#AIS: Tim Urban on political discourse + Keith Rabois on early-stage investing in 2022
01:09:01 Share

Next step is my good friend in urban from weight. But why I asked me to do this as a favor. He gets a huge speaking fee.

I said, we have no budget, said jack. He is seventy five hundred chicken and I said, have no budget I stole at all. And he has the number one talk in the history of ted on youtube, my power to urban.

Let your.

Winter, man, give.

We open sources to .

the fans and.

He said something yesterday to nate silver one after about one eight one poe grand news like you're not all to take away, you're speaking fee and I like the fuck speaking fee. All right. So the title of my talk is ten talks about politics, other things that are probably a bad idea, talk about in front of all these people.

And I want to start with, why am I even running about politics? I don't like politics. I like writing about the science and take in the future and craft inc.

And things that interest me. But as i'm thinking about the future and all this awesome stuff that we could have, I started to have a bad feeling. We think of society kind of like a giant organism.

And this is how I was group, assuming that society was like as I got a big grown up. But when I looked around, IT looked more like a puppy pants sexy old who dropped its ice cream. And I feel like this is what a lot of people are kind of getting at in these talks.

We're talking about kind of all this crazy polar ization, you know, mobs. And to me, I just look out and I see this as I see kind of reverting. And people are acting like during middle school and like we can communicate and what's going on.

So I started putting my mind to this and what was the problem? And the problem is very complicated, and i'm going to try to get into the whole thing today. But I think that what we can do is have a Better framework to talk about the problem.

I think that we are very constrained to this one dimensions access. It's like a straight jacket in our conversations. And you hear people say, the problem is, you know that we, the far left in the far right, we need to be in the center.

We need to be more. What is that in the center? Just a policy position, right? The far left and far right aren't inherently bad. The far left is just kind of radical and and questioning everything in their experimental in the far right is just questioning. Maybe we mess up, may be we should go back to the way things work.

I mean, there's nothing inherently Better or worse about any part of the spectrum, but we're using these words to try to get IT something else. We'd say centrist mother. We don't really mean in middle of the spectrum.

I think we're talking about a different access, I call IT the latter. So I think bringing our political discussions into two dimensions can be hugely helpful. Now sometimes you'll see like the political compass, they'll see you know politics and to do, but that's still all what you think.

That's all know different ways to look at what you think about politics. The latter is a how you think access. So there there's some nuances to IT.

It's a specter. But for our purposes, let's just focus on the two kind of core ideas here. There's high wrong political thinking and high wrong politics and low wrong politics.

So the high wrongs you can kind of divide the hydron progressive ism and high wrong conservatism, which I kind of think the likes like two arguing giants like they're like the collective efforts of hydron progressive ism conservatism are kind of like lawyers in a courtroom. They're heated. They don't like each other.

A lot of the time they have very different ideas of how things should go. But it's kind of like, you know, the two lawyers in the courtroom, this kind of a wink that goes on where they understand ultimately they're on the same team. There are two sides of a truth kind of discovery machine, and I think this is the same thing.

They don't like each other, but they're actually ultimately on the same team trying to figure out the road map, how do we move forward and the conversations in hydron politics, the complex they're nuanced. It's it's there's difficile rallies. Is what is write those science and history arguing about what is that not hard to figure out what should be right? That's it's physical hy and ethics.

Then there's even they agree on those two things. How do we get there, right? What are the right policy strategies? Experimental testing.

So there's a lot of nuance is a lot of complexity and and one of the core defining features as if this is how you form, believes writing. Now you go from, I don't know, some kind of process to, I know hydron politics is all about truth. They're gear towards truth.

They start here. And I don't know there's kind of an inherent humility to this process. So I think of humility a little bit like trying to stay on a tight rope.

It's not easy, right? We we are. It's easy for your confidence. You you know you have the done crew with thing. You're confidence shoots up when you the first learned something and then IT goes down after you you realized you don't know as much, you know and then sometimes you can go too low.

And so when you go too low, you're in the kind of the insecure zone you actually know more than you think you know um but you you're just not you even some kind of impostor syndrome above the line. We're in the arrogant zone, very common in politics obviously you think you know more than you really actually do. So like you could even measure IT like this is how much you're full of shit, how much above like the amount above that lying you are.

And in hybrid politics, look, no one is greatest staying on the tight rub, but it's very hard. But it's the culture of hiring politics is helpful because IT can actually IT humbles you because people will disagree with you. And it's cool in kind of a hydro in political culture to be humble like if you say, I don't know where you say, no, I haven't thought about that issue that makes you seem smart in higher in politics, right? So so it's incorrect.

Whatever the culture finds cool, we're going to do more of a core thing about hybrid politics. We don't identify with our ideas. So I think no ideas when you're in this zone are like a machine that you built is like a hypothesis where you put the boxing gloves on, you let your friends kick IT go to town.

You thought out there, if people try to argue with that, you the best. These are big on this, right? They love an opportunity, relish opportunity to just tell the other person they are wrong.

Or here's why you're biased or here's why you was you're being hypocritical. And this is what I wrong. Politics is about knowing takes IT personally.

You're just kicking my machine and i'm saying I machine can stand up to IT and there's something I bet IT can and if IT does, man, I just got more confident because I I just realize this things is pretty strong if they break IT doesn't feel good. But I just got a little smarter. I just got a little bit less dumb because I learned something I was wrong about.

So they are kicking IT and know you're watching them. Box is dialectic. When you watching box together, sometimes you play devils advocate.

You take the bat to your own idea, know of how move up that humility, take rope to a more knowledgeable place. Principles wise. One of the things that defines hydron politics is consistency. It's not again, there's left, right center. So the principles will totally vary, but there's consistency either way.

So classic example you love talking about yesterday, free speech doesn't count to value to fight for the free speech of people who agree with every single person in history has had that principle. That's the yellow zone. It's very easy to support be your principles when it's also supporting your tea.

The chAllenge comes when it's that when if people you don't like saying things you don't like, for example, or when or when it's your team trying to shut down the free speech of others and you know it's wrong even though you do hate that speech that you have to choose Green zone or orange zone. Hire ing. Politics is great about staying in the Green zone.

You will see them go against their own team all the time, if IT, if IT doesn't conflict, if IT doesn't die with their principles. I think if you take a big step back, this thing again gets heated. This doesn't, you know people mistake higher n politics, know it's old.

We be all we should be, no kind of withdrawn rational. But I think it's actually also IT can be very passionate, very emotional, very heated. People care deeply in hiro.

They can form coalitions and do marches and still and stuff like that. It's just that they care about truth. They are consistent with their principles.

They don't identify with their ideas. They like to argue. And ultimately, it's a positive some game with a positive effect on the country.

This is what drives to the country forward in the science academy. This is what drives knowledge for the right. This, this is what thrives innovation forward is, is people able to disagree? Now you get to the other thing that is low, wrong politics, low in politics. I have a name ford.

I call a political disney world, and I call IT, that because of take land of rainbows and unicorn and a bunch people who will not change their mind under any circumstances, it's a land of good guys and bad guys. The good guys are Angels, perfectly righteous. The bad guys are awful in every possible way.

And the good guys have good ideas, and the bad guys have bad ideas. And there's a checklist in hydron politics. If someone tells me their position on guns, I have no idea what their position is on climate change or on abortion or on immigration and low on politics.

You hear one position from someone, boom. You can just look at their, the minor. And I know every single position that have got on every single issue, the same concept in lowering politics. Again, no one thinks they're in lovering politics.

So people there think, yeah, of course I value truth, but they don't they're actually starting at I know they start at the the checklist item and now they say, well, I have to prove this is correct so when they read an article, they put, they won't read the article, but if they read the article that disagrees with them theyll me, there have a brick wall in their head about this campus. This person is bias this. This is know at hm and whatever.

And when they read an article that agrees with them, when they hear an opinion, is all that skepticism disappears, and suddenly IT must be true. Yes, of course. So I talked about hydron politics.

It's like the ideas are like machines, right? It's not. You don't get sensitive about that.

You kit kick the machine, right? Low, wrong politics. It's like a baby, a very cute baby who you love so much. So people's ideas, they're sacred in low run politics.

And and this is why, you know, you can kick up machine and let's no big deal if you kick a baby you and ask for and so on. The high rungs people can directly, you if you have two aces, your decency and agreement, they are totally different, right? You can have people that to disagree with you that are awesome and rice first, you can have people to agree with you in their assets.

But in lowering politics is very simple. People agree through their good people, people who don't their assets. So this is what IT comes down to.

You know you a wrong discussion of the kind of looks like this there, examining things. No wrong discussion. It's like fucking and shit.

That's a cute baby. Got IT. Such a good baby.

How awful for people who don't like the baby. So awful, right? This is very common. If you listen to a low, wrong political discussion. This is essentially what's happening.

They're sitting around and they're talking about how right they are and how awful the people and dangerous the people are who disagree with him. And that's just they will just talk about that forever and ever and ever. principles.

Same idea here. You actually a stick with the less circle you'll constantly give away here for low wrong politics is that when it's not convenient, yellow circle territory, they will almost always jump over to the orange circle. Know you'll have again, you know.

So free speech, i'll see, is a perfect latus test. If you know, as soon as the free speech people you don't like all those principles disappear. How about covin marches? You know, people are completely worked up about locked down marches in right wing states.

Soon as it's marches, racial justice, all good, all good. This this is a public health crisis, right? This is, that's that's orange material.

How about all the people who are super anti immigration policies and surveilLance policies and foreign policies and your debt issues? And then as soon as it's the other president now, your president and office all the same policies stay and you're fine with them. Classic example, the debt was the worst thing in the world during obama's presidency.

And then trump comes in office, starts doing of these tax packages they're adding to IT and suddenly leaves no problem. So there's endless examples here. Um if high ring politics is kind of this positive, some game lowering politics, I see IT much more like two screaming giants.

If the high wrong kind of emergent property is intelligence and progress, the low wrong emerging property is just strength and fighting for power. It's battle of good versus evil. And the big, the big goal is not not trying to create a more perfect union again, they think that's to go.

But the big goal really is beating the bad guys. It's a zero, some game that ultimately has a negative effect. So I know I just do a lot of you because I wanted to kind of cover the different basis of this to give a feel forward i'm talking about here.

This is the framework that I think is very useful. I've been living with IT now for a few years. I'm been having conversations with IT and I find that IT clarifies a lot and IT helps with a lot of things like, for example, if you just think it's a horse zonal access.

So as I said, you mistake that the far left and right must be the but it's not it's the low wrongs that a problem that's actually where people are trying to say the moderate centers, you know think that's not what they're actually trying to say. They are trying to say hyrum, which can spend the the corona l access. There's more than one tug of war going on.

We think if you just have one x as well as left first is right. And that is a tug of war both in the high and low wrongs, that is, they are fighting forward. They want.

But there's a tug of work going on northern, south as well. The progressive, I don't know a lot of people in here probably thinking i'm in the upper left guy. That's my guess. And if that's true and IT might be true, you do have a tug of we're going on again, set upper right guy. You also have a tug of war gone going on against that lower left guy.

This is the thing that I think is important to realize this when you have this, that the people who are on your team know they also hate trump or whatever they might be, actually like the biggest impediment to what you care about politically, they undermine the progress of what you care about. IT also can enhance kind of collaboration, because if you're in that one of those upper giants, the other upper giant is a lot more on your ultimate team. If you take a big step back, then the lower giant that wears the same color.

So once you start, I think this way, I think IT helps to to kind of loosing some of the tribal ism and give some nuance to our discussions and give some nuance to what we're trying to do. Now, the story I wanted to talk about here is that this is OK. This is Normal, by the way.

This is not a problem. Every democracy in the world will have this. The founders knew this would be here. The goal was not to suppress low wrongness.

IT was to contain IT and have actually in the economy to harness IT for progress, but in politics to contain IT. IT can't totally take over. They contain IT by taking away the physical cuddle.

You know, you can just conquer and become a dictator like so many low wrong giants and other countries have done. There's a laws here. And most importantly, there's kind of a high wrong immune system, which is just vigorous defense, defense against low run infringement ment, low wrong.

This will try to shut down the conversations in the high runs, in the high rungs. Resist they say, no, fuck off. Like, no, you can't enforce your echo chAmber upon us.

You're not to have your echo chAmber. That's why you can enforce this. So this is how it's supposed to be. Now part of the reason we're all here continually and to talk talking about men politics is awful and things are bad.

And there's a puppy pace pants six year old, but the ice cream falling is because of, I think we've had some big changes to the environment. This is the kind of a simple human equation I think about. You've got human nature is constant.

The environment is what changes, and that produces different behavior, right? The people who are really hard and during war, they're not different biological than us. They just were put in a very different environment and IT created different kinds of people.

So our environment has changed a lot, and I think it's causing a lot of problems. I think it's causing a low run flare up if you give you you know. So here's one way to think about IT.

In the sixties, you've got into party factions within the parties, and you have a lot of progressive republicans and contain the democrat and the these factions within the parties. They hate each other, right? Which is, which was a source of tribalism.

Some people are just so focused on the other people in their party, the other factions. There's the national parties like we have that we'd talk about a lot today, we republicans and democrats nationally. That was a source of tribulation.

M, and then there was this, you know, users. R and also before that, hitler, like, they're all these scary form and enemies that created this kind of macro o tribal ism on the national level. So you have patristic m, which is one kind of tribalism, but is also unifies down below, and the entry party factions might actually cause the national parties to collaborate sometimes.

So it's not that people were less tributes, that tribal ism was distributed. What happened is now the national party factions have disappeared because the conservative democrats have all gone to the republicans. The progressive republicans have all gone for lots of reasons.

Get into some other talk, but that's wait. There's still a little you still have berny and know hilla not liking people not like, but it's it's much less of a thing. Likewise, you still have no yes or russia, but mostly that's not the focus.

In fact, the focus is is is so not here that when there's a foreign thing now usually will just use IT is like political thought for our national debate. All the russians are on their side. No, they're on their side, right? There is no patriotically that unites anymore.

What you have is one big old political divide. And all the tribal ism from all those things is concentrated into one place which is an unhealthy that's not great. I don't think that's good.

And so this is one environmental change. No one's fault. It's just what happened then. You also have a lot, a lot of things with like the electoral map you have between Jerry, Mandarin and geographic starting you have purple accounting, turning you mostly red and blue now, which means primaries are actually electing the far.

This right and left people is opposed to people who can in in general election. There's a lot of other kind of little environmental changes, but one huge one that we talk about is the media. I think of the media i'd like, placed them on a media matrix, accuracy on the why, access in the objectivity.

So you want to be as the top, middle, right. And actually, for a long time, there was incentive magnet to be there for abc, cbs, nbc, right? They didn't want to see like they were inaccurate, and they had to cater to the whole country, which kept them somewhat close to that.

There was this incentive magnet. Today you have cable TV, and then eventually you talk radio, and you've got then the internet, all these websites. You have tribal media, which is a totally different set of incentives.

You cater to one side only. It's more bias, the more clicks and accuracy, just not a concern to the audiences they end up having. And then you have this feedback loop like was discussed yesterday, where once you cater to that, now you have to keep that going, right?

You've now lost neutral audience. And and so now we have a lot of americans super addicted to a really trashy reality show. Real politicians are watching him. And then I took me a long time to make this.

by the way.

Think my company is my favorite anyway. So then you've got, of course, the big bomb drops in our environment. You've got social media. This is a real graph showing people retweet things they agree with, two people they agree with, almost entirely right. This allegoric big bubbles, it's insane now.

And so if you're one of the people that actually I follow all consider people you're very rare because and I didn't again, I didn't used to be this way. John ronson talks about how IT used to be a radical d shaming like twitter. You know, you're going to be like, all I do this embarrassing thing.

People would be like me too, and to be like you. So in this, and fuzzy at the very beginning, and then IT turned into way, the second, this bad guy is harassing women at work. And now, actually, this woman has power.

For the first time, you can talk about social media can create A A whole kind of coalition against that. He gets fired. And that's exhilarating.

And that is good, right? This is speaking truth to power. Problem is, now people are exhilarated. And those thing whose next right, and you have this new source of power, which you again can be used for good, but it's gotten picked up by a lot of the low, wrong tribes who have started to use this casual. That started has been a while now, creating mobs to actually enforce low wrong politics.

And what happens if you end up with high wrong world, very scared, kind of cut off guard, the Normal defenses, the Normal immune system, not doing its job. And so what happens when the hydron world gets scared is is very can set off a domino effect. Imagine we picture, this is the high run world.

These are brains. This is what a bunch of high run people in the community think. They all think different things based on the color right now, if we draw a circle around them, this is imagining what they're saying is the circle color.

So here is the perfect tyron community, right? Everyone is the diverse, you know, thinking. And they're saying what they are thinking in IT connects together into the superbowl.

Awesome, right? But now maybe the social media cuddle, maybe something else starts to be a little bit scary. And this one group starts to say, the only opinion that's OK is the orange opinion.

Anyone who says anything other, the other opinion is an awful person. The high run commuter m was to kick in and and say, cool, fuck off. If IT doesn't say that, everyone starts getting scared and then cowardice starts to spread.

And before you know what everyone is just saying the orange out loud, even if they don't agree with IT, no one wants to upwardly say what they think anymore. And the problem is you can actually see what's going on in the brains. You only know what people are thinking based on what they're saying.

So all people see is this. So if you're this guy who actually has one opinion and actually is full of diverse thinking around them, they don't know that they assume you must look like this. Everyone starts to feel like, I mean, only one who thinks this.

I'm the only one who doesn't like this movement or this politician or whatever, and the group intelligence that so awesome about hydron politics IT disappears. I think what we're seeing is if what you know why why I think so bad. I don't think it's because we moved to the far right.

And for our left, I think it's because you have a low run flare up generated by changes of the environment. And the high rungs have been caught off guard by a really rapid environment changes, and they've just disappear theyve chunk away. And the low rungs are running.

You buckle ild. You can see this on the right. I think mostly in washington, you see the debt ceiling being uses a weapon, and way should never happen.

You see my condo in the senate not putting through a senate candidate, supreme court candidate, because of the last year, totally unprecedented. And that's not the rule. Then four years later, they go and they do.

They put their own candidate. This is low, wrong shit. Course trump with the election, I mean, regan's big thing was the peaceful transition of powers.

What makes a special trump, of course, is the exact opposite. On the left. I think we see IT less in washington and much more in culture.

I think weakness is two things. It's a far left ideology, and IT is far left as you post modern. And it's markus.

And that's fine. You can have those things in the high rungs. The thing that makes the weakness low wrong is the way they treat others. You can go and have your own.

You can have your own echo chAmber and the woke mantra is what a low wrong person in a liberal country supposed to say is I don't like these ideas and so I won't listen to them you're not supposed to be able to say is I don't like the idea is so no one is allowed to listen to them, right? A this invitation on campus, which has become very common, right? It's not saying I won't go to that talk, which is a long wrong thing to say.

It's much worse. It's saying no one on this campus is allowed to hear that talk. And we see that having played out, we see James bennet, the editor of the york times update section, getting fired because he published update by tom cotton that sixty two percent of the country agreed with, but IT didn't job with woke e orthodoxy.

You see Denny's Young and apple, a black woman who's ahead of diversity, who says to me, diversity is not you. It's it's more complicated than just about something like Grace. When I look at twelve blue eyes, black hair guys, I see, I see diversity.

I see different people, diverse and different ways. He was fired for saying that um you can go on and on medical journals are retracting papers that have never retracted papers before because double peer reviews papers because they get a rise on twitter from the walk mob. So I think we're seeing this in different ways, but to me, it's all one big story, which is that we're having a low wrong flare up and these low, wrong giants are out of hand.

They're doing things we're not supposed to be able to be doing. They're doing that because the new system is fAiling, and that's why we all look like this. Now the good news is I do think this can change.

I don't think most people are like this. I think most people are. And by the way, if you think this is all another finally divide, we are all high wrong and low wrong in different times.

And that's one of the big differences here. I think that if we want to get out of this and get back to here, we need two things. We need awareness, which is the first thing we need to be aware of.

I think, this access, and to think about not just where am I being bullied intellectually, where what's really the low wrong thing and what's not, but also where are we being low wrong? Because we are all can do this, a huge part of our brain that wants to go and and identify with our ideas and and be hypocritical. So where am I doing IT? Where are the people around we doing IT? And and maybe realizing, okay, maybe the people that on the high rungs when I am there, they disagree with me horizontally.

Maybe those are my friends, a lot more than the low rung people that are voting for the same. And finally, awareness, without saying anything out loud, is useless, right? need.

Awareness has to be coupled with courage. People have to start speaking out. And actually that's the the high run immunity stem is built of courage, is built of people actually standing up. And you've seen this with some companies declaring we will not we we're not a little political place that's courage in the face of a cujo that's trying to get them to be political.

And so I think if you can have a little bit more awareness ness and a little bit more courage, this kind of this low run flare op can be, I think, a control. And I think we can end up in a Better place. Thank you. wow.

Amaze truly .

about what an amazing talk to follow the talk we had our earlier, I think, with and know if you're got to witness at the palmer lucky .

talk I was trying to think about to trash you because I was so popular .

to do .

so you were going to go love wrong. Yeah.

I but I mean, in fact, that I think palm, I had some low wrong moments where, you know, he was doing the anti hilary stuff. I was dunning on him for IT. And then we saw an example of maybe adult, high run behavior of like him.

Let's sit here and talk about the differences I want to put out there, just talking about the woke moving for a second. One of the major chAllenges I had in this event was certain people attending the event meet some people in that group unwilling to come to the event. No offence, Keith.

In other words, like Keith sacks. And then even then, grand world and Green wall, i'm sorry. And at tab were triggers for certain people to not come speak.

were going to kick the baby.

They're going to kick the baby. And so I think and then on the right, we have, I think to some pleasure in knowing you're trigger ing the lives and it's exacerbated. Its hard for me as a conference producer or a podcast producer to get the two sides to sit and just have a reasonable discussion at time.

How do we break that logging of the right? Gest loves to troll and trigger the lives. And the lives are like, i'm not even participating in the discussion with this group of people, that group of people, you know, the sex is the kids you know whatever .

I say key you .

just came ah by the way.

please welcome keep for boy.

He triggers a lot of lives, but let's start there and then peace. A i've love to hear you respond to this dynamic, which I know you are full aware of.

So I think we can get the some clear definitions here, not wanting to go to something that that know high oner says all they disagree with me, great, let me go. And that's that's that's what they really want to hear because I want to learn something. The law, unger says, fuck those evil, awful people are not going to go right this strong way fine, you're in a liberal country.

Live and let live you. This are both OK. Um what's not okay is the low wrongs in pressuring you to kick off those speakers because otherwise they're going to start a movement, a petition, a boy cut your show. It's going to that's going to and hurting you in some way, threaten taking smearing you on social media into pressuring this to not happen and all that's saying no one's allowed to go to that conference.

That's what's not okay. It's interesting you bring this up. I shared with you that back channel .

IT was beautiful.

There was back channel of, you know how beautiful the moment was with the high run discussion we just said. There was also a dark moment before the event where a group of people who did not agree were doing what you're saying. The workshop was saying we need to get other hello on the left. David.

that time there is just to tell me when robots got here.

So there was literally, to your point, an intolerance level of not only are we not gonna to all in summit because sax or this person and that person or there we're going to start telling other people to not go and not participate IT literally, ally happened.

and I had to stop. But but this is a solo. This conference did happen.

Those people did come. Ideas worth spreading. So this is a Victory for high runners.

yeah. So then can you can tell us why is so pleasurable to trigger the limbs? David key, no.

In all seriousness, you love to debate. You take all commerce and no problem you want to get in the arena. What you're seeing now.

I actually .

just interject on that. sure. So I mean, speaking for myself, I don't get any pleasure trigger libs, and that's not my objective.

And I don't think it's specially keys either. What you're really doing is because we are willing to debate and we're not afraid to have the conversation. You're not read defining that as cheering other people.

No, we're not. We just want to have a conversation. Now is really easy to tell who are the people who have good points to make in our and have intellectual confidence, because there are the ones willing to show up and have conversations.

And I think is the biggest cop out for anybody to say what I can be your comfort. But I see this name and this name on your agenda. How name is that?

Well, and to be honest, you know a lot of the positions, I think you and palmer probably disagree on the approach to ukraine. He's probably very pro supporting that and you might be a little more damage.

yeah. So I think two points. First of all, I took on this fools iron, like ten years ago correctly. Everything wrong on the internet would you we want? This is same idea, I think, out of that.

But but the reason why I did IT was I felt like, wow, someone who doesn't know any Better might read something that's wrong. And then I believe IT. And so at least if I start correcting IT, they'll see that there's multiple perspectives and then how to do in as opposed to just take this regarded.

The second thing is, yeah, I have no desire to trigger the lives, but I do feel I have a platform. And I don't want to die without having used whatever influence I have to process for ideas i've believe in. So if I have three hundred thousand followers, I feel I would be Nicolete ting like my life, benefits of my life if i'm not protists ing for the few five, six, seven, eight and nine things I care about. And so I don't want to wake up one day and say, I wish I done X, Y, R, Z, and I could have maybe changed the world.

Can I have tim? A question .

around his name's tim. Tim, David. Free for. You .

actually have remember for.

uh.

do you think that over time, content has gotten shorter? Sound bites have become kind of the primary form of content to be that we donate books and we read newspapers and we watched these long form newser conversations, and then, you know, things got shorter, they got faster. They get got quicker.

And as a result, we ended up kind of debasing ourselves and ending up in this point where everything has to be reduced to that primal, instinctual reaction moment. And IT gets even more significantly fuelled by the feedback loop associated with social media. So the things that you see more of are the things that really you trigger that kind of primal, you emotional a sense more uh, is that a big driver? Do you thinks society in terms of have we become more tribal over the last century?

Yeah I mean, I I think environmental changes are just it's like they will produce behavioral al changes. And IT can be sometimes a feedback loop where you have shorter content, more emotionally, you know kind of trigger ing content like you said, try there almost like .

fermont evolution early .

IT wins yeah well, twitter actually there's a phenomenon where actually value dubbed down information because new baLance information doesn't hit as hard totally. And so it's when you have it's kind of like it's like evolution where you see the tweet that ends up supervision. It's survived one hundred and other competing tweet to get there. And the ones that are rising to the top, it's m. There's a mechanism right now that is that is pushing of forming a magnet down in political disney world that is putting us down.

And I one of the questions you know have for elon is like what what's how can that somehow be? What one idea that a friend and I we're kicking around is like some kind of almost like, you know, wikipedia managed to somehow stay somewhat you want to neutral in a way could there be some kind of like giant ten thousand pool of moderators that actually kind of put rank things by and maybe high run and low run and and the algorithm esn necessarily suppress, allow myself. He just doesn't push IT.

which right now the algorithm is .

to I D to give you like a credit rating, maybe a high low scale.

I kind of view this is like a muting effect. It's like an institutionalize ation of these social networks. Everyone talks about them being free to run as a network without kind of a central system of control. But sometimes that central system of control has an important role in playing moderation, viewing editorial ization that kind of avoid some of the adverse consequences.

It's definite optimising downwards right now. What do you think kids you .

should you learned? Should you want buy twitter? And then, yeah.

I start this. I mean, I look in the seven and eight and sound bite, you know, was the term of art for like thirty second commercials. And that's how we debated politics with thirty second commercials.

I don't know any evidence that suggests that tweet today and politics are worse than the thirty second commercials I grew up with. And if you think about polarization, and I also watch, you watch europe, european politics in the seventies and eighties here, the most extreme ds of politics you oversee. We don't have any these extremes in the day, still today.

Yeah so I don't think there. I think a lot people like make arguments without evidence that things have change. And I actually start with like first principles like wait, where's the evidence? Like people talk about this information.

There's no evidence that american voter in twenty sixteen have bus information or less OCR and information than eighty, eighty to eight or nineteen ninety four or one thousand hundred and ten. In fact, the opposite is true by most, by most serious studies. So this is all kind of made up in my mind that I should buy twitter to save the world. But it's not to be a good financial advisement.

So how does IT save the world? Do things well.

We need a free speech possible. People can make ideas, and the left wing of twitter, the employee base, has completely suppressed ideas. For example, in my husband, I happened to, knew this, wrote up article and foreign policy magazine, like the most procedure publication in the entire planet, for a foreign policy debate about the ccp.

Twitter refused for years to allow to advertise that article published in foreign icy magazine. So there's clearly something, a twitter suppressing content that's critical of the ccp. And we tried appealing to everybody and they wouldn't change this.

So there's either chinese spice there, or a loft in culture that you do suppresses debate. This is a foreign policy magazine. We can get any more prestigious than that. It's absurd, let alone the fact that I have three thousand followers and do not have a blue check. I must have the largest follow if anybody doesn't have a bu check, and it's all because I have views.

but unacceptable. That seems really pretty ridiculous considering many other VC who are meaningfully less credential of our experience.

And there's obvious and then I have insider that twitter have sent me screen shots of various things. There's no doubt that is a lovely monoculture that's suppressing ideas. And someone needs to fix that if the government needs to fix IT, which is worse than either than fixing IT.

But the government if the us. Congress is turned over over there is there be a lot of seppi OS flying over to twitter because there are absolutely foreign ments influencing that. Some of those decisions are twitter.

Well, I mean, IT wasn't, in fact prove in that there were saudi's inside of twitter.

Saw national tweet ever?

Yeah.

I wish I would be that good.

yeah. I mean.

what was a tweets? Well, here the saudi prince was complaining and he said, these explain freedom of speech and know how that works in your .

country alright yeah I mean.

you do the press.

Can you explain cancel culture in your framework?

Yeah so um I like to use a couple terms here. There's there's social believing which is no one if you disagree with you, you can be my friend and again, that's OK and I don't think you're an awesome person if you act like that but you allowed to then there's what I would call idea supremacy, which is no it's kind of it's like the body like been saying, you know no one is allowed to say this thing whether you're my friend or not and and you know, if you want to run something on your own property, you can make all the speech rules.

But cancel culture is specifically going into places that are supposed to be high wrong. You, when order says on top of harvard college, very toss, right toss, which is which is that that is then putting your steak down on the ground and saying we are a high wrong place. They're not say using those words, but that is what they're saying.

We are in place that cares about truth, that cares about diversity of ideas, right? IT course about openness and inquiry and curiosity in all of this. And so council culture goes into places like that.

Are google? No, started off had their all hands meetings that was all about, and every ideas good. Criticize the leadership like, right? So these things were specifically hired.

They were founded on these things. Pencil culture goes into those places and says our preferred echo chAmber. Now those rules apply to everyone here, and it's a power.

A lot of things want to do that, right? A lot of i'm sure the pro lifers would like to go into campuses and say no one could have a pro choice position. They don't have the power. Council culture is the product of a group that's not supposed to have the power to do that, having the power to do that. And I think that comes from the fear of social media, comes from this hypercharged tribal listed in the environment we live right now.

And a lot of things be a solution. So one of the solutions to medical of life is moving in my envy, and i'm serious about this.

Ladies and gentleman, mayor of forces.

one of the most dark things will remove to my m. Seventeen months ago was in my amy, you is incredibly refreshing because everybody has a different position. There's literally no environment socially, politically, culturally, business wise, where you won't run into people who voted for bide in or for trump like you cannot go to a dinner at eight people and how people have the same views.

You cannot work in a company where people don't haven't voted or doing the and if you try to Carry to your people, you're going be wrong all the time. Even I catch myself like assuming this person of this demographics is going be liberal and y're not. And so here people learn to both be polite, like sort of like when you're growing up, you were taught, like you don't debate religion front of people at dinner. People are polite, but also they have to engage and is incredibly refreshing because people learn to protein arguments and would be impossible live in miami successfully unless you do this every day. And so I think this is a model for america, like many things in miami.

But keep over time, doesn't that transform? So like isn't there a concentration of ideas of the medics that ultimately kind of. Rule the juice and know this whole thing.

Kind of eventually you end up with, you know, two pole, two poles, two camps. I mean, isn't this how all society started the great debate, the great conversation? This is a microcosm. And what just happens to a human behavior over time.

because if you understand that is so what? One of the benefits for me was, I grew up, and like the most work environments ever, I spent years stanford and harvard party, world places and all my professors. And political science was super liberal.

But I I was conserved at the whole time in every one of my, I says, if you read my final exams, they are all conservative because I had to learn to master all the liberal arguments and find the weaknesses in the data point and build a martial evidence. And that's a healthy thing. So when you encounter people have different views, like for example, there's controversial laws in florida, don't say gay porn, quote change in abortion policy here, people here will talk about them politely and debate them.

And that's good for everybody. I bet you, for example, like you, if you read the media, if you read twitter, you think this suborning law of change of lot is radical. It's actually more permissive than any european country.

But nobody, nobody knows that france actually allows a watching up to fourteen weeks. Germany is like sixteen. So we've twenty here, so we're more liable than europe, but nobody talked about that on top of that way. But if you live in a floridy.

you would actually know that by the way the campus is you just described not hear anymore the amount of testimonials from students saying if I disagree with the professor of my exam, I will get a bad grade even worse. Again, this is when there's encroachment by a low wrong giant and there's no push packet will keep going. So they've gone to some crazy places.

Here's an example, berkeley right now and ucl a and about twenty other schools, if you you want to apply to be a chemistry professor, the first thing that you do is you have to fill out a diversity statement and it's called that sounds a ized a diversity statement. But it's actually you have to basically improve that. You have a proven track record of social justice, activist of the world, not mlk style social justice, very specific social justice in this.

And if you are not a proven activist that has the right politics more than even a political witness test, you have to actually be an activist to get to even be seen by the chemistry department. They want to even show the chemistry. So the stories like that, you're just like, my god, but that's what happens when the immunity stem is fAiling. This things will continue.

So what is the what is the end to that if we, for those of us that can move to miami.

everybody, we welcome .

those of a happy yet the .

antidote is leadership. Because what happens is in each one of these stories, you know, James been getting fire from the new york times. You are read the story in detail.

Neal is another example for the new york times. See for whole long story. But in each story, the leadership, often, because leadership is, know that most people are not insane like this.

almost. This is again, with the orange circles. Almost everyone actually thinks this is insane, these firings, and that was scary. They're happening anyway. So know in each of these stories you see a moment the the ship first as well, know here we do agree with, even though I I hate his views to, we value a diversity of a viewpoint. And then there's a huge push back, and there's a moment of the truth.

Are they going to stand up for the very thin for the core values? Are they going to? Are they going to, or are they going to, to seed the culture to the mob? And what council culture is is these moments of truth that leadership choosing cowards and the actual cuddle of social media doesn't actually hit the person. It's the leader actually going and actually firing them, the leaders, the one who ends up actually .

being the standing up to the mob as opposed letting the mob rule you. Yes, which is the hard thing.

And a lot of his car .

think about these.

We see IT when we do the podcast we had a moment um and we were discussing me don't say gay lash parents choice bill which you look at the framing of that it's completely hilarious that like framed as those two things, either you're like you don't want parents to be able to parent their kids or you hate gay people it's like really, is that what we're talking about here? And we looked at IT and a couple of buses were having the harmer's sion.

I want to say who and we were trying to get educated on IT. And i'm like, should people be able to talk about their gay parents in first great second grade? They are grade.

Of course you're a parent. You're gay. Come assuming you don't want people to able to tell you you can't be talked about at school and that was like and gender assignment and what gender you choose.

And now we're sitting, you're going, I don't actually know enough about this. Should you introduce that you can be one of forty genders at secure or old or twelve years old? When should sex education start? I actually don't know why we will learn that fifteen should to be twelve, I don't know.

And we were like, is this a discussion we can have on the podcast without us actually consulting with some people who know more than us and discussing IT? And i've written about three or four tweet about the the trans swimmer. And I have feelings on IT.

But I like, should I actually tweet that? I find it's profoundly unfair that this person gets to win every single women's meet. And I kind of a feel that for the women who now can, the best they can do a second place is, am I going to get cancelled for that? Cause that was my initial response to IT.

And I don't actually know my position because I don't know that other person story who's a trans woman and maybe he does deserve to be in that. I don't know if anybody has an answer for that. So i'm curious you from the best is themselves and what are your thoughts on um are tackling some of those things and not getting these things .

happen on every dimension every day, which is you have more questions and answers. I think tim wrote in the slide. It's kind of like you're navigating between high conviction and you know high knowledge.

But that's a path and that path happens because you can talk to people and you can ask questions and you can figure out where you are today. You can figure out where you could be tomorrow. That's what's not allowed anymore on on any dimension.

It's not anyone specific issue. It's on so many topics. And the thing with that is that IT gets people very afraid. And then when you are afraid, I think to your point, what happens is you take the most simplest productive point of view that can be the most acceptable on any topic, whatever. And this is what causes.

Snowball is literally scared to talk about the trans issue because I feel like I don't know enough. I also don't want to hurt anybody y's feelings. I would feel terrible if I did hear his feelings.

So the ways to talk about IT is because the social cost of even taking the risk of having that conversation outweigh any potential benefit is just that conversation gets so hot. But I want I want to go back to what tim said, that the moment of truth is when the leader of the organization has the choice of whether to fire the person of the obs.

Going after seems self evident that the leader shouldn't basically join the mob and and inflict mob justice on this poor employee. But they do anyway. And the question is why, and I would argue that the reason why is because they're RAID of the new york times is hit piece that's IT.

That's what IT comes down to. They're afraid that the wall model come after them next. And we've seen him before when brian armstrong implemented his policy of no police, the workplace at coin base, who then retaliated against he got in york times is at peace. That was, they are the enforcement wing of the woke mob. When elon said that he would restore free speech to twitter, what was the response? The new york times wrote an article basically trying to identify him with the apartheid regime in south africa, even though is a kid, the headline, the article didn't even match up with the body of the article, the body of the article.

story about him as a oral account of you. A bunch of oppressive things that happened in south .

africa and in IT when he was a child.

right? He was the body of the story, had nothing been animates about how he, even as a Young analyst, basically rejected apartheid. And yet the headline, the story, was basically painting him with this brush. So basically.

macaca and and IT came from his dead. And they have a super complicated relationship. And so I was like the IT was like the one person where you couldn't have necessarily guaranteeing what would have come out of irs mouth.

And IT was still so supportive of you to overcome this problem. I think we have to have this recognition that you that these prestige outlets, like in york times, who for some reason have so much credibility in our culture, they have the power, or they used to have the power, basically destroy people's careers. We have to realize that these are just places have been hijacked by radical. And like their stories are meaningless, they're completely by we have to stop investment them with the cultural power to like, destroy people.

Is that simple?

What happens is there's a leg. Now do fox news?

They don't. Here's a difference. They don't have the cultural power to destroy anyone. And who have they destroy? Named somebody that like what woke mob of .

the engineered mike, the pillow guy?

I not say i'm .

not saying they wouldn't, if they could, and saying that they can't because they don't have that kind of cultural power.

Before we TM you.

we're going to say something I was you to say, when an institution like this gets what happens is a mob like this, they don't build anything. They don't create. What they do is the appropriate. They hide jack something. They take its existing good reputation, which is real, which is a lot of power.

and they spend IT down. It's not constructive.

it's destructive. But they actually go in life. They like they take over and and they spend the reputation down. But in the lag time between when the reputation catches up, IT can do a ton of damage.

So again, I would say that a lot i'm scared about what's going like iv league institutions that they have so much credibility. But a lot of really bad things kind of happened there. And it's .

can I suggest we pip IT to tech .

and investing why we think you thank. And we decided to do a cross over .

on well done can because .

when I were talking back stage and I was like, what investments have you made? You like, I ve made no investments in twenty twenty two. And you guys have like how big your latest fund, billion, five billion dollar or latest fund and you have made any investments.

Well, the fun as a whole has made some investments. I vents let any I didn't had any new investments. And twenty twenty two yeah, last year, i'd LED the thirteen or fourteen and a year. So to go to the go to effectively zero for half of the year is like me being on vacation.

Can you tell us what your point of view is?

Well, I mean, I tweed in october, but that we are the the market I to do last january or that we're going to see two thousand over again. And so privately internally have been arguing this internally that this is actually what's going to happen. And so you my behavior should reflect my views, believe some consistency and harmonization.

So if I believe tech stocks and tech companies aren't worth that much, I can be investing until they have reset. I don't want to spend money and invest in companies that aren't to make me money. My job is to ultimately return billions of dollars to my lp. And if I can't do that, I should not be giving anybody, anybody.

So when do you change your mind?

Well, there are founders who are head of the curve. There always are, who understand where the worlds going. They actually understand the world, where the worlds going Better than I do. They actually teach me that world, the world's going more typically, and if they have appropriate expectations, have happy to invest.

So the last three or four investments I did make, actually we're all interesting in enough about one point five million dollar or investments where the founder walked and said, you know, I don't need to want the money. I can accomplish a lot. I can achieve an inflection moments for a very small, not a capital, that is the easiest thing ever to say yes at one point five million dollars.

I don't need to think about the macro o world. I don't need to think about world, you know, nzd CS going. And so the last three of four investments were all incredibly disciplined founders that they made like late last year into argument into january.

Now we have double down. Just to be clear about our conversation, we have doubled down in portfolio companies where we've LED new rounds. But as far as a new indorsement from scratch, I haven't made any new ones.

So when you double down in a moment like this, how do you set valuation, especially if the last valuation was maybe felt .

like a topic I think the founder has sort digested where the world is, then we have to die like my valuation. Otherwise I actually encouraged to go to shop IT like I say that we will give you money.

but will you Price IT at the .

same mark at a discount if they have a fair market valuation from top to your firms will try to be like in that own, but you'll often go to the market and people will be like you to pass, pass, pass, pass, pass. Or they will give them in our direct and they will match that. But we've done that a few times where we've encouraged founders.

Typically, we wouldn't do this because my partner, bryan singer, men loves to power money to companies are working that we've been a high conviction fund for about a decade. So typically, if we like a company, will lead the next round and lead the next round. We'd one this with rap, for example.

We've like three or four rounds. But now with evaluation reset going on, it's been easier sometimes with founders. I really like to say why you go talk to five people, well, is just like go talk to five people and i'll match what they do if they're really talk to your people. But like I want you to get like fair market feedback, you do not just have to .

rely upon my judgment. Car, are we at the point in the cycle where the downloads, the warrants, the the the liquidation preferences have happened or are starting to be discussed?

Seen a lot of the preferences, again.

explain what IT is and why that's important.

yeah. So liquidation preference basically means that the investor is going to get their money back first regards to what happens in the world and that nobody who's a shareholder, nobody is a founder is going to get. Nobody is a common shredder, which basically means founder employee is going to get any money until the investigators all their money back.

Time, some multiple. And that multiple is based on time and or just A A hurdle is very scary. But I can be arbitrium ed by success is founder sometimes has been arbitrate well, meaning they based metal information about the future of the company.

If they really believe they can hit escape ilo city in a short period time, IT can be a decent gamble. I've seen someone like jack rosey, it's where to this very slow istis ted CEO and you knew what he was doing and knew what he was doing and and worked out pretty well actually. But it's it's your pain, a lot of fire.

So it's not for everybody, and you should get a lot of feed back in advice before the float rounds are definitely happening. The new flat. Is that a Brown kind of philosophy even .

in some of our Better are those senior like .

preferred and IT depends.

And on the round, they're all over the APP action. The market isn't .

shift IT to the point that every new money coming in senior to all other money.

that much leverage and what quality investors have your capable like? For example, someone tries to put a senior preference of my company. I'm going to yellow a lot. And if everyone to new investment that from our fund, they may not want to do that.

You think that were um turns away the discount rounds? Well, some companies .

are going to have to try. The problem is like for example, we don't like to do those rounds. There's so much brain damage in the politics of that with founders.

with the brain. So .

typically, if the found you think there's an efficient market of pricing, right? Like I need this much capital and the markets going to float what the Price of our capital is in private capital is not really true. Like so if someone comes to me and says you, my last round was done three hundred million nine months ago and today would probably get Priced at, I say, one hundred twenty million.

I'm more likely to say no than to give them an offer at one hundred twenty because I know there are prior investors and their prior employees are going to be made at me and far at me. And I don't want a lot of dollars and people are yat me and so that brain damage isn't worth IT. So more likely in our fund is more likely to say no, then try to find whether ee hundred, eight hundred, two hundred, forty years, the appropriate Price, which is very bad for the in some ways because you they might need to people start money.

Yeah no.

they maybe able to find somebody else. But we typically a founders fund, really don't like to do those rounds. The only way we would consider IT is pretty much if if everybody on the capital called this up the filler CEO, the board members prior investor said, we really want you to do this and that we're all collectively holding hands. We want you to do this. Then we seriously consider IT.

Do you at the end of q one, do you guys sit around and reset valuations and Marks before you tell your L, P, S, what these companies are worth, meaning your own sense when you sort of generate .

A A sense of valuations? I proactively, mark, we do proactively markdown.

What's your math .

enology for that?

Peter views? I mean, I think I think .

Peter .

would be open to doing that if we felt like we had an objective .

methodology for doing. It's very tRicky. I think you can if you later stage ones of but easy apply multiple les is public know public comments and he just adjust to that. I think you're early your stage stuff very difficult to do, jack, and also not that you promise sense of two in terms of what that how IT moves in needle, but the growth stuff we try to use public comes and be that realistic.

What do you think about that? This will destroy some firms. Just give you had to guess um the next eighteen months for some of these books salt bank I mean my reasons .

of them have been obvious ous inside york times of all things interview two thousand and sixteen. You should reread the transcript. But I like that tragedy just does not work.

Powering money into companies in hoping that money is the key asset in the key Greener for success has been false in the history, technology for fifty years and the last twenty seven billion dollars, again, the brand supreme. They used to do well in america, but they got rid the person who actually do what he's doing. So this is the carriston and mass plus has moral issues, less moral issues than before, but still not the best investor tiger.

I think they have a skill set gap of the going to try IT. From what I read publicly, they're trying to invest serious a in series b companies. The skill to be successful of the investing serious a in series b companies is very different than leading growth rounds or private or public growth ounds.

And we look at this in our fund and we do both. We have a venture fund of one point eight billion in the growth, one of three point two billion. And we apart.

The investment team is basically the saying most of the investment team, maybe all the investment team is Better at wonder the other. And if tiger thinks that they're going to be successful series a investors, they're in for a very rude awakening. I know about five or ten people a plan that that are successful serious investors. IT is a very different discipline.

deploying capital rate large yeah sickle.

I think sickos, the best one fund historically, they are really good at what they do. Obviously, the world is changing around them. Like I think, like many people, crypto can throw little mug urge in their model. They have to scale.

They missed .

the first way of crypto. The crypto, you know, has returned. These are the money for people.

And so I think that's torne h the brand a bit with cypher people specifically, but they're working on fixing that. They have a really good team. The team is aging still pretty well.

One of the hardest things adventure is you age non Grace way in the b about time. You're my age. You're probably to you're already passed your prime and know I kind of comparing I went to law school go with people who us.

senators. And I had breakfast in miami with one of the more prominent U. S. senators. And I said, i'm basically going to the tail end of my career attack. And he said, i'm in the bottom twenty percent of the Youngest twenty percent in the senate and there is a big contrast. And anyway, I think I think they're actually into what they do.

a boy for senate or boy for senate. You .

might run for .

seven .

plus encrypt.

They are excEllent.

Let me ask you, I wanted take the other side of the cypher missing the last crypto insanity, if this thing IT does all get torched, as IT seems to be. And nobody shipping actual products that touch customers that actually saw problems in the world sitting out. You know that crazy fanatic moment might actually look a stood because, you know some of these projects, I do not see them shipping products. I think that you're .

saying something that's practically true, but I think kids is also saying something that is practically true, which is if you're a fund that has that crapo deal flow, at least my understanding of that playbook is you see the project, you make sure that you get some amount of the float of tokens. You're allowed to monetize those tokens very quickly. And so as long as you're in the flow.

there's money to be made.

there's a lot of money to be made. And I think what keeps the saying, and this is where it's acqua, may have made an excEllent decision, which is that form of money making is not very reliable. And I think that there's to be a lot of questions about that. One, there's a regulatory framework.

Yes, three points mostly.

I agree with that. I think first one depends what you think, your vision of what a venture fund does or what you do as a partner. So to me, I think i'm in the company building mode.

And so people who are not building companies are not really interested to making money, not a hedgehog load. So tokens without successful products and iconic companies aren't interesting to me even if they're turn capital. We did think that founders funded that all the alpha was in bitcoin.

So going back a decade, not me, but my partners bought a lot of bitcoin and we made a lot of money with bit quakers without the alpha. Is there or not? In the company building, a year two ago, we started to shift.

And I think appropriately, I think there maybe some alpha. Now we're in the end of one business, founders fund, meaning the right founder, it's worth us investing. The wrong founders is not.

And so there are cypher projects and cypher companies where the founders are is extraordinary. And we would love to be the primary industry if we can. And then there's a bunch of other companies that might be successful, but that's not our business. We are at the end of one find the next year line.

Isn't the fundamental problem that a lot of the way these crypto projects are designed is that you don't have protective provisions, preferred chairs and the Operating system that venture runs on nothing, nothing. And they're asking you to give them a donation of a hundred million dollars for a token that has some panamanian foundation and you don't have a board seat. I mean, this seems incredibly high risk and undisciplined.

They are high risk, but we're in the business of high risk in some ways, like the protective provisions. I think we don't really care that much about them. And founder n. IT is one of the thesis that Peter started the fund with, which is these terms are way overrated. They are ultimately the companies succeed or the really the facebooks, the talented er the space actions that's where you make your money in this business is worrying about what is is really they do that boards and I actually believe in boards by believe in boards is being a mentor.

Consider ary not in governance, of course. Okay, great. But you not buying chucky.

I never give a little shy. I never give a term. Has a board provision for me. The founders requires me to join the board got up.

But I mean the tokens, I think we're part of the problem and I cake in my head .

around the issue we taken to the a little board structure. When you have liquidity prior to success is not necessarily a good incentive. Like I think success liquidity should follow success with product, follow with users, follow with traction, not be in advance.

I to those teams, when they get flush with a billion dollars in tokens or a hundred billion in tokens, they wind down the and they .

haven't ship the product and has missed iner, batter, perversion, sentience, ves all over.

Talk about you're mentioning in the back um in a moment like this, the people that is hard test for right after the entrepreneur, as you said, the june your partners at these organizations, uh just described the dynamic now of having to wonder an organization where you are trying to tell people just go to the beach for you .

yeah and I think I look the way you makes the way you becomes successfull is you give money to a founder, return IT into an iconic company. That is how you get promoted, right? That's the job.

And so if you tell you your colleagues, like you don't make any investments right now, they're thinking the back in the mind, well, how do how do I become successful? So it's easy for me to say, this is easy for Peter to say. This is easier for brian to say this, but it's not so easy for people who wanted make their career to say, don't make any investments.

Now that said, if you make a lot of bad investments, simul shaw has a good boy post about this. Your portfolio is your career when you make five or ten investments in venture, if those aren't good, you're never going to get great. I don't know. There's a single example like a VC who became successful where the first five or seven that show some signs of brilliant.

It's literally the story of the people on the stage right now is that we either got lucky or we were good or some combination of the early investments actually .

hitting definitely worse. Like my first five investments, three of them became public companies.

And like I two cords in the .

first four.

I think I hit two uniforms in the first four. How does that happen? It's just luck. I think I do think there's some luck to IT or maybe your network.

Well, network is so for me is easy because these were people that we work diving. And I worked with a paypal and I was smart enough to at least follow the people that we're launching companies after payable and give them some money. So I didn't have to know much about venture other than just follow my former colleagues.

We have to rap, go to lunch. We're going to end with sex, telling us his most illustrative and funny story about key thr boy, oh god, from stanford.

So some .

great moment with key.

I don't know the two of you.

This is you can feel the friendship and all the memories coming through for sex right now. All this way I could flip the keys.

And maybe since D, I like the work of the keys and I did a paypal Better, I guess .

whatever stanford I give .

us us the moment.

Well, well, good, I think is instructive, was kind of the opinion person running around all the time, probably half eight, half wrong. And David, who is basically running the company at the time, and I could occasions sabotage some projects, David had a really good way of refrain and channeling my energy, which I think is a licker of most people.

He's like, basically, I don't mind if you send me any this feedback, but you have to send them to me directly and not top their people and then you would like filter ative is if you were like, if it's right, I ked on and if not accepted, i'll debate with you. But IT was actually constructed for the organza, so I felt liberalize liberal, liberalized to basic, give the feedback and try to know, edit our course. And IT would be channeled in useful. But IT wasn't distracting people. And so I think that is something like a lesson, or take IT with me .

that I actually now uses a CEO. This is so crazy, but i've heard this exact story from read hofman tell me that about you. I think IT was either IT was either paypal or at lanton where you would send me emails. And I was just like .

living everybody and everything on the.

I made IT like letters from the boy.

I read the emails and I like, shit. I kit right. Well.

more mattered from her boy, a member I give you up to her.

while.

Rain man gave IT.

And we open sources to the fans.

And i've .

just got crazy with.

why? why? why?

We should all just get a room, just one big sexual tension, just need .

to release fee.

What do. You know.