E115: The AI Search Wars: Google vs. Microsoft, Nordstream report, State of the Union
01:49:45 Share

I had the same with my older son, where I don't know it's all kids, but he's thirteen, he doesn't know. I answer the fun not to save his life. Uh, he picked up on her hello and so and so I said, listen, from now on, when you call me, I expect a certain way that you pick up the phone and that's gonna practice for you how you interact with anybody else.

Advice first says, well, if I call you, you have to pick up the phone and if you don't, i'm hanging up right away so yesterday he calls me and and i'm like china speaking. No, it's like, hello, china speaking, dad. Hi, hello, he calls back hello, china speaking that. Hug up again we did this three more fucking times and then finally I said, when will you get that through your head? Can you please just answered like, if I say hello must picking hey, dad is your son or hey, dad is and it's unbelievable and is like, but none of my friends pick up the phone like this and unlike, oh my god like don't they think they need to have verbal communication skills? It's so it's unbelievable and then when I call him, he picks fun oh what not even hello what is that is like a grunt.

minimal efforts, like the mini number sables.

It's it's embarrassing. Are your kids like this?

Or is this just my kid? Actually, I don't think I i've heard and pick up the phone. I need to test that 动一动。 我的。

We can give time.

We are to the fans .

and .

crazy.

Check out was on twitter, called me out for not denouncing the chinese balloon is strong enough language, although I don't think he understood the language I was using. Did you know what iran means?

What did you think that you know I do understand? Yeah generally means straying, of course yeah and traveling in search of adventure, at least according to marine website. So I just thought maybe you're being a little, but I know you're a doubt so but I was a little David thinking may we're just of course, I think you think they were, of course, or they were doing IT deliberately.

You buy that. I was, of course, january lago, january lect j go.

go, go, go. So I knew, jake, I would have to join in this nationwide .

panic .

over .

over this .

balloon. I have no panic word.

jack. I guess some really bad news for you. There are these things called spy satellites can .

see everything I want.

It's obviously .

they've send these balloons over here for a while. I just thought you were framing as IT was erant as like as do you think I was so asking, do you think .

I was iron was think it's such a hair brain scheme to send a balloon flying over american territory that the oculus razor explanation here is that they somehow lost control over IT and these things are not steer able. So like my guesses is that IT probably wasn't deliberate just because of how stupid a plan IT would be and how like obvious that would be. But I could be, I don't really know.

What I do know is that the whole nation got ten in a lather and A Z Z. And started hyperventilated this balloon and IT shows how reflective hawkish the media is. No, he, can we just wrap up this, warn ukrainy before we start .

another .

war with mean up the.

well, okay, a whole time pretty much know what I would say about that is, uh, the media insight is the valid one. I wish just respond ding to the arid. And I was curious if you actually thought I was an I don't think it's an axim.

I don't think there are well, clearly was of course, and problematic. So know I don't know about the intentionality of IT. I I think I think IT very well could have been intentional, but I tend to think because it's such a stupid hair brain scheme like I almost given the Better of the doubt, not because you're not capable of spying. I'm sure spying by spying on us, just like we're spying on them as what we both do. But I seems like such a stupid way because really made for TV moment.

you have to understand the nature of live television, why the media overreacted to IT. It's ongoing. So because IT is not final. It's like a live event occurring, like when kids are trapped in a mind. Those are the best stories for CNN because you can keep updating people and people keep turning the TV on to check on the status.

So this one was just made for a CNN because obviously, we're going to shoot the thing down and obviously you can interpret into IT if it's an accident or not and just give them something to tell. Go out on a slow this week. But IT is interesting.

I take your point that is interesting is, is the north stream story correct or not? Why is that not being covered? It's not being covered because there is not an ongoing story. So that just shows you no.

I don't think that's right. I think it's not being covered because the mainstream media already took aside on this.

Well, IT is not just cynical.

So when not got blown up, the administration came racing out with the line that the russians did IT, that this was self satoh. And either way, the media repeated this endlessly. This was the media line.

And IT never really made sense. Anyone who's paying attention, because, first of all, this was an economically vital asset to russia. Second, IT was the remain source of leverage over europe, was the control over the gas supply. The idea that they would shoot themselves in the fact that way, just to somehow show how crazy they are IT never really made sense. Anyone was paying attention.

And the fact of the administration, the media so quickly raised to that conclusion suggested that I was maybe a cover story because if we had nothing to do with that, you would just be more neutral and say, yeah, we don't know what happened, but they had to, like, promote this line that all the russians did IT, which has never made any sense. And now cyr shes come out with the story. So IT laying out in great detail how we did IT.

It's not just saying we did IT is laying out who did IT and how in the steps and all that kind of stuff. And just see you guys understand who this guy is. He's this legendary pool, a surprise winning journalist.

He's like eighty six years older, something like that now. But he broke during vietnam. He broke the story of the medi massacre, which the military denied until he proved that.

He broke the story during the iraq war of the above de prison abuses, which, again, the media, the military denied until they was undeniable. His poets are winning all you really need. Here he is, again, basically another cover, military action. And look, we don't know for sure whether it's sure or not, but IT looks, IT looks pretty.

Ad, do you think that europe knew? Do you think that the europeans were told that the americans were gonna blow the singing up.

if that's true, rather way that the administration has said clearly.

this is a full story question. I think the big code was, this is peer fection.

The ukraine would be the most, like me person to ability .

you look for means more of an opportunity.

They don't have opportunity. Go to the story.

I don't think, I don't think the ukrainians have the capability to do an undersea mission like that. The norwegians do. And the story maintained that we did IT with them.

The british do. Story didn't say whether they were involved or or not. So no, my guess is that if this was a covert U. S. Activity, was kept a very small group, which is why it'll be hard to prove more definitively than .

the other side of the argument is this is such a provocation and the administration saying is fiction. So what what is your response to that act? Like would the us do something so provocative, or would they have somebody else do IT? And would norway do something so provocative if IT seems an extremely IT seems like going to extremely offensive technique is supposed to just backing the ukraine to defend itself against russia's invasion?

Here's a thing. Before the invasion, biting at a press conference said that if the russians invade nord stream would be no more. And they asked him, well, how can you make sure that that's a deal between germany and russia were not involved? They say, we have ways, we have ways to trust middle happen.

Separately, Victoria newland's, or defective straight state, said something very similar about how we would stop north stream if the russians invaded. And then after north should got blown up, blinking at a press conference, said that this was a wonderful opportunity. I was extolling all the benefits of this, and then Victory.

Newland ded, a congressional hearing, said that i'm sure were all very glad that the hunk of medals, the bottom to sea, again, extolling all the benefits, and we discuss the benefits on this program of now we have shifted the european independence on russian gas to a dependence on american gas. So the fact the matter is administration kinds, telegraph ed, what they were going to do, they had the capability to do IT and they have the motive to do IT. So it's certainly applaud story you're write that we .

can't know for sure .

it's a single source story ends on the credibility of but as IT stands right now, whose story do I think makes more sense probably sir shes you believe .

ci harsh over the spokesperson with the CIA who wrote the claim is completely an early .

false just to be clear people denied you believe they know everything they deny that um nato expansion and anything to do with the you break out all of this war yeah I mean this is .

one of these situations where we can possibly know yeah .

you make a good point. Co, which is this if true, I look I not say I I don't know if it's you're .

leaning towards believing .

and I lean towards seeking. It's more applausive than not O A, because also like who else could have done IT and again, who went the motive means an opportunity. But you make a great point, which is if we did IT, it's an incredibly provocative act, is basically perpetrating an act of war against the country that has thousands of nuclear weapons bite and promises at the beginning of this war that he would keep us out of being directly involved. So this would directly contradict what he said at the begin of this war. So I think it's a very scary situation here.

Yeah, I have famous .

if if the us. Didn't do IT like, why don't we find the real killer?

I actually have this. I have the theory. Here's my theory.

The C I, I knew how to do IT. Biden wants to do IT. The republicans want to do IT.

Obviously, the the people who are the most pro topic or trip have been the republicans. They've LED discharge even more than the democrats. So it's it's a by parties in issue, stop north.

Y, by parties in issue, hands down. I think the CIA probably knew how to do IT. And just like we equipped the ukraine to do IT, we might have facilitated the ukraine and a collaborator.

U K. Norway, some freeLancers, you know we have those freeLance former nav sales that Operate perhaps the C I. Just set to the ukraine. Here's a, you know, black ops group. If you wanted to engage them, you could feel free to do so, which would then split the difference between what size is saying or the CIA is saying, which is typically where the truth lies, is probably between what the same investigative journalist of note has said and what h the CIA is denying the CIA probably has plausible deniability.

That's my well, if you could find a source of that story, jack, that lays out in the same level of detail that harsh is laid out in terms of the meetings that occurred, what was approved, when, how they did IT, when they did IT, the explosives they use, the divers, they used IT goes into a fair amount detail.

incredible detail.

Yeah I mean, so you what to what explosives right? But you you're .

trying to put what you just said, which is basically you inventing a story on the same level is a story yeah, I understand. But he actually has a lot of detail in his story.

He had yet empty sources. There is a lot of people that we're willing to tell the story.

No, no, I don't think that's actually the. I don't think empty sources and there's no on the record the sources.

one main sources, but who provided a tonet detail, I don't know exactly what is able to directly CoOperate with other sources.

I know that the other thing I wonder x is he with this one store story, he has a collaboration with the new yorker. And anybody would, if this was a really well sourced and you could back IT up kind of story, they would love to have the ratings for this story. There's a blockbuster story for.

as happens a long time, which we learned was IT through the gallery plan affair, which is that these major news publications will, some time signs, have a back channel back to the national security Operators when they have something like this. And the message was, you can hit print on this, in which case possibly to he goes and just self published himself, which wasn't relieve in an option few years ago.

Yeah, so I mean, no, this is, this is the russia t test of russia test. You have the media, you get the C I. I.

It's photo for a great movie.

What I go back to J. L, is I think you can lay out some theories about, let's say, you know, the polls at IT or maybe ukrainians with the british or something. Yes, you could lay out those theories, but the media wasn't only to entertain any other theories when this news broke.

Where do they do? They blame the russians. And that story made no sense, but they said IT. So definitively .

the source on that, i'm looking for A A couple of the source of the administration blaming the russians.

I just want to make sure we're press conference. I just want to make sure where by the russians now they didn't push IT that hard, but was interesting is the by administration set up, but they didn't keep coming back to IT, but the media really ran with IT. And when people on both the left and the right, like people like jeffrey sacks on the left and tucked across on the right, basic started a question whether the U.

S. Could have done IT. They were accused being conspiracy serious. And, you know, putin studies and all the rest of IT. And now all of a sudden, here comes more harsh with the pretty detailed story lending incredible to that point of view.

Yeah.

I just may indicate we don't know everything that's going on with this war. And I think the longer this goes on, the more dangerous that is .

freely in many thoughts on geopolitical issues. And who might have blown up your trim? And what are your .

sources saying facebook?

What are your sources in size quarter saying speculation .

is best left to the future? I don't know about the whole speculating on what could have been done in the past by someone. Those are conspiracy theory.

There's there's not actually experiences theory because your stream, your stream was blowing up. You understand that right?

Like this one double, then sing J S J S theory.

哦 yeah， jack is .

to bring to.

by the way, speaking of which.

radix a corsi .

who is a polish diplomats. I think he is like their foreign ister. When north stream blew up, he tweed, a photo of IT saying, thank you, you say.

哦， at which was one .

of the reasons why people thought that, okay, like of course, the U. S did IT, you know who has the capability to do IT? Who has the motive to do IT? Who said they were gonna IT? And who benefits you? We know who benefits who .

was conducting nature exercises in that region? Three months that up? Yeah.

exactly. And Jeffery, sex point in that out, I think, was A C nbc interview before they basically stop him because he's allowed to talk about this network TV, apparently. But he based pointed out there were like us rate or signature in the area.

President joby declared that is is from bloomberg that a massive league from the north trim gas pipeline system in the bolsa was an intentional act and that the russian statements about the incident couldn't be trusted. He was a deliberate act of sabotage. And now the russians are pumping out disagreement, lies by, and told reporters friday at the Whitehouse. So he didn't exactly say the russians did.

Did he just said it's an act of the media. Russian, now what's media? You can do one of these montojo where IT was like russian saboor. In fact.

he just good biting and say vertige. He said he was an active sabot .

SHE actually, look at what he said. Everything he said is absolutely true. If the U. S. Also, the correct .

single sentence.

single and said is one hundred percent. Whether we did IT or whether russia did IT was a deliberate action tige.

Think about IT. If we did that, we know they didn't do IT. And then we have to be like careful about suggestion. They did IT.

Well, what are the germans think? Because this is the germans pipeline. this. So if we blew IT up, that's also explained to me you're thinking on the chessboard of our relationship with germany. If we blew up with they not also see that as a hostile act.

is why I asked a european news because I think you have to tell germany that it's gonna en. And I think the .

quit procol with germany .

is some amount of guaranteed supply that the U. S. Directs into europe so that they know that their long term L N, G. Supply is intact, so that they become ambitious, right? There's a point of indifference where the german say, okay, we don't know when this thing is going to get turn back on, and we don't know what the implications of IT are. Here's what the demands are, meaning our energy supply, our energy needs are. And so as long as the united states can say you look worse case, we have stuff in the, you know S P, R that we can give you, there's probably a point of a difference for the german say, okay, we're just gonna turn around and not anything. And i'm curiously the german say anything when this happened.

No, i'm looking for the gr.

I was literally type to nick, what was the german's position on this? Because I S A till, well, yeah, you're breaking this down like a poker hand. We are trying to figure .

out if you construct this hand right prop. It's like, you know where both of these folks are.

right? Okay, there was a really interesting video that a guy named uh, matt or failure, who puts together these really funny videos. He puts together these motos of media reactions to things.

And what he shows is that, you know, you can have like twenty different media outlets and they all use the exact same words. And when eclipses together, you can see they're reading from somebody's talking points and it's not really clear who. And in basically, if you look at his video here on who blob north ing pipeline, you see that there was like a party line from the major media on the stuff.

How how will.

You do that.

I promise you.

we will be able.

To I will and without .

the that most .

likely russia russian.

And own in raw camera. Look.

I can blow up a pipeline. Everyone knows that button. Give this to you.

Who are these talking about?

You stream .

two pipeline .

and s is .

talking .

heads who have no first more than he has one .

on one hundred by and laptop as well. Well, again, he's got like twenty different talking heads and media outlets all portraying IT in the exactly the same language and how narrative around the .

sunday morning shows you hear the same narrative from each side. How does that actually get quartey to each side? Build those bullet points. Emails there. Where do they call them surrogates? The email, all the surrogates, and say, just keep saying these things over and over again to qualify.

So what's up to what's .

up of and just like save this over and over again, how does that work?

sex? I think it's partly talking point memos. I go out to check groups. I think it's also as people looking on twitter and then there's like certain key nodes that they follow and they know, okay, this is the party line because such as such, key person is saying IT and they .

take their cues that metic memetic effect that you guys always talk about. People meet the memetics .

understand that all of the prestige outlasted, repeat the same party line and have the same perspective.

Yeah, got to do your own search for information. This is the beauty of sub stack.

Actually, this why sub stack is so important is that actually gives you alterable ah alternative because like you've got ten different mainstream media networks and newspapers and magazines, but they all have exactly the same talking point except you may be fox news of the one exception although even fox on the whole north string thing you saw, the fox can be pretty military tic and they had the same general basically blaming the russians for their on fox .

yeah germany's position is just, hey everybody, this is sabotage. So that's IT. But sabot, I think you ask a really .

good question there about the german interest in this right now, the german economic interest and the german foreign policy interest are not aligned. What's clearly best for the german economy is to have cheap natural gas powering its industries, even if IT comes from russian pipelines. And they no longer have that anymore, in fact, they may never have that again.

They are going to pay a very high Price economically, maybe forever. And remember, there are whole economies based on the industry. They're a very industrial power. So if this war drags on for a long time, I think shorts might be in some political trouble precisely because he's gone along with the americans on this. And there is, there is a growing political opposition to this war inside of germany.

More fatigue is a real thing, and the things got a rap up at some point. Any final face you get to involve conversation. But what is any any game theory from you?

Okay, there you have .

the folks salt of science checking in what's problem.

You don't the establish .

it's very special.

is predicted.

What do you have my position on this?

Because I I, and because I don't, I don't stabs.

I ticals around the fact that I think there's a orientation towards conflict, and I think there is still is. I don't think that there's much of an incentive or a motivation to back down because this conflict creates a significant amount of that back to the U. S.

He creates potential future asset stream, creates a an a real alignment of power. Everyone's looking externally as internal, you know, economic conflict and wealth disparity issues arise and economic growth. This chAllenge and inflation is soring.

It's a great place to you know, uh, address one energy. So I think all of the stuff is detailed analytical anagen around who's saying what, who's doing what. I think the underlying pieces and the underlying river that's flowing is one that's like looking for external conflict.

I think the same is true with the U. S. In china.

you talk about the military industrial complex is going to benefit massive ness. The longer this dragged out, the more the conflict in taiwan heats up, the more we're going to invest in our military.

And we often talk about these things as if they are like top down, like master plan driven, and as we all know, like more V G board driven. The bunch of guys, they got their hand on the V G board and they're just had a little too much caffeine, you know. And in this case, I think it's just more about, like everyone's little animals, the anxieties leading to a desire for more conflict.

We're not happy at home. You are happy at home. You're not looking externally for conflict. That's true in nearly every development on earth today. That's pretty I like position.

I think great. I think great. I think there are a lot of interest who benefits from war. And I think the foreign icy established ment is funded by those interests. And that's kind of wired for war, least in terms of the reflex, right, even something as relatively harmless as a balloon I .

saw that becomes .

like a castle spell. It's like you are ready to go to war against china over that.

I saw a couple military leaders give a talk a few months ago in a private thing, so wasn't .

on public .

record with .

the establishment. No, but one genuine flex on each nee.

they may give you the bank of capital. What was striking to me in this particular thing, where these guys were being interviewed on stage and like a dinner thing, and they were so oriented around their next steps in escalation. And I think that speaks to the point, acts like none of them were thinking about, like where we have today.

How do we just like what is this going to get? There was no conversation at all from anyone about resolution or the escalation with every single one of the moves all about like my orientation for getting bigger, going deeper, going harder, going stronger, making the thing bigger. And I think that was really scary to me because I did I didn't hear anyone having a conversation around like how we should we even consider whether we doesn't get bigger. Everyone was thinking assumptive, vely. IT was going to get bigger.

I like the V. G. board.

You have to follow the financial sentence. When the last time we looked at this right, leon, pat and all these other guys who are screaming for war, they were getting paid by the military industrial complex I member. When layd Austin was nominated as defense secretary, he had some conflict issues because he was just on the board of north gramm or one of these big military industrial companies. And so of course, these generals have to push for war, because as long as they're garden forward, their guaranteed to have for them a very lucrative job once they leave the military.

The wiggy board, though, sacks on an authority. Maybe you can keep this matter for going. The media has got their hands, and not that they want ratings.

You have the energy industrial complex in this german conflict, who seeks to benefit massively if people invest in renewables or you find other oil, often norway. Norway oil is one of the large reserves that's untapped. So you have this wiggy board, media energy and the military industry complex all moving in.

That one wants to move IT to the side of the wig board that says, escalate. There are very few people that that have the energy to move on to the other side.

that of the way possible. The escalation means less energy, more, less investment. So yeah, we've going to go escalate.

You know, who warned us about the military industrial complex? yes. Do I eyes an hour supreme? I like committed and war two wins the war, patriots, AR hero, top general becomes present, republican present and is his departing address warns us that, yes, we need to defense industry, but they become a vested interest in favor of foreign interventions or war.

And where the site .

that where is the worthy interest on the outside of IT? I can tell you this, the american people don't want to be in a war with russia. I want to think most american people want to send a hundred billion over there. They want to send a one hundred billion to their cities to fix crime and all the other problems.

Yeah, if you've never seen that farewell address or one thousand and sixty one IT is well worth watching. You can find IT on youtube. Just search for military complex is in her and he. And this is a person who was part of the military industry complex saying, watch out for this. He was a very morning.

E, yes, he was .

in the .

machine.

E, welcome to the in park with us again. David duff, sex chamar paly hopeth. Ia, and the soft on of science, who is on his powers starter, or my god, so many podcast are doing.

The soft n of science is in hot demand. What all these pocket should do in freeze only science pockets. Point you.

I did a podcast with brain kidding last week who was really kind enough to reach. He had some awesome guests. He's cosme ology that U.

C, S. D. Professor down there. And we were were supposed to record that day and then we cancelled at in class minute, right? Yeah, yeah.

I was only supposed to be alone with him for now. Our like a well, my next thing just got freed up. So and then like three hours, I was so I was like exhausted that day. So I look really hang over on the video and probably part of the course, some a lot.

but no, lex freeman for you, such a mother. And I have to freedman, lex freedmen, but you have not. He's invited you yet. Lex has legs .

inside my inventions .

going on. collect. Like, what are you doing?

No, dovers is. No lex. Three moon .

was going. Establishment.

what's going on?

No, i'm too N T. Establishment sax.

nobody, nobody inviting this court to anything process. Now we're that doing, go all in lie from davos. It's not happy books. Sorry, they have found that he, hi, great.

I'm cha Marks. I don't want to be part of any club that would have you as a member.

I don't want to. And they also do there. Yeah, worked out for everybody.

IT does fill me with like a rage where I actually, my degree doing the all in summer. Again, nice.

by the way, proposal coming your way this weekend .

up if you want to really, really, really from your nose of establish, yes, let's do IT set IT during the exact same dates and times as an establishment conference.

Oh.

the auto door and then invite all .

the best guests .

so that they are they come toward just a to like .

a tag line. Let's come up with a tag line that just tweet everybody and let me st.

We should create the entire list. You know, they have there, like establishment list. We should have the entire list.

That's all good.

I like the entire establishment to start with them.

I have a great vanity fair establishment thing story OK. I not gone. Athletes, they put me on that list a decade ago.

We like go and keep. And the most .

incredible thing about IT is that when you go to the event, which is kind of a cool event, we all had photos taken by any leave of its, oh, and I have a montage of some of the people that took photos that day as critical me and LV, brazil's chain bazas bunch of people.

But I look like a you you have the dad board. And fashion sense at IT was like.

yeah look look .

great. Yeah basic?

no.

That's not that the big .

ford ford .

is blair thing, which is like a really .

tired look for not two .

thousand so bad, just don't pull up the .

chaos pictures when he's wearing like, oh g you know his my shirt if you do the google search, put the images before twenty eleven, you will find chough photos.

Do the facebook. And I were the same thing every day for four years, five years as brutal. Oh.

oh my, my god. What is that going to break this down? See, this is when the sweater game was not tight. This is like sweater one point o again.

So I don't know what I was doing back then to stop, put, take these pictures off please.

He's also got to watch suddenly peaking out. This is back when he was like, I got a role ex.

that's a ject. But anyway.

this is what the watch is really.

We fight. I don't know that .

watch got to six.

order two, order two. But the same story, same, same jack.

Listen, I and I got an apple .

watch and i'm going to up dead. But here's the dead by.

wow.

That was to bend from the thirty fourteen years ago.

Wow, god.

you had no style. I really didn't.

Well, I mean, do put up pictures of me. I was fat. Pictures of me eating.

X, yeah, we check out. Oh, man, look at that face. That's plus to one pound.

Let's keep this gun search words. Microsoft first is google okay? It's been a rough couple of days for google. We've all seen a goole serve live demos of their new geneva I dia dia.

You guys all know about ChatGPT, but now being integrating IT into their search and and getting there before google and microsoft CEO sadia nadella, he is going ham. He looks great. He's fit.

He's wearing a tight t shirt, and he is saying he's gona make google dance, dance, google dance. He is getting up in their business. And I listen, he is in A A distance second place, so that makes sense.

On the other hand, google A I demo was Frankly a bit of a disaster. Poorly received stock. They dropped well percents ces event and their presentation did not include the chat that bard because in search because IT wasn't working.

IT seems like there was an era in IT when they said, what do you discoveries from the jim's web space telescope? Can I tell my nine year old and bar d answer that he took the first pictures of a planet outside our solar system, which is false, which of course we all know about ChatGPT is only right half the time is a little broke, uh, on the margins. So anyway, there was a screen shot circulating today, which is probably false.

But IT says the following me, an a bunch co workers registered for google, for A I demos wrong, who is a team of one hundred six, eight people were prepare red to slide for the demo, all of us around the jobs. I can't imagine that's real. But if IT was, that would be a hard core moment for google to fire a bunch of people for screwing IT up. Listen, you work in the belly of the beast for you. But what are your thoughts on being poking the tiger and telling google dance, you know, cinda dance.

you know. What's interesting is google had like an incredible A I competency, but particularly since they bought deep mind and it's been predominantly oriented towards kind of, you know internal problems, they demonstrated last year that the A I improved data center of energy efficiency by forty percent theyve used IT for add optimization, add copy optimization uh the youtube follow uh video algorithm so what video is suggested you is your next video to watch, which massively increased youtube hours watched uh per user, which massively increased youtube revenue.

You know what's the right time and place to insert video S S and youtube or insert ads, youtube video so you know, auto fill in gmail and dark. So so much of this competency has been oriented specifically to avoid this primary disruption and search. Obviously, now things have come to a bit of a point because, you know, this alternative research has been revealed in ChatGPT.

And you guys can kind of think about search and you know we've use this termine in the past, Larry and sergey, the textbook that they read, you know one of the original textbooks that use in um internet search engine technologies called information or information retrieval. So information retrieval is this idea that, you know, how do you pull data from a static h data set and IT involves skating that data set are crawling IT, and then creating an index against IT. And then a ranking model for how you post stuff out of the index, present the results from the data that's available based on what IT is your querying for, you know, and doing that all in a tenth of a second.

So you know, if you think about the information retrieval problem, you type in the data or some rough estimation of the data you want to pull up, and then a list is present to you. And over time, google realize we could show that data in smarter, quicker ways. Like, if we can identify that you are looking for a very specific answer, we can reveal that answer in the one box, which is the thing that sits about the search results.

Likely you said, what time is IT know what? When does this movie showed theater? So they can pull out the structure data and give you very specific cancer, rather than a list from the, the, the database. And then over time, there were other kind of modalities for displaying data that IT turns out or even Better than the list like maps or shopping, we can kind of see a matrix of results or youtube where you can see uh you know longer form version of content. And so this is different kind of um you know information retrieval, you know media will present A T O and I really kind of changed the game and created much Better user satisfaction in terms of getting what they were looking for. The the chAllenge with with this new morality is it's not really fully encompassing.

So if you can kind of think about the human computer interaction problem, you want to see flight times and airlines and the Price of flights in the matrix, you don't necessarily want us uh a text stream written to you are to give you the um you know the the answer that you're looking for or you want to see a visual display of shopping results for or you do want to see a bunch of different people's commentary because you're looking for different points of you on a topic rather than just get an answer. But there are certainly a bunch of answer solutions for which ChatGPT uh type you know natural language pensiveness becomes a fantastic and Better mode to present answers to you than the matrix or the list or the ranking and so on. Now the one thing that I think is worth noting, I didn't back the on develop analysis on the cost of doing this compared to ChatGPT.

So so google makes about three box per clink. You can back in to what the revenue researches a bunch of different ways. One way is three box per clack, about a three percent click to read on ads. Some people estimate this about right, about five cents to ten cents revenue per search done on google or anywhere from one cento dc.

even if they don't click the ads, because one out of one hundred people click in, and es call IT five sets.

right? And you can assume a roughly fifty percent margin, uh, on that search, which means that fifty percent cos or cost of goods, or a cost to run that search and present those ads. So you know, right now google search costs them about, you know, how tuna have sense research uh to present the results.

A recent estimate on running the GPT three model for ChatGPT is that each um result takes about thirty sense of compute. So it's about an order of magnet de higher cost to run that search result. Then IT is to to do IT through a traditional search query, which makes today that's right.

And so so that's the point like IT has to come down by about an order of magnetite. Now this is a this then becomes a very deep technical discussion that i'm certainly not the expert, but there a lot of great experts that there's great blogs and subjects on this on what's you're gona take to get there to get a tex reduction in cost on on running these models. And there's A A lot related to kind of optimization on how you run them on a compute platform, the the type of computer dare that's being used all the way down of the chips that are being used.

So they're still quite a lot of work to go before this becomes truly economically competitive with google. And that really matters because if you get to the scale of google, you're talking about spending eight to twenty billion dollars a quarter just to run search results and display them. And so for ChatGPT type solutions on being or elsewhere to scale and to use that as the modality, you're talking about something that today would cost eighty billion dollars a quarter, uh, to run from a computer perspective if you were to do this across all search queries. So it's certainly gonna a total game changer for a subset of search queries. But to make IT economically uh, work for for these businesses, whether it's paying or google or others, there's a lot of work still to be done.

The great part about this chaos is that had been gave tenability to our friends sam and ChatGPT to invest in as your uh which now has the infrastructure and will providing the ChatGPT infrastructure to startups or corporations, big companies and small like, so that ten billion dollars should do enough to ground IT down between software optimization, data optimization, chip optimization and cloud optimization. Yes, you think so or no?

The ability to run this that scale is gonna en because were getting Better and Better at creating silicon that specializes in doing things in a massively paralyzed way. And the cost of energy at the same time is getting cheap and cheaper along with you. When you multiple these two things together, the effectives is that you'll be able to run these models.

The same output today will cost one one tenth as long as you ride the energy and computer care for the next few years. So that is going to naturally happen. I have two interesting takeoff, and one is may be a little bit of side bar.

The side bar is if you guys were sitting on top of something that you thought was as foundational as google search back in one thousand eight ninety nine, would you have sold forty nine percent of IT for ten billion dollars? Hard done. I think the answer is no. I think the answer is no.

not in an environment where you have unlimited ability to raise capital.

This is something that we ve said before, which is that ChatGPT is an incredibly important innovation, but it's an element of a platform who will get quickly commoditized because everybody will compete over time. And so I think what microsoft is doing is the natural thing for somebody on the outside looking in at an entity that has ninety three percent share of a very valuable category, which, how can I scorch the earth?

And so microsoft, effectively for ten billion, but almost fifty percent of a tool, and now will make that tool as pervasive possible, so that consumer expectations are such that google is forced to decay the quality of their business model in order to compete. So that as free break side, you have to invest in all kinds of compute resources that today are still somewhat expensive and that will flow into the p nl. And what you will see is that the business quality degrades.

And this is why when google did the deal bar, the first thing that happened was a stock went off five hundred basis points. They lopped off one hundred billion dollars of the market camp. Most in reaction to, oh my god, this is not good for the long term business.

but not good for the long term business. On the mechanical basis, when you get an answer, you don't have to click the links.

Right now, if you look at google business, they have the best business model ever invented on earth, ever for poor profit. Company IT just rains money. This is a business that this year will do almost a hundred billion dollars of free cash.

low. It's a business that has to find ways, and we kind of joke, but they have to find ways to spend money. Othe wise, they'd be showing probably fifty or sixty percent e but the margins.

And people would wonder, hey, wait a minute. You can't let something like this go unattended, so they try to do a lot more things to make. That core treasure looked not as incredible as IT is. They have one hundred and twenty billion a cash. This is a business that's just an absolute jog nut.

And they have ten times as many employees as they need to run the core business.

That says, I don't know what, but my point is that it's an incredible business. So that business will get worse if microsoft takes a few hundred basis points of share, if meta takes a few hundred basis points of share, if ten set does, if a few startups to quora, by the way, launch something called poo, which I was experimenting and playing around with last weekend.

If you add IT all up, what sort said is true? Which is even if all we do collectively as an industry is take five hundred or six hundred basis points of share away from google. IT doesn't create that much experimental cost for us, but IT dos create enormous headwinds and pressure for google with respect to how they are valued and how they will have to get revalued.

And that's what happened. So the last thing i'll say is the question that i've been thinking about is what is soon I do, right? So once the counter measure.

yes.

this is what I was gonna to think. The counter measure here, if I was him, is to go to the board and say, guys, we're going to double pack right? Attack is the traffic acquisition costs that google pays their publishers.

IT is effectively their way of guarantee and exclusivity on search traffic. So for example, you guys have an iphone, its google search, that the default search in the iphone, google pays apple this year. This ring negotiation for the deal could mean that apple gets paid twenty five billion dollars for giving away that right to google. So if these google does all these kinds of deals last year, they spent, I think, forty five billion or so. So about twenty .

one percent when you think about that a math, google basically paid apple, which was working on search technology. They were working on a search solution. They I hate them to stand there .

and they're paying everybody.

So I think the question for google are following, if you think you're gona lose share and let's say you go to seventy five percent share, would you rather go there and actually still maintain your core stranglehold on search? Or do you actually want seventy five percent share where now all of these other competitors have been seated? Well, you can decay business model quality and still remain exclusive if you just double attack.

And what you do is you put all these other guys on their heels because as we talked about, if you're paying publishers two times more, then what anybody else is paying them, you'll be able to get published to say, hey, you know what? Don't let those A I agents craw your website because i'm paying you all this money. Remember that, right? So do not crawl in robots.

Start T, X, T equivalent for these A I agents. And I think that that will put microsoft in all these other folks on their heels. And then as as you have to figure out all this derivative work stuff, all these lawsuits, google will look pristine because they can say on paying these guys double because I acknowledge that this is a court part of the service. So that's the game theory. I think that has to get .

to red because hold them make a thanks about, yeah, I love the second part to math because in this clip i'm about to show me lay patel from the verge at an awesome interview with satire. And he basically would not answer this question, at least to my satisfactory, which is, hey, what do the publishers get out of this? You've adjusted our information. How do we get paid? Watch this clip is very talent answer, even in set.

If the new being, what are the ten best gaming tvs and just makes me a list, why should I the user then click on the the link, the verge, which he has another way to the time amount.

That's a great question but you even there you would say, hey, who added these things come from um and would you want to go die like that? Even surge today has that have answers? They may not be as high quality answers. They just are getting Better.

So I don't think of this as a complete departure from what is expected of a search engine today, which is supposed to really respond your query while giving them the links that they can then click on, like ads and such works. That way, in my mind, is a terrible answer. He needs to address how they get paid.

He punted the answer and just said, hey, listen, search works as way sax will the ride to the data will google to state a cora? Hey, we'll give you a billion dollars year for the data set lag. Let me hear storage, you N O google.

I think there's maybe even A A bigger problem before that, which is I think the whole motivation model might change. So the reason why google motorized so well is, is perceived having the best search. And then IT gives you a list of links and a bunch of those links are paid and then people click on them.

Now I think when you use search in AI, you're looking for a very different ficano answer. You're not looking for a list of ten or twenty links, you're just a link for the answer. And so where is the opportunity vertige against that?

I mean, maybe you can charge like an a filly commission if the answer contains link in IT or something like that. But then you have asked a question, what does that distort? Like best answer, I am. I really gain the best answer. Or am again, the answer that .

someone's going to pay for. This is your key insight. The fact is google gives you an answer.

You don't click on IT. Google has had a very finally tuned baLance between, hey, these first two and three paid ads. These might the paid links might actually give you a Better answer than the context below them.

But in this case of the ChatGPT sell, just hate, this is the top three televisions. These are the top three hotels. These are the top three ways to write a Better esa. You don't need to click, you have never given answer, and the model is gone.

The paid link is still a subset in that case. So a google we used to have a key metric was the bounce back rate. So when a user claimed so when a user clicks on a result on the search results page, we could see whether or not they came back and searched again. And so that tells you the quality of the result that they were given because if they don't come back IT means they ended up getting what they were looking for.

And so ads that um performed Better than organic search results, which means someone created the ad paid for IT and the user clicked on IT and didn't come back and came back with less frequency than if they click on an organic result that meant that the ad quality was higher than organic quality. And so the add got promoted to kind of sit at the top and IT became a really kind of important part of the equation for google's business model, which is how do we source, how do we monetize more search results where we can get advertisers to pay for a Better result than what next search might otherwise kind of show. And so it's actually Better for the user in this case then say, just getting an answer.

For example, i'm looking for a playstation five. I don't want to just be told he go to best buy by playstation five. I want to be taken to the check out page to buy a play station five, and I am more likely to be happy if I click on a result, and I immediately takes me to the check out page and best buy, really happy to pay for you to get there, because they don't want you looking around the internet, looking further places and a lot we can't convolution all search queries, not all search query.

Es are, hey, you know what's the best dog to get to not be on the floor, whatever kind of arbitrarily question you might have that are doing research on many search queries. Es are um commerce intention related? I want to buy a flight to go somewhere. I want to book a hotel to go somewhere. I want to buy a video game system, eta.

That series of cherries may have a very different kind of modality in terms of what's the right interface versus the ChatGPT interface where yeah, there's a lot of kind of organic results of people sit on the internet fort today and and and and the question earlier can be resolved by google doing a simple and utica exercise, which is know what's you going to cost us and what's going to give the user of the best result. And that's ultimately what kind of resolve to a Better business model. It's really measurable.

I think on your map point, you know, today google pays apple fifteen million dollars a year to be the, the the default surch engine on iphone N S. On the safari browser. That's only about a quarter of google overall tag.

The majority of google traffic acquisition cost is actually not being paid for search. A good chunk that is being paid to publishers to do ads, sense display ads. On their sites um and google read share back to them for putting ads on their sites. So you know the tag number, I think maybe you kind of want to move the needle, but the majority of google searches don't come through the default search engine that they pay to be on IT. IT might move the needle bit.

but I don't IT really change. Your comment is more tag has to become a weapon on the forward foot, number one. So if you're going to spend twenty one percent of your revenue on tag, you should be willing to spend thirty to forty percent to maintain the ninety three percent market year. I don't think what you want to see is your profit dollars decade because you lose share. It's rather Better for you to spend the money and decay your business bottle and have someone decade .

for you in apple. At this point, apple is really the only tech why I don't know.

I'm saying, take that idea. You have an entire sales team whose job IT is right now to sell absence, right? You have an entire group of people who know how to account for tact and how to think about IT as a cost.

But if you're basically willing to say out of the hundred billion dollars of free casual, are willing to go to eighty or seventy billion of free cash for combined with a hundred billion of short and long term investments, I have and i'm going to use IT as a weapon, and i'm going to go and make sure that all of these publishers have a new kind of agreement that they signed up for, which is how do my best to help you monetize. You do your best by being exclusive to our A I agents, right? So you deprive other models of your content on your pages because that will get indicated.

And there is no way just like again, if you say do not craw your not allowed to crawl. If you're google, microsoft actions have for agent unrealistic to expect that. So my point is google should do this and define how it's done before it's define for them because right now, people are in this nice and phase where everybody thinks everybody's going to be open and get along. And I just think that that's unrealistic.

It's a really important kind of philosopher question. First, like google today just have people know on add sense, is typically paying out seventy cents on every dollar to the publisher. They know it's it's a it's a pretty you know general.

It's it's the way they've kept the competitive mode, you know wide and kept folks out of beating them on third party ad network bit because they they bit on everything and they always win because they always share the most driving you back. So they own that market with respect to acquire in content. You know the internet is open.

It's an open protocol. Anyone can go to any website by typing the IP address and viewing the content that they publish our choosers to make available on that server to display to the internet. And there's a fair use policy and there can type the address.

I think, fifteen or twenty or thirty percent of the pages on the internet right now, our apps that .

are closed facebook close internet right content.

the open internet matters less and less.

Yeah I I don't know. I mean, look, you're right. Maybe there's there's the enhancement of the models. But my point being that if the internet is open and you and I spent uh a billion lifetime reading the whole internet and getting smart, and then we were the chat pot and someone came and asked us a question and we could kind of answer the question um because we've now read the whole internet do I O licensing royalty revenues to the knowledge that I gained and then the sympathy is that I did, which ultimately meant excluding some things, including something combining certain things and the problem with these LLM, these these large language models, is that you end up with one hundred million, a billion plus parameters that are in these models that are really impossible to the convolution. You don't know, we don't really understand deeply how the neutral network is. Model is defined and run based on the data that IT is constantly kind of aggregating and learning from. And so to go in and say, hey, IT learned a little more from this website and a practical impossibility.

you look at transform chieko today, every LLM that you write on the same corpus of underlying data for training will get to the same answer. So my point is, today, if you are a company, the most important thing that you can do, especially have a one trillions dollar plus market cap that could get competed away, is to figure out how to defended.

And so all i'm saying is from the perspective of a shareholder of google and also from the perspective of aver, the board of director or senior executive or the C E O, this should be the number one thing that i'm thinking about. And my my framing of how to answer that question is build the competitive mode around two things. One is at the end, which is how much money and what kind of relationship do I have with my customers, including the publishers, and can I give them more? So that number two is I can affect who they decide to contribute their content, too. So you're right. Let's assume that there are five of these infinite libraries in the world.

You mean non public content.

How important and also public? How important is that? If cora says, you know what, guys, i've done a deal were my billions of page views in all of that really rich content.

Correa, incredible content. Google pay me two billion year, and I ve decided to only let google A I agents crawling. And so maybe when there are questions that corner is already doing a phenomenal job of answering. I think IT does make a difference that google now has access to course content and others don't, right?

For hot minute, they did have access to the twitter firehose. And that was the premise was we could get this corpus of data that we can have in a very limited, restricted way. They paid twitter a lot of money. I don't think that those deals existing more twitter. I mean, you guys might know Better than idea, but I think they exist anymore.

Here's where you mom, I think you're right um and maybe dave, that you're being too forgiven. These models know where they got the data, and they can easily cite the sources, and they can easily pay for IT. And if you want to ld good, you actually .

write the video in the wall street journal where sadia was interviewed, showed the demo. And you're exactly right. They actually, Jason, in the search results and the five or short, but IT made no sense because it's like, how do you know that those are the five most cited places that resulted .

in this page rank technology or the authority of the website or the author? But let's pause for a second here. There is a company called neva 点 com。

I'm not investor. None of us are as a former google. They have seventy eight employees. I think, according to linton hy, just type in one of the best flat penel TV. Here's the result. And as you see sentence by sentence, as IT rewrites another person's content, IT links with a citation, just like the wikipedia does. And when you scroll to the bottom move that he tells you, hey, this is from rolling style, this is from best fire, this is from ratings. And if that answers good view and you trust those sources, those people should get a commission every time there's a thousand searches and you come up, you should get a dollar every time your data was used. And if not, these sites should sue the daylights out of google for google to say .

they can do IT is hug .

is not you because in fair use, you have the ability to create derivative works on future platforms, uh, and you are taking this person the real content owner's ability to exploit that. And you are so opting IT and you're doing at at scale and that is against ferus. You're not allowed to .

interfere with my ability .

to make future products.

You know this a ney place on the .

problem with that idea is from a product perspective for second is that if you limit how they can cogan ize to just being all entire sentences, the product will not be that good. Like the whole idea of these alarms is that you are running, you know, so many iterations to literally figure out what is the next most best word that comes after this other word. And if you are all of a sudden stuck with blocks of sentences as inputs that can be violated because of copyright, the product will not be as good. I don't just not think there will be as useful.

correct? These are also not deterministic models and they are not deterministic output, meaning that it's not a discrete, a specific answer that's going to be repeated every time the model is wrong. These are statistical models, so they infer what the right answer could or should be based on a corpus of data, a sympathy of that data, to generate a response to a query that for that inference is gonna be, you know, assign some probability score.

And so the model will resolve to something that he thinks is high probability. But I could also kind to say there's a chance this is the Better answer, this is the Better answer, and so on. And so when you have, like you have in the internet, competing data, competing points of view, competing opinions, the model is sympathising all these different opinions and doing what google search change and historically is done well, which is trying to rank them and figure out which ones are Better than others. And that's a very dynamic process. And so if as part of that in process, one is using some open, openly read able data set, that doesn't necessarily mean that, that data set is improving the quality of the output or is necessarily the answer from the output.

correct? Let me just give everybody a quick fur factor education on fair use. And here, IT is from google actual website, because they deal with this all the time.

And when you look at that, the nature and purpose and character of the work, including whether such use is not profit or educational purposes, so that first test of fair use is, hey, if you're producing IT educationally and you want to make a video that is criticism of star wars prequel or how to shoot a shot, like to quit in trentino. If its educational, it's fine in courtierly focus on reading here from google on whether the us. Is transformative, that is, whether IT adds new expression or meaning to the original, or whether IT merely copies the original. It's very obvious that this is not transformed if they're rewriting IT the nature .

of the corner transform.

I don't think so.

Not about they're entirely new content.

They're just rewriting IT. They're not actually adding anything to a deine. If a human does IT, it's not.

If a human right .

on my jack out s pretty cool.

I I I think the right issue, I think the right issue is just like the cost issue, which is a problem today. Maybe, but it's gonna get sorted out.

But but let me finding .

new technologic waves that are this powerful don't get to me by either chip costs or legal rights .

issues they do. By the get hundred times youtube got tracks and the be the tracks with .

youtube level, this and .

google was enable .

to piracy.

And any reason to stay in the way the A I, A, I .

have .

already .

happening AI .

happening .

like version.

Actually.

I want my .

point I would .

like to make. We don't need the effect .

an hour for the.

let's look this .

one of you .

before from .

you here.

IT is okay. Take a easy mr.

Sub Better called J K.

L. We ve done this.

The effect. Listen to this. The effect of the use upon the potential market for, or value of the corporate work uses that harm the copyright. Listen to this. Very.

when I took over the world like skynet, jack else gonna like I thought we'd stop this with rights.

Thanks to this, A I is not going to be stop. But companies using A I to still content will be effective. Views uses that farm the original corporate owers ability to profit from his, her original work by start .

as a replacement .

for that work. Less .

likely to be.

This is a one.

O, K, great. OK you you made your point .

and you maybe to get. To legal .

I something have another aspect, the A I think I want to talk about besides this, this like the internal rights issue that you're going on.

they are call j go.

So I had to see you know A I experience this week, and I think we're all going to start having .

these stories you ripped every week.

We'll be some new like use case that you see blown away by the use case I saw this past week in a product demo was they were showing me like can sell spread chy like a very complicated I can sell spread chy modeling and financial asset. And they had a plug in to a ChatGPT type A I. And so they just asked if they typed in, what does the sport do? And I spent out like a one paragraph explanation what the spreading y did.

And I was really good. I mean, because me just, I bowling the spread shit, I could not have figured out like instantly what that thing did IT would to take me like a while to figure out. He told me, here are the key inputs.

Here are the key outputs. So that wasn't one. Then they did something I think even more interesting, which is they said, give me the formula that tells me when the yield is above two percent.

And this is that in that and the ChatGPT spat out of formula that was like, perfect excell logic. That was something that you are, I could never figure out, right? You need like a super pro user of excel, basically, you know how to do this stuff.

So I spit IT out and like, boom, IT worked instantly. They copy a pain to spread cheap. And the U. K, basically, like the spache, was much more advanced now. So what I got me thinking about is that we're going to have these little assistance everywhere.

You combine that power with, say, speech to text, right? Because we couldn't just talk to IT with the speech text would transcribe the instruction, spit IT back out and you're going to have these like little personal digital assistance in applications. I think, you know it's pretty obvious to see how A I could replace call centers with you're having the front line calls in our Operator be set of being a human and can be like an AI.

But this is actually even before that like you could actually, I think in every single application that we use going to be an A I interface and like IT is probably the voice space where you can just say to IT, hey, i'm trying to accomplish this. Like, how do I do IT can you just make that happen totally? And it's going to be really powerful.

I have an idea. And with only carpathia, and I gave him this following child.

So .

there are.

I said, if you had to build strike, I said, how many engineers do you think I will take you and how long will take you to build a competitor? I was just, just a thought exercise. You know, we take hundreds of millions of dollars and years.

now. Imagine you could you were feeling threatened by strike. Imagine you are a large company. Pizza masters card. Just as an example, you can now actually get one or two really smart people like him to lead an effort where you would say, here's a couple hundred million dollars to compete with stripe. But here, the boundary conditions, the number one is you can only hire five or ten engineers.

And so what you would do is you would actually use tools like this to write the code for you. And the ability to write code is going to be the first thing that these guys that these things do incredibly well with absolute precision. You can already do unit testing incredibly well, but it's gonna go from unit testing to basically enter and testing, and you'll be able to build a version of stripe extremely quickly and in a very clean way.

So then the questions, but what would you do with the two or three hundred million you race? And my thought is you use IT again as tag. You go to corner customers, you go to customers and you like will listen if rain tree is going to charge you one basis point over VISA master card and or sorry, a hundred basis points and stripe of fifty, you know what i'll charge ten.

Margin destruction, margin destruction. Tok, and this is going to make, that's what's interesting. You can take any business that the middle man business, I think this is the point any middle business right now that doesn't have its own competitive mode can be competed against because now you can take all of those input costs are going to human capital. You can defer that, have a much smaller human capital pool and push all of that extra money into traffic acquisition .

and sound value of being more efficient. This going to have a .

fenced of all of this is economic productivity because the end customer that's using that tool, you just mention, they now have a lower to run their business and their total net profits go up. And this is what happens with every technology cycle. IT always yields greater economic cy.

And that's why the economy growing to dry the economic growth, not debt. We've historically used the engineering to dry the economic growth. And this is immigration.

Check out what are you talking about. What we're describing here is, is A I IT harder and harder to make humans productive.

So you wanted, like bringing millions before in this.

still enough to .

use the A I go back to go back to traditional capital.

easier than programing.

Go back to traditional capitalism for second. So go back, start example is another good one.

If you have this business model, right, how does the ecosystem get efficient? right? How do we create more opportunity to use facebooks language? Well, the only way that IT really happens, how does cost go down, is that certain entities become big enough that they can drive the Prices down, right? An uber, a door dash, or whom ever says, yes, I need payments capability.

So brain, try, give me your best bit check out dot com, give me your bid aud and give me your best ID strike. Give me your best ID. You compete, right? Amazon comes.

Walmart comes in. They do IT in physical C P. G.

goods. They do IT online. They do IT for all kinds of technologies. But you've never had an internal form that can create hyperfine, ency and and basically create customer value like this thing can because this thing can allow, let me show you an example, Julie and ten person companies to get .

created that can do the work of ten thousand. These, which just a tweet.

You describe the design of an c, an on boarding screen of a dog walking APP incredible and you type that in and IT gives you hua welcome screen that's like a seven and eight ten that IT says, oh, a way for people to change their name, phone number, press where you know that classic screen on any APP I need to change something bomb gives you that well then at the same time that people are making text to U. X. User interface.

Beautiful here, this stuff will get dumped into fig. ma. But then there's get help copilot, which if you haven't seen, we all know IT here, this is allowing you get up and get up copy IT.

Gib is bought by microsoft, another one of saudi and the dollars, incredible acquisitions. This guys like the new socker G I. An, what what an incredible person to come after.

Bomber, who is just so effective at what he's doing as you're writing your code IT fills in your code IT knows what you're writing just like in an email and it's a smaller subset of information than email. Email you could write anything you could be you know talking to a lover or a business person, whatever. Here when you're doing programme, it's a much finer data set. These two things are gonna come together where you're going to be able to build your M V P for your start up by typing in text and then published. You're not need to develop for for your start up that is transformative in the world.

Let me ask you guys a question. Do you think that this leverage, and I I argue this is all about like leverage at one person can generate x unit of output more? yes. Do you guys think that this commoditized and puts at risk sex in particular, like all of enterprises, because IT becomes such a commodity to basically build a business that does something now? Or does IT create much higher returns for investors because you invest so much less capital to get to a point of a productivity with that business or revenue with that business and was needed before?

I'm not sure. I tend to think that if IT gets easier than everything comes more competitive. So right, I don't know.

but the value gets computer.

What I would slightly disagree .

with the character zan.

I know. I mean, like for example, on that demo, we just saw what is the I do IT exports the new design assets to fig M A format because that's the stand baster. So if you can create a SaaS park that becomes a standard, everyone still gone to want to use IT.

And there's like really good reasons for that. So I don't know. I don't think I don't think this is software is going away. I also don't think that like you're not going to need tire engineers because copas is going to do IT for you.

I think what copilot t will do is make your typical engineer more productive, yes, that some grass around how like copilot reduce coating time by fifty percent. So I think you've to get a lot more out of your developers. I think that sort of the key is a lot of the treachery work getting curve.

The answer freeburg to your question is I think more startups, more knee startups will make Better products. And then you'll just have many more folks like making size for dentists. Making size are .

those venture they don't get big enough right?

I mean, in that case.

IT to entry Price matters IT will be poor returns. Well.

entry press matters to if you're investing at five million, like I do, and companies when they're just on napkins and you know back of envelope, there's plenty of room. If you have a two hundred million doll exit has a four years.

But there be a lot of new categories too.

like a lot of new categories there.

like we're thinking about this software displacing software IT could be software displacing like industries that that aren't even software.

I think the entire video game industry going to get completely with A I because you're not going to have a publisher anymore that makes one game that everyone consumes. You're going to a have tools that everyone creates and consumes their own game. You guys, I want to watch this cool clip at fifty eight seconds long. good. This is a music clip there, here on all in, but I thought he was really cool.

Is this A I turning you into M A M? This is what the world's waiting for. I hope it's you doing.

And me, naturally, I am like, but this is a .

only in your anger. This is the future rave sound. I'm getting off in an underground. This is the future rave sound. I'm getting off in an underground.

Sam m, and.

David a, David a, playing M, M, M, A practical and m voice and track became something that I made as a joke. And IT works so good, I would not like that. I discovered those websites that about A, I basically, you can write lyrics in the style of any, honestly, like.

So I tied right a verse in the style of any about future rave. And I went to another A I website that can recreate the the voice. I put the text in that, and I played the racket, and people were not.

It's that is nuts. It's not. And the crown wafers.

So here IT is folks.

Whoever makes the best freeburg m and m hybrid rap with David sax as the hype man's getting a free .

VIP ticket to all, in sum.

twenty twenty three and one thousand .

percent and sing mash PS that get created. Like, for example, you'd be able to create a movie where less you want to make a western .

and you want john way.

no actor ever goes away. You could. There should be a database.

all of them, but it's onna be Better. You're going to be writing the script as you write the script. The AI is going to be showing you that seen real time every day, rainy day. I'll just change in real time. I do for yeah.

just like instagram and tiktok basically democratized like everyone's ability to create and publish content. This takes IT to a whole another level where the monopoly that big um a production houses ha because they have the big budget so they can afford to make a big movie if that cost of making a ten million doll movie goes to ten thousand or thousand dollars of computer time, anyone sitting in their studio in a basement can start to make a movie. And IT really changes the landscape for all um media, not just movies, music, video games and ultimately the consumers themselves can create stuff for their own enjoyment and me be the .

best of those products win. But having really a and they and people do go viral upload .

on disherited ID and it's on spotify in .

the new york times that was kind of throwing some shade at the CEO glen's. David Solomon, I see the headline.

You look great in the picture but I didn't read IT because I figured it's hate.

They were talking about his his side gig is being A D J. But specifically they called out a potential conflict of interest and its related to this because I guess he had gotten a license to a witney houston song and he remixed IT and released IT on spotify and her biopic c is about to come out and they thought there could be this perceived conflict because goldman works on behalf of the publishing company and my thought was along the lines of what you guys said, like, why is this a story, meaning, David, all woman should be able to go to any website, license the song, make IT, and then submitted IT back to them for them to approve.

Because the quote in here that that matters is the company that license. That said, we are in the business of making sure this body of music stays relevant. So obviously want witney houston songs, Michael Jackson songs, you want john wen, you want these people to live on in culture because it's part of our culture.

Look at the pad. David Solomon n brushes off DJ.

The Better way to maximized IT would be like this, go and use IT created over to work. Let us see IT if we like IT. So like Greta should be able to just give that back m, and and if M, M school, that he should be .

able to ship IT and just be done. What a non story, like the new york times. So antibiotic vid solum brushes off DJ as a minor hobby that has little to do with his work at the bank box. His activities may pose potential conflicts of interest. It's like, what are they writing about this, or not something more important than this?

Do you think that David or any C, E, O of any major bank on wall street would put their job at risk running one of the twenty or thirty most important institutions in the financial architecture of the world to license a witney housing song that they can play catalan? I mean, desire can pass the smell the test?

No, no. And just for the record, iconoclastic David, I saw woman, you are going to be doing the opening night DJ set for all in some much twenty twenty three. If the griffis on, let's get a facebook. If the new york hates him, you got anybody the new york times hates on, you got a lot.

You've got a slot that be our lens s for sure.

one thousand per time. He, like he's live with his best life. So fine.

it's just like I fend them somehow, it's just like I fend them .

that a corporate CEO well.

that anybody is happy think I think it's D J. yeah. yes. D J, after party and .

will use A.

I to help you. I have been learning.

D, J, I was in the violin.

You should get up there. An earthly or violin under A D, J.

said that I, for ten years, we can play to a do together. Today, you, again.

all of revelations .

happening here.

by the way, here is my most pull up that the first ChatGPT I gave you. This was an aha moment. Mean and sex.

We're doing our weekly mastermind group. You exact and I get together. We like commentary each other.

Here was something do us away during our masterminded. This was a ChatGPT. I did this one because I was trying to figure this out.

How do I make my spouse and kids feel heard and in charge? D A game. A great.

Give them your full attention. Number two, emphasize. Number three, validate their feelings. They have a sex. Just put .

that example. What public? So that's obviously the aggregation and synthesis of lots of different self help help websites. How do you describe attribution of that answer to a particular content publisher?

Honestly, fair use derivative work.

I think IT .

to be on.

Yeah, you say that .

because you is here. I tell this is compassionate publishing. I think the GPT, the ChatGPT.

we should be going .

because this is no right. They know who they got IT from.

It's a synthesis of lots of website. It's a very smart synthesis is be alone is not just Better. It's not pulling a result from someone's website. It's like red hundreds of website and it's like .

average than average. They could say .

as we adjust the stuff.

take IT one and then you .

could publish IT.

When you publish IT.

you say, hey, let's say that the AI is using one hundred different websites and sync zing hundred websites. What's you in senate for the marginal hundred hundred website to say, well, opt me out .

unless you pay me.

because open a eye will just be like, okay, fine was what is work with the other night?

And this is why contemporary ers is my best piece of advice. You, as a question, I give you the answer. Contemporary ers, as a group, need to get together and fight for their rights in unison. New york times .

met at the party.

no fight for the right to get paid and to survive. You know, the ChatGPT and say, as a group, either give us these .

terms or done indexes.

the united absolutely be t like the music I think I can just paid everybody is to get and organize .

millions of publishers. I think the point here is that technology is fundamentally deflationary. Here's the next great example count where the minute you make something incredible, cost go down. But also, Frankly, revenue and profit dollars go down in the aggregate doesn't mean that one company can husband a lot of IT and doing incredibly well like google has done. But it's just going to fundamentally put pressure on all these business models.

I think it's important .

google should go and they should capabilities their own business before IT is inability zed for them?

Free bar fun a word.

Here's another way to think about IT. I think that if this goes as we all predict and everyone saying it's going to go IT is more likely than not that many of these quote content publishers that aren't adding very much marginal value are going to go away.

That you could see the number of content sites offering self help advice and how to do this and how to do that, ninety five percent of them go away because all of that work is aggregated and sympathize and presented in a really simple, easy user interface that makes them completely a oblivious. And i'm not discrediting the value that many content publishers provide, but the um you know the requested at that point to be valued as a code novel content producer is going to go away on. Like the offset .

to that though is so much easier to create content because of the A I like you know we have this company copy A, I, or even before this ChatGPT stuff, you would just go there and say, I want to write a blog about X, Y and z. You just give me a title and IT spits out a post and then you'll actually give you ten different blog, and then you just select the one that is the direction you want to go, and you keep doing your human selection money.

But how how does new intelligence get put back into the system? That .

is.

if there is now some new information in the world, who is going to add that to the corpus, if everybody is just still in content and rewriting IT.

how humans have always had a desire to create.

most people create for free. There's ahead of the long tail that actually get compensated, the rest long tails to dish goten nothing. And they do IT because they want to create. Now the creation, the creation explodes is so easy.

they can listen to hidden. And then behavin wrote novel symphony's, and his symphonies were incredible. And he built on the experience of listening to hide in.

The same is true of how content is gonna evolve. And it's gonna evolve in a faster way because of A I. And this content is not just being retrieved and reproduced. It's being, you know, sympathised and aggregated and represented in a novel way by answers .

that I wanted. Answer that, please, if ChatGPT takes a yell review and know a contain traveller review, and they represented based on the best country out that out there that y've already rank, because they have that algorithm with page rank or beings ranking engine, and then they republished, and then that jeopardize those businesses. That is profoundly unfair and not what we want for society.

And they are interfering with their ability to leverage their own content is profoundly unfair. And those magazines and newspapers need to what's up? It's possible. Youtube is a great example.

Youtube was going to get shut down sequoia and the youtube founder sold IT to google because they were so scared of the vice lesuto and how well I was a working against them. They thought this is this business will never fly if we don't have a big partner like youtube, like google. To support the lawsuit.

They they won the lawsuit or they settled IT because they were able to do content ID and allow content creators only to be exit is hold on the me finishes because they let content creators water mark and find their stolen content and then claim IT. And when they claim the stolen content, they were able to monetize IT. That's what's gna happen here.

They'll be a settlement where they are going to be able in, let's make a propose of this.

propose a bit.

You've seen these A S are generate images, right? Like stable confusion and like walle whatever. You literally just tell that I want this image in this style.

And boom is done, and I will taken artist weeks to produce that. And you can do IT in five seconds, and you can tell the AI give me two of those, and then you just keep iterating. And in five minutes you've got something mind blowing. So the fact that is so much easier to create content, you can do the same thing with the written word, is the people who need to be compensated. J, K, L, if they don't go what they want, they may just go away, but they'll be ten times.

one hundred times more people. So that I can prove how one you are getting images is suing stable division at the moment. Here is what the dip shits at stable diffusion did. They are trained their AI on getting images with the waterMarks on them, and they've been busted, and they are deter right now, and they're going to pay a hundred million dollars or more getting images for stealing their content and allowing IT to be republished .

in the commercial setting.

Over the stable to fusion.

copied the getty image.

Water of the fusion. O, K, I think civil diffusive bigger problem is they can do noses and ears and islands that was like bigger for me.

Anyway, share to stable to fusion for stealing, getting image way.

Motes are influence by hide. Not sorry.

the interesting topic about A I that we don't time to get to this week, but I think we should put on the docket for next week, which is should ais be trained to lie?

Super important .

because that's happening .

right now and thing or have opinions.

The last thing i'll see on this, my perspective maybe jup on after this, is this is the best thing that could happen for all of the monopolists in technology because microsoft taking five or six hundred basis points of shares, the best way to ensure that the ftc has zero credibility and going after, or anybody else, those, those, all of those things, I think, are D. O. A. So in some ways, actually, google leaking five or six percent of the market chair is a really good thing, because the F, T. C is render toothless and .

making understand a good point. I mean, it's kind of a good news, bad news scenario with the whole thing. The good news is that google and also finally been cracked.

The bad news is that it's microsoft and even bigger apply. That's the one that's done IT. But IT just shows like how vulnerable all these big tech companies are, A, T, B, T, and they may all end up coming with each other.

They everyone's got a tactical nuclear web now and we don't know where it's going to get pointed and who's going to set IT off and where, like the weapon has completely, yeah, the weapon is totally.

And to prove how wrong you guys are, here is the verge. Here is the other lawsuit. Open source feeding him none.

This, i've been tracking .

the two people. Haven't you guys need to watch what's happening right now? Coal pilot, github, ChatGPT and microsoft being sued by developers because copilot was built off a stolen content. These lawsuits are just beginning and .

so is going to change. 我们 要 信心 licensing fees。

This will be a transitory effect and IT won't IT won't change the DNA ics of where this is going .

over the long IT changed the dynamics of youtube in the long term.

So let's keep a pretty .

we have important to be called forest graphic is building .

and logo page up if you're going .

to go to the whole no, I mean their buildings me similar, but it's up in you just the you .

just get all your customers stopped into IT o which you want to be on what you want a stay to the union? I don't know about you guys, but I found that one of the more profoundly disappointing sadness state to the union of act act, I think that was, you know, we often kind of focus on the one year cycle of what the state of the union says.

But I think what's more important as how much the data that's coming through in the state of the union supports the more scary long term cycle. I've talked about this a lot on how scared I am about a kind of where we're headed with respective the U S. Is ability to fund its uh financial obligations and the the scary moment of the state of the union besides bints inability the kind of articulate much very well, which was, uh, honestly I really discouraging site to see was, you know what he talked about, what you know the republicans are trying to cut social security and medicare.

Are the U. S. Treasury put out a projection, uh which I wait last week, uh, originally shared on twitter by lin alden, this is the U. S. Treasury's forecast of uh, debt held by the united states over time and the assumptions in this forecast or we've got a certain amount of debt today and we're running social security and medicare forward without cuts.

And so what happens as we make the social security medical payments and we are crew and pay interest on the debt that we hold today and we don't change the tax rates, uh, in this country and this is what happens. So it's a runaway kind of that scenario. The U.

S, by definition, has to default at some point because you cannot tax every dollar of the economy at one hundred percent at some point. And so you know, there are two ways this can go. The first way is you have to cut back on these major kind of, you know, the expense that naturally balloon over time.

And that is social security and medicare are. And the other one is that we just tax a lot more. And when you tax a lot more, economic growth gets affected and IT makes IT really hard to eventually pay off.

That dead and the debt continues to spiral. I think what we saw was a, number one, the announcement by biden, hey, republicans are the ones who you want to cut social medical. And they all screamed, and they said, no way, no way, will never, never do that.

And A A lot of them did interviews afterwards and said, it's total B, S. To, I say that which I think supports what the polls have shown, which is on both sides of the air. People do not want to see social security, medicare cut in any way right now.

That means you can. And you guys saw what happened in france, where they pushed back the retirement age by two years, and there was effectively riots across the country. And if you guys saw this a few weeks ago, we didn't talk about IT, but I was pretty brutal, pretty ugly. And so this is a real cost that's coming bare.

It's coming back the united states, not just with the publicly funded social security medical programs, but also with a lot of the private tensions are going to need to get bailed out with the same federal money because they are going to let those things go bankrupt and another trillion plus of liabilities. So you know that that cost is gone a balloon. And the only solution at that point is to introduce massive tax, tax.

And so they propose this billion attacks, this tacks on unrecognized capital gains. IT is literally if you keep social security, medical where they are and you don't pay down the debt and you don't grow the economy fast enough, you have to introduce significant tax sites across corporate um uh and visual taxpayer base. Um and so you know I really again, if you zoom out IT really indicates the steeped in curve that the U S.

Have to client way out of. And as you takes more, there's less to invest in the economic growth. The government is a far worse investor and economic growth than the free market. And that means that we can grow our way out and grow G, D, P, enough to ultimately cover our dead obligations.

And this is what does lio dolly OS book that I mentioned in twenty twenty one was so kind of importantly sharing, this is a mult hundred years cycle, and the last couple decades get really nasty. And this chart, which is the forecast from the actual treasury, highlights the problem. And the comments made IT the congress in front of congress this week by the president united states, indicates how series of a problem this is going to be because no one wants to cut these major cost obligations that we have coming due. What are you talking?

Checked orange. You and the republicans, you want to cut medicine, get IT and said, you eyes want to get rid of IT OK. What was that curve for about with who is the person on your squad who is yelling and screaming out .

of the president of the nine states?

The matter that let .

me tell what happened of the union is that biden was basic, trying to take a page at a billin's playback. When bill kin lost the mid terms in ninety four, he basically trying way to the center, and he did two things. He started going for kind of small ball.

He start playing small ball. Politics is like school uniforms and things like that, that were relatively unobstructed, able, and that regular middle class people could get behind. And then he basically as the defender of entitlement programs.

Back then, he in ninety sixty, running in the doll. By portraying doll, he went only back to those vote against medicare. This is what the biden team is team up for the reelect in twenty four is they are talking about things like curbing ticket master fees and fixing right turn red lights.

I mean, seriously like total small ball OK, they're onna try and pretend like he wasn't the most radical tax and spend progressive over the last two years that we've really ever had in american history. They're going to try and make everyone forget that and just talk about the small object able stuff. And then he's also going to again poses the stolars defenders of Anthony programmes.

They are very popular and and partly they're doing this. Um they're ready, I think, getting ready for the senses on this because if you read some the political analysis on this and josh body and I could call lumm and Andrew said a good column talking about this that way back when the scientist was in congress and he was like a backbencher, he voted for, you know some republican budgets of paulian budget. That had some of this entitlement reform minute.

So they're going to try to portray him as against the reform. Now I don't think is going to work because all yet to say is like, listen, that was a long time ago. I wasn't voting for cutting entitlements.

I just voted for my party's budget. That's irrelevant. I can tell you, I will not cut entitlement. So any smart republican is going to take comment reform off the table because IT is a total third rail and they will lose. And I think trump had the right instincts on this.

And i'm sure that any major republic lan of the ride instincts on this, and you can see, you see the way they're throwing rick Scott to the bus. Rick god had this proposal about having entitlements go from being sort permanent, entitled to being something that gets voted on every year. And the rest of republican caucus, like i'll know, we're not touching that and they can't run away fast from rich Scott.

So freeburg is right. There is no appetite for intent reform. And I would tell any republican, if you want to do entitled reform is got you by partisan.

You think you got to do .

a wrong rig and did, which is, join hands with tippo eel and more in the hand, and you jump off the Cliff together. You do not stick your neck out on .

this to math editors on the state union red large.

no merger telegram .

yelling liar at .

the present. Um no.

okay, this is the .

most boring state. J I like both sides, engaged in a lot of like weird and writing was like bellowing at various poisonous speech. IT was quite bizarre. And you're right, there were some republicans, the audience, who are brain like jack nose. And it's unfortunately because .

I think I think if they .

are republicans had discharged down. I think britten's sort of weird mannerisms where he was like practically elling IT was like sam, you know, old man yelling at the cloud.

And yeah, they do a good job of like, right at the moment of self in malawi, they let him off the hook. Yes, it's really incredible. Republicans just, they have no impulse control, right? When they could just be quiet, sit there, calm, quiet and let bike do the damage to himself, they just cannot.

I like my carthy marthy telling maria, teach, admit me, tell him that other liar guide to get the hell out here.

listen, is always been hard to control backpackers. This is the reality that does not speak for the entire party.

How do you um how do you guys feel about being taxed on your change and network from year to year?

You mean a wealth tax.

wealth tax.

If it's if it's for billionaire, totally cool. If it's for centive millionaire or deck millionaires, absolutely off the table. We want those people to grow their wealth and invest the billionaires. Yeah.

sure is what you think is coming feeder.

Yeah, so hard to execute what he tries to do.

Like I would love to see a website where you have a piece of yarn, you know those those site, then you a pen and you push the pen out. The other one has to go in. You can have IT all, you can have low taxes and have these entitlement programs and have this level of spending, it's impossible. You have to tax, that's the only way. Or you have to cut the entitled programs or you have to cut the spending.

Well, you're right about that everywhere we will. Let me tell you why the american people think that would be ridiculous to cut their entitlements. They've watch as washington spend eight trillion dollars and on forever wars, the middle east, they just watched as biden spent trillions enrich ing the farmer companies on a fugazi that didn't work. They've just watched as hundreds of billions went to climate special interest.

the democratic party .

we talked about. Trillions all on .

that they've watches .

trillions dollars have gone to the donor class and they are going to rise up and say the hell with you if you cut off our security that we paid into for decades while in reaching all the special .

interest and not the time one bit. I advocate for any these points and the bell outs .

of corporations in the great final crises that you you got a zoom out and stop thinking about the yearly cycle in the election cycle on the stuff and just look at where we're headed over a multi decade cycle OK. And there's just no resolution to this .

problem. What happened .

right now if there is a well, tax let save, what happened in france, by the way, adding forty percent of people that were tax left and then they came back.

They will late, our constitution.

that's that will be, it'll be litigated for sure. If you can get the cost of energy in this country to drop by fifty to seventy five percent, and you can increase energy a capacity by ten to twenty fold, then you have a fighting chance because you can actually grow the economy out of the problem. And that's really where I am optimistic and excited about opportunities like future. And you guys can make fun me all you want, but if we can get to a point where we can increase in energy capacity by an order of magnet de, there is economic growth that will arrive from that from all these new industries and these productions systems. And that's how we can grow our way out of the debt entitlement tax problem, where one of those three things have to give in the absence of that.

Now the cheap source of energy yesterday, fusion three cents ago, whatever, no fusion. The sun using solar panels is .

yeah .

the problem. Honestly, you just say this one. The problem is can you scale energy capacity by telex ah and can you do IT fast enough? And that's the real texaco .

while creating jobs .

the real technical economic question.

right? Like I posted a link in my reading list today. This week, you guys can go look at IT.

The most prolific distribution of fusion technology is china actually deploying solar on every single rooftop in china. United states could do IT to. And you will ten x the power available yeah I mean, they are in zero I six years.

And just sometimes .

we want to create intellect al complexity. I I love these different forms of fusion. I just think it's a fifty year charge .

to get IT because i'm not betting. I'm not betting .

on i'm just think again with and it's actually happening. Fusion is what is actually creating abundant zero cost energy today.

Yeah I and so look, if we can increase energy capacity in this country by tex, energy production capacity by telex, and we can do IT in the next twenty to thirty years, have a bult. If we can, we have a path out of the entitlement ment tax debt problem. Otherwise, one of those three things is gna give and it's going to be ugly.

Is the thing that we are lacking right now is not actually the generation capability, which is incredibly cheap, but it's really scalable storage. And once we figured that up, which is actually the real technical bottom up to abundant zero car energy will have your boundary condition met and will have IT well before different forms of fusion or commercialized.

France had an exodus of an estimated forty two thousand millionaire between two thousand and twenty twelve and really and before mercure killed .

tax for twelve years and then they rever, they were just losing their .

tax base. So what is happening .

without the it's happening already. Now they're .

stupidly telling people that this, well, tax is going to a ten year look forward. So everybody I know is at least talking about, hey, could this happen in the next ten years? Because if IT might happen five years now we've got to leave now because if I wait, they'll going to change me.

Yeah, persists.

Ally you. They hate you. No, I mean, it's a problem. IT is a serious .

free .

burst point. It's not this radio, the great power SATA peja ork, who died last year, he wrote that american politics is defined by the formula x minus y equals a big stinking. Where x is what people want from government, and why equals what they're willing to pay for government.

And that difference is basic. The big tank and the job of politicians is to manage that stink. And the problem is the politicians have not been to good job managing IT, and they increasingly do a worst job managing IT. So yeah, at some point it's gonna blow up.

Yeah, guys want to hear crazy statistics playing. You know, the budget per capital is of the city of 3Francisco。 So how much the city spends per year divided by the number of people that live in the city, but we know it's a couple of billion dollars and we know only a couple of hundred billions bug yeah.

And is eight hundred eighteen thousand dollars per citizen player? That's how much the city of conferences go spends a third of that uh money by the way, thirty percent of IT goes to twenty five percent goes to public health care. Now when you look at that eighteen thousand dollar uh budget per capital IT is more than every single state of the union on a per capita is except org north kota which have very weird uh, a budget.

So san Francisco spends more than every other state per capital IT spends more in aggregate than sixteen U. S. states. And the federal budget per capital is fifteen thousand dollars. The federal governments budget per capital fifty thousand dollars.

So sanford cisco spends more than fifteen states and spend more per capital than every other state except to and spends more than the federal government per capital. And I think that really highlights and and you need to tax the base to do that. And now we are seeing san Francisco is the largest population accidents and population access of any city and business accident.

M any city in the united states. That is your predict. That is your predict of awareness coast in mm.

Florida, by contrast, has no state income tax. They just roll on property tax and sales tax, which california has as well. There is A A income tax and captains of zero in florida and they seem to make IT work eight hundred eighty .

thousand people uh with the peak and seven six o twenty eighteen and twenty twenty and twenty twenty and then in uh twenty twenty one eight hundred fifteen so some ten per thousand and twenty it's down to six. I think IT is hard. yes. Well, you have a lot of people who owned homes there and may be on second homes because let's face IT IT was a well heeled group of individuals living there, and a lot of them just still have their places, but they've left and then there in the process .

of selling their the point, the point is increasing the tax rate is a great short term solution. But over the long term, if that budget her citizen isn't brought in line, there is no way attacks the base enough without causing the tax base to leave. Forget about what my anyone's personal opinions are.

Not just economic reality of what happened in france. It's what's happening in sand from cisco. There's a lot of great predictors in history of where this has happened. And so something has to give or you have to have a miracle, black and energy miracle. But you know we're all keep investing for that.

But everybody, this has been an amazing, amazing episode of the all in podcast, one hundred and fifteen episodes for the dictator salt of science and for the pacifist David the dov sax. I am the world's great test moment. J. O, and i'll see you next time by bye.

Your winter.

We open sources to the fans and they .

just .

got crazy with.

Should all get a room, big room sexual attention .

to released.