dollars.

• 1:09:24Jason Calacanis?

  Yep, mine is clearly Bitcoin as well because I was reporting on it when it was 10 cents. And I was one of the first journalists to write about it and talk about it on my podcast. And I had like maybe 10 of these Bitcoins in a wallet of, that was a Mt. Gox and it got hacked and it all went away. And then my wife bought it at under 200. And so now we have a joke in the house that my wife is going to because of her incredible trade. Because she saw it as well, return more on her. It's conceivable she'll return more than my entire investing career. So shout out to Jade for getting that one.

• 1:09:59David Sacks?

  Actually, I made that mistake too, that Chamath made of not hodling enough, long enough. So that is painful.

• 1:10:06Chamath Palihapitiya?

  Did you see this article? I fished this article out, but in 2014, I was buying a land at Martis Camp in Lake Tahoe. And I told the sales guy there, Jeff Hall, I said, hey, listen, I'll buy this lot if you let me buy it in Bitcoin because I wanted to promote Bitcoin as a transactional infrastructure. So we went to a company called BitPay. They wired it up and I bought it for 1.6 million dollars in Bitcoin. That was 2,800 coins, which right now is worth 140 or 150 million dollars.

• 1:10:39Jason Calacanis?

  What are you going to build on that lot?

• 1:10:42Chamath Palihapitiya?

  I don't even own that a lot.

• 1:10:43Jason Calacanis?

  You should make it a grave. You should make it a grave plot. You should just.

• 1:10:47Chamath Palihapitiya?

  Well, my ex iPhone's a lot. I hope, you know, she enjoys it, but I'm saying.

• 1:10:51Jason Calacanis?

  You literally could have bought the Knicks, Lakers and the Warriors and been the majority owner in each. All right, let's take another question. What's the number one macro uncertainty or risk you guys are most worried about for your investment portfolios?

• 1:11:06Chamath Palihapitiya?

  There is only one, and I think it's inflation, but I think it's important to understand where inflation is coming from. The single biggest risk to all of us is what's going to happen in the following order of operations. So I think all of this sort of at the coming out of the pandemic, basically what you're going to have is like four or five major trading blocks in the world, right? You have China as a standalone. You have Europe as a standalone. You have America slash North America under Biden. I think it could be more North America as a standalone. And then you have these sort of what I would call random, you know, friends with benefits. Africa, South America, Japan, Korea. Okay.

• 1:11:49Chamath Palihapitiya?

  But those are all bit players to these three huge trading blocks. Everybody was going to go and they're going to go and get vertically integrated. So it sort of builds a little bit on what David said, like you're not going to have, you know, one central place where you get this thing, basically, i.e. China, that you ship on a boat to get over here for a whole host of reasons, national security, carbon, et cetera. So you're going to have all these vertically, you know, vertically integrated supply chains and resilient economies. You know what that does when you have to try to build that stuff? Prices go screaming higher because instead of having one factory in China making nine billion iPhone cases, you have now 50 factories all around the world, each with their own infrastructures and costs and whatever.

• 1:12:35Chamath Palihapitiya?

  And so I think you're going to reflate the world. I don't know when it happens, but that's sort of the biggest risk to all of what we do is that all of a sudden, you know, real rates go to like six or seven percent. And then all of a sudden, you're not going to look at a company trading at 50 times earnings and say, you know, you're going to, you're going to question that. So I think that's the biggest risk that I think.

• 1:12:56Jason Calacanis?

  Friedberg, what's your risk? Max, what's your risk?

• 1:12:58David Friedberg?

  Zach, you go ahead.

• 1:12:59David Sacks?

  Yeah, so actually, mine is pretty similar to Hamas, which is, I think we're accruing these unpayable deficits and debts and obligations. And, you know, all this money has to be paid back at some point that the US government's incurring. I mean, there's a California version of this where we've accrued a trillion dollars of pension obligations that we have no ability to pay. So, yeah, I mean, I think that eventually it translates into inflation, but I think it translates into something even worse, which is, at some point, people become skeptical about loaning money to the US government and, because they don't want the US to be able to just print dollars to pay back these loans.

• 1:13:43David Sacks?

  And the US dollar stops becoming the world's reserve currency. I think the reason why we're seeing Bitcoin go to the moon right now is people are starting to speculate on the idea that this might be the future world reserve currency, because it's not subject to manipulation by, you know, by central banks. And, you know, and let's think, like, that world looks, if you think about like a world in which the US dollar is not the world's reserve currency anymore, in which the government is basically broke, I mean, that is, it's pretty scary to think about.

• 1:14:17David Friedberg?

  There's a Ray Dalio, who's a famous and, you know, prominent hedge fund founder of Bridgewater Associates, wrote an essay, if anyone's interested, called "The Big Cycle of Money, Credit, Debt, and Economic Activity." You can find it online. He published it last year. Highly recommended reading. He has a few chapters that proceed and follow that talks about the grand macroeconomic cycle of governments and societies, and it's really worth the read. I think one really basic principled economic point... Is that governments operate in such a way that their people ask for goods and ask for services.

• 1:15:01David Friedberg?

  The government spends on those services by borrowing more than they're making in income in that year. And that is, I think, the premise for a lot of how governments operate around the world. The only way that that works over time is if your future shows that that borrowing allows you to grow your revenue more. And therefore, you can underwrite taking on debt to pay in the future. So you force growth. And I've said this a couple of times before, but it is the most basic principle, but it is also the most scary and shocking principle. Which is the only way you can afford debt is if you have growth. And that forces you to find growth.

• 1:15:41David Friedberg?

  And when you're forced to find growth, you get all of these unnatural perturbations in terms of economic activity and market forces. It is not necessarily the case that things should and would always grow. And we force things to always grow because of the mechanism by which we fund our services at a government level. And that is what's basically going to ultimately lead to a lot of different types of crises, both kind of financial crises, but also societal crises in terms of revolution and pushes for socialism and all the other things that are typically associated with things like inflation. And so it is the big crisis of the 21st century will be, we underwrote growth in the 20th century.

• 1:16:26David Friedberg?

  And there's a lot of forces that may bring that all to bear this century.

• 1:16:33Jason Calacanis?

  I see one that's maybe a little less acute and a little bit more big picture, which is the number of people living in democracies in the world as a percentage of population, which has been going down. Which if you asked anybody, they would be pretty shocked to hear. But just looking at the percentage of humans on the planet, not the percentage of countries, because the percentage of countries that are democracies or flawed democracies is right now at 45% and we have 50.

• 1:17:03Jason Calacanis?

  Five percent of regimes are authoritarian or hybrid. And the population of people living in those is growing. So we have countries that are authoritarian that are growing. Countries that are democracies, like in Europe or in the West and the US, Canada are declining or not keeping up pace in terms of population growth. And that is, I think, going to be the major issue, which is, does China win capitalism plus authoritarianism, or does democracy plus capitalism work? The next question, I think, is super fascinating, which is, what would each of you wish you could teach every 12-year-old right now? What a great question. Chamath, you want to go first? Do you have something that comes to mind? Or you need a minute to think about it?

• 1:17:45Chamath Palihapitiya?

  Wow, it's such a fabulous question.

• 1:17:47Jason Calacanis?

  It's a great question.

• 1:17:48Chamath Palihapitiya?

  There's so many answers.

• 1:17:50Jason Calacanis?

  Very personal for all of us, yeah.

• 1:17:50Chamath Palihapitiya?

  There's so many answers there.

• 1:17:52Jason Calacanis?

  Well, let's workshop it. Anybody just have a thought? What comes to mind?

• 1:17:55David Sacks?

  This is very, this is very tactical. Okay, so I'm sure there's like grander things, but just the two things we're not really teaching are coding and financial literacy. Those are like the two big, I think, omissions in the curriculum right now and would be very helpful for, for people to learn.

• 1:18:13Chamath Palihapitiya?

  Oh, I mean, on that theme, I would also then add, like, better eating habits and mental health exercises.

• 1:18:27Jason Calacanis?

  Friedberg, you got any that come to mind? Things you want your 12-year-old or everybody's 12-year-old to learn?

• 1:18:32David Friedberg?

  I think the principles of biology and how we, I mean, again, like, I feel like we underestimate and we don't talk enough about the opportunity and the reality that is about to hit us like a tidal wave of bioengineering. You know, everything in medicine is moving towards this notion of using biological machines to fix our bodies, like, not just a molecule, which is the historical way of doing medicine, where you find a molecule, does something in the body, you stick it in, you turn it into a drug. But we are actually on the precipice of creating machines, biologically engineered or designed cells and proteins that can go into your body and do specific things and enhance your life and improve your health and solve, you know, disease.

• 1:19:14David Friedberg?

  Similarly, like I talked about earlier, biomanufacturing to make all the materials and food in a more sustainable way and a lower cost way. And so I think teaching the principles of DNA, how DNA causes protein, how protein causes function, and how cells operate, and how that is basically being softwareized, and you can basically think about biology now as being software. I think that is the trend of science and engineering. I think computing created a great foundation, but I think that's really, if I were to tell my 12-year-old daughter in eight years what she should consider doing, or spending her time studying, it's bioengineering and what the opportunities are that are going to arise from that.

• 1:19:57Jason Calacanis?

  All great answers. I think for me, again, move it up a level since you guys took some of my answers. Financial literacy was definitely going to be in there for me. But I would say radical self-reliance, and entrepreneurialism and resiliency. I think a lot of young people right now don't believe that they have agency in their lives, in the world, that they can create stuff, that they can not be stopped if they go and do something. And there's a victim mentality and culture that the system is rigged against you and that you cannot rise above, which I understand why people feel that way, but I actually think it's less true than ever. And so we have to basically really remind people that if you are radically self-reliant,

• 1:20:40Jason Calacanis?

  you can live the American dream, you can create anything you want, there is absolutely nobody who can stop you. And, you know, all the knowledge you want to learn is out there. And so the, in radical self-reliance, for me, is this concept of the ability to learn. And the ability to learn how to learn and having faith that you can learn any skill, you know, even 60, 70%, you know, very quickly, is what I see results in, you know, people being successful in life. This ability to take on any new topic with a zeal and an understanding that you can master it, or even 60 or 70% mastery means something. Going around the horn, we're going to plan a bestie trip, and we might even allow besties to come for the first live bestie show.

• 1:21:25Jason Calacanis?

  What is your vote? I want everybody to type it into the chat room. I, everybody's going to type in where they most want to have a bestie show. All right, I like it. Okay, so Chamath and I both want to go to New York. Sacks wants to go to Miami to see Keith Raboy and Peter Thiel, his besties. Those are his alternate universe besties, by the way.

• 1:21:45David Friedberg?

  They won't do a podcast together.

• 1:21:47Chamath Palihapitiya?

  No.

• 1:21:48Jason Calacanis?

  Oh, my God, how great would that podcast be?

• 1:21:52David Sacks?

  I think that would be, I think you call that the righties.

• 1:21:55Jason Calacanis?

  The righties.

• 1:21:56David Sacks?

  You've got the besties, you've got the leasties, and you're going to get the righties.

• 1:21:59Jason Calacanis?

  I'm starting the leasties. It's going to be me, Howard Lindzen, Sarah Cone, and Prof G. Prof G.

• 1:22:06David Sacks?

  Now, why, why wouldn't you call it the worsties?

• 1:22:09Jason Calacanis?

  The worsties.

• 1:22:09David Sacks?

  It's going to be the worst, yeah.

• 1:22:10Jason Calacanis?

  I'm going to do the worsties, just as a thing. I had an idea. Here's an idea. If we want to be the number one podcast. Friedberg, do you have any of that Molly from your 1999, 2000 era?

• 1:22:21David Friedberg?

  I've never, I've never done Molly. I've never done Molly.

• 1:22:23Jason Calacanis?

  Sure. You just made your own synthesis of it and took it. Okay, great. Here's how we become the number one podcast. We all take Molly at the start of the podcast, and we start the podcast 30 minutes in, and then we see if David Sacks can say, I love you.

• 1:22:41David Sacks?

  Can I just say, we've done more self-referential naval gazing bullshit on this pod than any other pod. And I don't know, this is like even worse than.

• 1:22:50Jason Calacanis?

  You don't have to listen to it, people.

• 1:22:52Chamath Palihapitiya?

  We may need to spike. Nick will need to edit the fuck out of this and spike it.

• 1:22:56Jason Calacanis?

  Spike it.

• 1:22:57Chamath Palihapitiya?

  All right, boys.

• 1:22:58Jason Calacanis?

  Love you. Boys, I love you besties. Love you, David. Love you, other David.

• 1:23:04David Friedberg?

  I gotcha.

• 1:23:04Jason Calacanis?

  Love you, Chamath Palihapitiya. We upgraded the Davids, by the way, with their outrage and cantankerous firmware, which we saw from Friedberg when he threatened to quit the podcast over the publishing over the Robin Hood.

• 1:23:15Chamath Palihapitiya?

  No, that's why we added the thirst trap feature set. That's why he went to throbbing and pulsating.

• 1:23:21Jason Calacanis?

  He was throbbing and pulsating. We'll see you all next time on the All In Pod.

• 1:23:26Speaker 03

  We'll let your winners ride.

• 1:23:29Speaker 03

  Rain Man David Sacks.

• 1:23:33Speaker 03

  And it said, we open source it to the fans, and they've just gone crazy with it.

• 1:23:37Jason Calacanis?

  Love you, besties.

• 1:23:38Speaker 03

  Queen of Kinoa.

• 1:23:46Speaker 03

  Besties are gone.

• 1:23:49Speaker 03

  That is funny how a dog taking a... Oh, this is your driveway sex?

• 1:23:54Speaker 03

  Oh, man.

• 1:23:57Speaker 03

  We should all just get a room and just have one big huge orgy, because they're all just... It's like this sexual tension that they just need to release somehow.

• 1:24:05Speaker 03

  What? You're the bee! What? You're the bee! What? You're a bee? Bee! What? We need to get merch! Besties are back!