E47: Facebook's week from hell, Ellen Pao on sexism in Elizabeth Holmes coverage, Newsom's win, frauds & more
01:35:30 Share

Where were you want those? They were used here.

I was at home. I got a family to do well.

Family, have you? You met him, or would they like? Everything you back at me.

I meet the new kid.

He's nineteen.

what?

What is major?

We are to the fans .

and they got.

Hey, everybody, welcome to another episode of the all in podcast. Yes, we made IT to episode forty seven and three episodes to the episode fifty. No plans to do anything other than just try to record this every week for you, the loyal audience with us again coming off an amazing event, a live event on monday and tuesday and I don't went into wednesday, but David freeburg, the production board event we recorded our first live all in IT seems like IT went uh well on a nav basis in the audience seemed to enjoy what was the feedback.

So, you know, half the room were scientists to may never heard of this pocket before, and they were like, what they help did we show like these already four guys on stage drinking this one, talking about politics for hour to have, but then dropping .

f bombs and dropping f bombs.

And there is a little bit of kind of seasoning we had to do afterwards to get everyone kind of comfortable. But actually IT was sent talking. People loved that you get through the highlight. Um and I thought I was super fund to do that in person and I don't know what you guys thought.

It's cold energy is super cool energy.

And with us again, of course, uh, David sax, the rain man himself and the dictator to math poli hopeth a what did you think that? Uh, sacks of the live event format, obviously half the audience for the show half warrant, which is I Better than putting people randomly into IT, but i'm glad that the people who are not fans who have never heard the show didn't walk out. We didn't have walk out. So that was good.

Yeah I mean, look, we were sightly more palatable to them than android ice clay or something like that. But yes.

One for you.

smell.

something.

IT was a good change of pace. I mean, I thinks people commented that the lighting, the production values weren't that great and they seem fight us at the time. But so we're enough to do Better on that next time. And other people speculate that we took we are easier on each other in terms of debating topics because we are in person. I didn't feel that while sitting there, but you guys told me, if you think that was true.

I thought, I think we got a Better read on each other in person and we had more dialogue than we Normally would over assume. I don't know you guys felt the same.

I think so I kind of like the evening podcast, the glass of wine and there's something .

like you're just like a little yeah you can IT could be a thing that could definitely.

could definitely make harwell in two thousand and twelve a regular part of tapping this pot. The problem is we take too early on a friday, right? If we could change that taping to like happy hour or something like that, that might work Better.

Oh my god.

a harland, twenty twelve. What is that? A good bottle one.

Even jack out knows that. Look at him pretending, pretending to be the one of the people.

It's the one of the round label I know that. I know i'm looking at right now. Oh my lord, some of those go up and value those things are us looks like us.

Hi you like record after playing poker for two hours. So you're two notes into .

the wine and poker and then you .

record wouldn't no, no, I think.

yeah, I think for a first time the audio was great. So that, you know, job one has get the point conception hamps that way .

to do like the line of light in freebooter's face.

The first, the comments, all comment actually got .

up and fix that like no one else of the crew, you know, the dozens of people working there. Didn't me think about IT, my wife, sixty curtain dude.

without all you would be nowhere he is. She's a great.

我， 我是 em。 About tween .

to up .

a .

pic not shown up .

nine in a reason .

for .

that.

Yeah, I actually was the bad channel there. sky. The bad channel was sky date. And somebody else waited outside because they .

knew they might get pulled up.

I got that from.

you have to beat his name out me.

But on my market, but on this makest service is on the first time. Guess that was the last precipitance he did was eleven years ago. He literally does not administrate our sky dinesh earthling founder.

bingo founder, everybody of our generation. But it's amazing how quickly the the tech crowd moves on. So true there. There's a famous story actually when when Martin rison met mark sucker t for the first time, zark ward didn't know that in recent had created netscape. I'm going, i'm sure he knew what netscape was.

I think he said something like, I created music and he's like, what's .

that like? Yeah look in the tech. We are all concerned about the future. No one pays lot of attention to history.

Do you feel like the generations interpreting urs and investors at this point?

Well, I think of us are still currently .

creating things freeboard. I can't mention .

the name of the APP as per and I promotion rules, but I have recently launched .

in you could dow by APP.

But is not a lot of there's not a lot of um kind of long careers. And silicon valley, a lot of people kind of .

have because creating products.

if you have a metric success, right, you have these kind of like big burst. And then you know it's it's a different kind of life. You don't go to push again for the next hard crop neural project, typically not everyone obviously ah and then you end up seeing like a generation kind of die out like you know web one point one two point. No, you don't see him again. See the.

I think I think it's a trust to that that and I worry about this for my own kids, that I think deprivation creates motivation is to do .

something as hard as create A.

Welcome to day .

with some more. No, no.

You beat beat our friend .

b has a saying that that sort .

became famous when elon then repeated IT, which is that really started is like three to the best. And eating glass and IT is really hard to create these companies when they're successful. And so not a lot of people wanted do IT again once they ve reached that point.

And you know IT does take a certain amount of um like I said, deprivation to do this time, which is why giving everybody the participation trophy and trying to make people's lives as easy as possible. Yes, you want you don't want to deprive people on the one hand and on the other hand, IT often lead to to good things. So we are .

seeing a bit of a dry .

run of this if people believe that you know they have U B, I or the governments going to take care of them, I would be fine with U B, I, you know everybody getting a little bit of money um and if I was a safety net, the only thing I worry about is IT seems like a little bit of money if you're clever means you could never work. And then what happens to those people in society? You right like.

well, I just I think it's anti compassionate because what you do is you kick out the the bottom rungs of the latter of economic success when you basically pay able body people not to work. I mean, they need those entry level jobs that may not pay much Better than the ubi r an important stepping stone to where they get to next in their career. And I think it's it's demotivating and we're already .

seen in california between I is gonna pay you to go to college, but amazon, well, as an example. So you're absolutely right. There's the the G I bill, you know there's all kinds of examples were in history reviews. Entry level jobs is exactly as I meant to be an entry level opportunity and on ramp to work your ass off and to make something of yourself.

If you if you all of a sudden let people opt out of IT, then it's gonna a very um it's what they are not gonna realized is by the time they get old enough, where they will want to have some kind of purpose, it'll be too late. Because in activating yourself in your forties and fifties to essentially start your life is really hard. I'll give you an example of this.

Like you know right now, I I would seem like fairly fluent in the um impressed but I um but I started taking italian lessons and know the last four five percent of a language is brutalizing right because it's like it's every little grammatical thing and you want to get a completely right and it's very um demotivating for me sometimes because i'm my god why the fucking I doing this um I don't have to I can get a bike to speak IT but I ve made a commitment to myself uh same thing in bio tack you know I got introduced to IT by freeburg and obviously that and and now trying to learn and IT is a IT is a grind and I think it's so easy to quit. Now you take that to the extreme and some random person that doesn't have necessarily the ability to fall back on the success that you know we've all collectively had. And you have to start from scratch.

My god, it's really tough. It's really tough at our age. IT is just hard. Kids, you're screaming in the background, you trying to manage all this stuff.

It's impossible. So even easier you are. Yeah.

be careful what you wish for. But why is IT .

easier when you're you're early twenty and always a grind to learn something and push yourself to yourself? Me.

well, you have nothing. So you the the areas, you have some motivation to get something right because you you're going to climb up the mountain because like staying at the shore, meaning you go watched out .

to see you the time and hours and hours and hours in my twenty and thirties like he was like ten to sixteen .

eight days I the .

office today.

yeah I don't work in the same way I did before because I i'm trying to do a different job um but i've earned the right and I now put myself under pressure to do IT differently because I have a different job to do. But when I was in my twins and I was A P M, you know grinding out a product tor, you know, writing a features back, or, you know, building a model and trying to put all these things together, uh, IT was so much thankless work I learned to time. Uh, and IT was all worth IT about that.

No, look.

this is the thing about, this is the thing about worklife baLance that the people are always complaining about. People are working too hard to realizes that yeah, you want to think about worklife baLance, but across your entire life, I mean, one of the things you'll do in your twenties is work much harder to set yourself up to where you want to be in your fifties. And so chromos doesn't have to work as harder as fifties because he worked much harder earlier in his life, now got the skills set where he can delegate more. So yeah, I think we really short change people when we tell them as Young people that they don't need to work hard or in the extreme case of ubi, that we're actually paying people not to work that's not developing the right habits are gonna make them successful later on.

And in fairness though, if you look at minimum wage and you look at entry level jobs, many of them paid too little. historically. These companies like mcDonald, I know it's a free market, but we're paying very little. We're talking seventy dollars an hour in no benefits. And you this is kind of unnecessary grade in my mind and I think that's what we're seeing .

jobs is I made four fifty five an hour.

Yeah, I made four dollars and twenty five seven an hour nineteen ninety six of my first job and clean up .

two fifty for me when I worked at form uh, fordam computer center, there was four, two, two, three, three dollars that had gone to. But when I started in the work force in A D A IT was two fifty, was the minimum, was the minimum age where you.

what is IT like to meet my teen century sex?

Yeah, I I when I was working, no member, I code I D bar. And I mean, I was there drinking so much, I finally was like, weren't just give me a job. So what makes the money while i'm sitting here and they pay me seven bucks an hour?

That's why I did my senior year well paying jobs.

seven box of the other problems.

But the other problems of U. B, I, that Larry summer has been, he's the former U. S. secretary. Ury been on the record, is the inflationary effect. So, you know, there are prety more economists like himself who kind of highlight that as you give people, everyone you know, ten thousand dollars a year, first of gonna cost ten trillion dollars, whatever the estimate is to kind of fund that sort of program um and you know suddenly the cost of a burglar goes from forty nine cents to ninety nine cents or nine nine cents and ninety nine because there is uh you know much greater demand on that kind of area of the economy, uh, for consumption. And so you see an inflationary effect which trickles its way through.

And so what ends up happening ultimately is by putting more that money in for free without productivity coming out of IT, you effectively see inflation and so IT White itself out. Um and so this is kind of one economic theory on ubi is that I can actually just end up being within ten years completely useless and pointless because then the basic cost of living climb so much that you need to raise the U B I again to give people basic living expenses and so IT becomes this kind of nasty run away effect. So it's not really sustainable is one argument that's made against U B.

I. But you know obviously different point in what we are not saying. I want to go anywhere. I think people.

I think people don't know what they want. And if they get IT, they're going to um I think I look a form of a form of U B. I does make sense and I do think we need to subsidize folks.

But no, I think maybe it's probably just defenced your word for welfare. I grew up on welfare and I can tell you that I don't think our family benefit from IT psychologically. We d benefit from a social economically because we needed IT to not starve.

Um but the the knock on effects of you know when you're in that loop of again being in your thirties, forties and fifties not finding purpose, you know which my parents had to struggle uh coping you cope with alcohol, you cope with depression but not can affect your kids. I don't think we want to see that. And so when people think about U B I, I think they need to understand that you know we've run a long experiment in this thing called welfare. You know what welfare does um a lot of us have felt IT. And uh, there needs to be a Better way because if you just let people opt out, I don't think you really understand what happens over long durations of time when you're not doing anything.

What's getting really weird right now, right? I mean, the fact that restaurants are closing that have customers but they can't Operate. And so we're starting to actually see the effect of IT in some what's the open jobs step.

right? Like nine million and open jobs in the U.

S. It's been bounding for me .

to ten million. Yes, there more unfilled jobs and there are unemployed people, right? yeah.

Or unemployment. Unemployment is high, but unfair jobs even higher yeah. We somehow .

moved away from .

a political consensus we had in the one hundred and ninety that I think made a lot of sense when bill kin passed welfare reform with, know a lot of republican support is, look, we need to have a welfare system. We need to take care of people who either can't work or can't find a job for for a good reason. There needs to be a social safety net.

But if you're an able body person who can find a job, you should be working and and that well for a formally pass in the unities did lead to a lot of people finding meaningful work, which I think results to happier lives. And somehow we've moved off that power consensus that everyone kind of agrees. Yes, social safety net, but but able by people should work to. Now we have this. The is really the ideology of ubi, which is, look, we're going to pay people not to work, which I just think it's sort of like on american isn't .

IT also like a little insulting being like, you know, don't even bother working, you're making too little money.

What does to give you money?

Insulting to people's dignity. I like, I wouldn't want to take IT. I would rather go out and be, I was a waiter, a bus boy. I would be a waiter, a bus boy. Make enough money to pay my rent on.

Yeah.

one of the things free.

Yeah, one of the things you hear is, well, your jobs are replay by a machine anyway, it's not productive work. So why don't we just pay you to sit back and you take yourself out of the economy? Well, I like you said, the unfilled jobs number shows that even with all the automation that's happening in the economy and that's a trend that will continue, there's still a need for, you know, human labor. And I think there are always will be and and it's a little bit too soon to be throwing in the toll on the idea that an entire groups of people can't productively work.

Does everybody believe able bought at people should work and not free money?

It's not that is shorter. Shouldn't I think the question is what's uh what's in folks .

is best interests 扩大 出 人民币 呀？ So is IT in best people's best interest of cases where you're in is IT in people's best interests.

I think the I think the point where we're gonna wrong is when we couple U B I with um actually having to work or not work, and I don't think that's the right idea. I think we have to do a decent job of letting people find the things that they want to work on, because everybody can find something that they want to work on. And that shouldn't exclude you or disqualify you from getting U.

B. I. So that all that does is then just raise the general standard of living. I think that idea is Better. The problem is when we talk about U B I, what we are talking about IT is in the exact wage that you said, which is letting people opt out. So I mean.

think about how privilege that is to there are places in the world where there is not enough jobs, and people are like way to second in amErica has to be fulfilled with their jobs. Election, in addition to getting a job in that just seems like the height of entire mental, sometimes you just need a job because you need money to pay your bells, right? But you're saying if you get product, if you get job, job candidate, you know citizen fit, the update will be Better.

U B, S, A benefit. It's like universal health care. We don't we don't make a decision about universal health care based on who does does not have a job.

And so uh U B I should basically be about evening, you know the bottom few rungs of economic viability ties so that everybody has a reasonable um ability to have a decent life. That's a nice idea. I think that makes a ton of sense. But coupling IT to having to work or not work, where some people say, oh great, I can take this money in network, is the wrong way to figure this out.

They are talking politics when we shift to the the recall.

Yeah, alright ah so a post more on the a num recall secret of seats says the recall cost over three hundred billion. Obviously.

Gavin newson, one and saw, you know what that I did, cost three hundred million dollars. But all the people crying about that, clutching their polls about the three hundred million, never said a word about the thirty billion one hundred times is greater edd fraud that was perpetrated by our state and by our one party rule of the state. And the recall process, and the about initial process, is the only check.

We have an elected leadership at a one party state. So listen, all start clucking, my pro, about the three hundred million when they start talking about the thirty billion. But look, let let's shift to the result of this.

What what you are for you so much, I know enough.

is the E. D. D. Fraud, where thirty billion basically went to anyone, unemployment insurance, and thirty billion and fake claims were paid out.

That process was so poorly ministered. So I made, people were just creating fake addresses. They were descending and claims from anywhere.

And and thirty billion went out. So luck. I mean, that's the kind of incompetence and corruption that we have in california.

So fact, your point is that because it's a single party state where the state of where the democrats have super majority in the assembly and obviously have the the governments that the only for the minority, the republican party is .

a kind of run recall, not even not an ens, to remember how the how to recall the ballooning ship came to be. That process IT actually came from progressives early in the twenty eighth century who said, we need the people to have some direct democracy, because special interest might you serve the the electoral process and and and get control of all these elected represents. And Frankly, that's exactly what's happened in the cata a california.

But the people who you have that power are progressives, and so they want to amend or abolish the recall process. But so it's a look, I think three hundred million once every twenty years to put the fear of god into politicians is not, is money will spend, in my view. Even if this particularly recall wasn't close, there are much greater examples of waist fadden abuse that the people complaining about this should be wanting to tackle.

And i'll believe them about the three hundred million when they complain about the thirty billion. Look, this was a total tracking for supporters of the recall. And I do think that whenever you suffer a feet, I think it's important for you to think about what went wrong, you know? And certainly as a supporter of the recall, I think it's worth doing a post more than I think of any political party when he loses, needs to do some, some introspection.

And so what went wrong? Well, I think a couple of things. okay. So if you go back to the polls a month ago or so, IT was a dead heat. We even had that shocker le, that newser was down by ten.

And then what happened? Well, the republican party basic consulted to their support around Larry elder. Prior to that, you kind of had this a morphed blob of five different candidates who didn't have a lot of named recognition.

They were pretty moderate. They were a hard target for for nuisance to shoot out. Once a republican party consolidate, around, elder provided a very convenient and rich target for for nuisance to shoot up.

And so you'd have to say that tactically the republican party made made a mistake there. And I understand why they did IT. I mean, older is smart, he's charismatic.

Um he appeals to that base but he's not the modern candidate that like a shorts and igor was or that I math, I wanted you to run and so falkner was sort of candidate and so you kind of had a choice on the republican side between a moderate candidate who was a very cosmetic, which was falconer, and a very cosmetic canada, who wasn't moderate. And he really played into new some hands. And he was then able to nationalize the election in in the wake of that.

So he branded, I think, someone unfairly. He branded elder as as a trumper, and he ran against trump ism and even bitten came to california to denounce elders of trump. Clone, which look, there is a lot of things you may not like about Larry elder.

I don't think it's fair to call a clone, but that's what they did. And so they demonized him. And so if you look at the issues that newson ran on, they were all national issues.

He was here talking about what was happening in texas with abortion, and he talked about cove. And we should come back to that once. I think that is a state issue too. We should talk about IT. But he started talking about issues that were really more national issues and and the recall moved away from the issues that had garnished supporters in the polls, just polls just one month ago, which were homelessness, crime schools and school closers. And lockdowns and user was able to very effect change the subject.

Well, I got everybody back to school, right? If people didn't go back to school, could have been a different I think the .

recall is very helpful in that you should remember.

giving policy has shifted because of the recall sex at this point. And doesn't that ultimately kind of benefit the issues you are most kind of concerned about?

Look, the three hundred million was worth that just to get businesses open and just to send a message to the the education university, they could not keep schools close for another year. I you know, if you look at when newsome relax the lockdowns IT was at every step of the recall process. When the recall finally got enough signature to get put over the top.

He also, son started liberalizing the lockdown, and he knew they were very unpopular. And he gave up on that issue. And he got the education unions to stand down on the issue of scary openings. I think because he was facing this recall. So look, I think that the recall was worth that just for that.

But giving things could have been different if there was a french candidate like, I don't know, a rilling billionaire ah, that was, you know, not kind of this hard and republican that.

yes, I lame, I chmagh for this. I think I think I canada, like cheatham, could have won. Okay, a democratic centers, obviously, you I don't blame you have to mah, I stand what you would want to run.

But but i'm saying a candidate like to moths, which is who I supported, or a candidate like shorts and igor. Remember shorts and niggar when he ran in the early two thousands, he was protocol and pro game gay marriage. At a time that gay marriage was not very popular. He was socially very liberal. You have to take those issues off the table because california is not going to vote.

He was sure. I think he was pro gay marriage before the clinton.

Yes, he was very early on on that was he was socially very liberal and very tolerant. And you got to be in california in general.

giving the unions in california know which is the issue has been talked about a lot on this pod have been weekend because of the recall and the voice that kind of rose up during this period of time. Or you think the note's really change kind of long term?

I think I think it's a long term project for to get the public to see that the education unions are like any special interest, which is that they will pursue their interest at the expense of the general interest, and they have to be controlled again, like any special interest. I think because teachers are rightfully very popular, people haven't realized what the union bosses are up to. I think that, that has been exposed because of covered and the school closures to a much, much greater degree. And I think that's that's a good thing.

Well, I mean, if you look at the recall, happy locally to with chess, bon and the service school school board IT seems like now the citizenship is saying, oh, we do have a recourse is called doing a recall and stating our opinion very strongly and then attempting to removing people and yeah, I think that does change people's behavior. You can be sure chess boot is thinking about outcomes a little bit more.

Now the the implications of this recall, I think, are really important. And I think that plays out in who runs uh, in two years when, uh, newsom is up for reelection and absolutely little change, who runs on the democratic side in four years, assuming newsome winds.

You have to remember, there has been a massive degradation in the quality of life, the most popular state in america, which represents the fifth largest economy in the world, under one party control, right? So there is not a single law that cannot be passed. There's not a single program that cannot be implemented. There's not a single idea that can be pursued yet. We have had an absolute decline in quality of life under that rubric. And so when people really come to terms with that, that I think when there's a sea change and I hope the c change is not necessarily a democrator republic and think it's back to centrism, and I think it's checking special interests exactly what success and realizing that just because you use a different name like union or something else, you're still a special interest and you need to actually be uh, focus on the interest of the general public, our kids, the environment, water quality and if you can't walk into a state where everybody up and out the ticket is on your same team and get shit done, it's a really tough report card. Yeah.

i'm just super uninspired by this guys like where is there or dacians plan for california? Has anybody stay?

Like here's what what possible.

We could be the best economy with the greatest education system, and we can build a million units .

of how be the role of the state government. I mean, in competition .

are are in competition with with florida and texas. They have to compete for business and citizens.

And if it's not that at the state level, we're going to have to rely on the federal level. And we know that, that doesn't work because we have fifty states that are increasingly more diverse every day. So the whole idea with the constitution and the founding fathers was we have this incredible startup. But over time, I think we've decided that, you know, this startup is an umbrella organization of fifty other startups to hold .

company and and .

we'll be these small little, you know rules and differences among these fifty states and that to allow us collectively to thrive.

So thank you. Put out a tweet.

No, I just wanted, I think we wanted believe in that idea, like there is no savior, you know I mean, there's no savior for three hundred and fifty people and there's barely a savior for the sixty million people in california. But it's not going to happen by just thrown your hands up in here and expecting some president to come around because that's .

just too hard of a problem. Date has to act like the citizens and be, you know just rugged individualists or self sustaining uh, and resourceful and this state is not self sustaining, resourceful or ambitious. And it's falling behind .

texas and florida and other petitt petit to off there. Are you me active transition phase or where?

Well, I don't know. I mean, we'll see. I think the trend in california is not good. I think you've already seen in the day since the recall is that Gavin newson has made now laid out the strategy for all progressives in like even from cement to go to anywhere in the country of how they are going to run.

And what they're going to do is this, that no matter how bad things get in terms of crime, in terms of homelessness, in terms of quality of schools in cities and states that they have complete control over, they are always going to campaign inst trump and trump ism, and they're going to demonize and otherwise, whoever the candidate is on the other side as a trumpet, whether they are not, that's going to be the player up from now on. And this is where I think the attacks against Larry elder were very unfair, is before he even had a chance to define what he was about. You have publications like the L A times calling him the new face of White supremacy. I mean, he was like, unbelievable.

but black the best.

You tried to make him out for a look. He is not okay. Larry elders is libertarian. Maybe his politics are not in the mainstreaming california, but he's not a black clansmen. But look, this is what the progressive playbooks is going to be for the next two decades, which is to demonize anybody who stands up to them as basically being a trumpet.

And and and the irony of IT will be that they will have total control over over the the problems that people really care about, crime, schools, homelessness and and somehow, you know they what newson proved is that you can whip people up into, you can stir their their partisan, political tribal ism when you do that. right? That's why it's effective is he gets people just to see blue and and he gets a free pass on these issues that just a month ago, people were very dissatisfied with. Now I do think it's very, very important that republican party not play into this. And there was a very good editorial .

about to say, how come on the republicans are still pursuing a trumpy and stupid they that there is a .

really super strategy. And there's two things I got a fix right away. Okay, so number one, Richard ary from national of you, you had a police, a piece and political where he said that this election, the stolen election myth, has become an albatross for republicans.

They have to get off that. I think it's ridiculous that's gonna bring him down and trying to into. And the other thing is this anti vx stuff. I mean.

voters completely forgot .

about the way that newsome locked down this state and then broke his own lockdowns. why? Because he's pro vax, even to the point of vaccine man, whether the republicans were not. And Frankly, I think chaos, your instincts ts on this we're right on, which is people given a choice between vaccine Mandates or an anti vx position, they will take the the vx Mandates.

Speaking of instincts, uh, you wanna go to the, uh, this weekend facebook .

stomach fire.

sure. So I mean where to begin? This all started on .

twenty twenty sixteen at the grade school of business.

OK will get to your Victory lab in a moment. But just to cue up this past week, on tuesday, the world street journal reported that facebook conducted in depth of research on the impacts of instagram on children's mental health from twenty eighteen to twenty twenty. But they never made the research public, nor did they make IT available to academics or lawmakers who requested IT.

Uh you will remember that uh last year uh or earlier this year, facebook started floating the idea of instagram for kids. Uh so in addition to having this research, was that in share? And here is the slide from a presentation.

IT seems like the wall street journal has uh, somebody inside of facebook giving them everything literally but here is the quote uh from presentation slides, from twenty nineteen internal facebook presentation slides. We make body image issues worse for one in three teen girls. Teens blame instagram for increases in the rate of anxiety on and depression.

Uh, this reaction was unprompted and consistent across all groups, according to the wall street journal. Uh and h instagram hovers y is a jug or nut. Over a billion of the active users and over forty percent of them are under the age of twenty two.

This is really interesting issue because we are this is probably the first example of a broad based public policy, public health issue that tech has created, not necessarily amplified right or exacerbated, but actually created IT. And now we're going to have to deal with this before I I want .

to do what how would you define that issue?

Well, I think IT is a public health issue. If you have to the percentage of a court of our population uh, subject to mental health issues and eating disorders, that's not a good place to be, right? I don't think that's what we want is a healthy society in a healthy society.

Our daughters it's probably by the way, it's probably not more than just our daughters, probably sons and daughters that are going through these issues. The question is ah now about you know is that really a public health issue if you know about IT, what responsibility do you have to do something? And before I apply, I just want to give you guys uh, a little bit of data and just get your reaction.

I actually want to go back to what's called the tobacco master settlement agreement and the tobacco master settlement agreement was entered in november of nineteen ninety eight, originally between the four largest U. S. Tobacco companies, fill moras, R J.

Ralles, Brown and Williamson and Lorry yard, okay. And the attorney general of forty six states. And essentially IT was an agreement that basically said, okay, we're going to net all these medicated lawsuits together. We're gonna hold these folks responsible for the downstream implications of the product that they have been selling our kids and our, you know, adults population without the proper disclosures and set at at at the what happened before this tobacco M A, say, in big tobacco though, was there was about eight or nine hundred private claims that were filed from the mid fifties all the way to the middle. David knows all this because he he made a movie about this. The reason why I think this is interesting is that whether IT happens in the united states or some play cells, when I read that article, my immediate thought went to the tobacco msa because I was like, well, okay, there's a public health issue that mayor may .

not have been recovered up the cover up.

There could be criminal liability there probably civil liability if you are, you know, a mother or father whose lost their kid to an eating disorder .

or to depression.

anxiety, bullying.

suicide. And and I think .

like I think the article in the wall street journal yesterday was about like human trafficking. I mean, these are some nearly horribly complicated narvi issues to me. That's how I connected. So I just love to hear .

and who's the jeffrey y end? In this case, this is literally the move the insider like somebody is leaking these documents out. There's a team that's a facebook yeah and that's what the Brown and Williams in was really about is that somebody had the studies from the seventies of when, correct me from wrong, David, when the tacco industry knew and did nothing and covered IT up and then they had the whistle lower. So do you feel this is exactly analogous sax? Or how close to analogous are we taking too big of a jump here?

Well, this idea that social media is is bad for you, as cigarets has been around for several years now. And i've always wondered whether that was a hyperbolic claim. I mean, IT cannot really be the case that using facebook because this is bad for you as lighting something on fire and sucking its carbonized ash into your lungs. I mean, I just yes, I think there's like a kernel of truth here in terms of, yes, IT does exacerbate body image issues but I don't believe that facebook, our social media created those issues.

Um I mean these issues existed before and um what facebook does is connect people in a more intense way than they were connected and so I might intensify some of the social dynamic theory existed, but I don't know that I created them and if you're going to blame facebook for this was a lot of other places you could blame too I mean, why why don't we blame the met gala? You know like. Look at all.

those had actually blame on the fashion industry for making unrealistic body types. And the magazine .

my kids can wear the full body is stocking to school, that kim cardan war to the whatever. I mean, they're upset about that. So should we ban the met gala? Or I mean, let's look at all advertising.

I mean, all advertising just about focuses on unrestingly beautiful people. And what about TV and movies? I mean, a hollywood tends to cast people are Better looking, or even the people reading the news of teleprompters.

I mean, so this like body image and self estee issue is everywhere in our society. And I think what social media does as IT doesn't so many these cases is really just hold up a mirror to our society. And and yes, there's a lot of bad stuff happening on social media, but that's because there's lot of bad stuff happening in our society.

Well, let me know. Here's one thing, David, the there there have been other industries that have influences this, but I don't think that they were as prediction ous and as frequent in their use of a social media. You know, when reading a fashion magazine, you are watching T, V, like slightly different than an interactive version of that that you might use for five hours today like tiktok or instagram.

And I just dropped in an an image into, uh, the the zoom chat there about suicide rates. The nine states in this chart you'll see goes up to twenty eighteen and right around two thousand and six when we're at eleven eleven suicides in per ten thousand four hundred thousand uh you'll see from two thousand and six to two thousand and eight we go from ten eleven basically suicides per hundred thousand americans, all up to fourteen, a forty percent increase. That correlates directly with social media becoming part of what we're doing here.

But what's your connection to what's up? I mean, is that a teens? I mean.

is this is overall suicide. So I just think social media and the anxiety produced could be actually having that.

I'm open minded to that. Can I clear up one thing, sex. I think that um your argument would be reasonable if the first part of your argument uh made more sense than to me IT doesn't. And when you don't think that smoking and looking at your screen for an hour a day are the same, let me just in from my perspective, explain to you why they are the same, whether or not you're ingesting something into your lungs or whether or not it's your eyes. At the end of the day, you're still activating physiological pathways.

Okay, there are specific chemicals that are being created through smoking, specific chemicals that are created through how your brain and your mind is reacting, and all of these things when you're bathe in these chemicals for long periods of time, have known deleterious consequences. Some manifest in tumors, which then result in cancer. You die, lung cancer, cigarettes.

But what we're learning is some of these things result in long term imbaLance of these critical hormones and chemicals you need in your brain to stay healthy. And that results in anxiety or the propensity to over read or the propensity to then throw stuff up. And so I would be careful about not assuming they're not physiologically the same. I actually think they're more similar than different at a core physiological level is just that we're not used to the fact that something that that is equivalent to looking at a screen could actually do that to you.

I guess the question is what's what's what's the thresh hold for regulatory intervention if um if someone did this at the scale that say there was a social network that was had one hundred thousand users and people were actively using the social network every day and having body issues to whatever the know the kind kind might be able to find out you, are we going to end up creating kind of a regulatory friend across all of the things. And I think that this goes also to the point of scale because um at the end of the day, if you end up starting a business and you're not successful, you don't really kind of find yourself in the sort of framing of what what are you doing wrong. All of the the companies that scale assumption is they did something wrong in order to get to that scale. You know roll off both the um sax is former colleague and obviously fame investor at now it's a qua capital said that he always only invest in businesses that pursue one of the seven deadly since because those they are ultimately the things that consumers kind of increment their consumption of, there has to be a seven deadly and driver uh you know underscoring the success of any business um that self to consumers and if that is actually true, people aren't making kind of altruistic purchasing and consumption decisions, are making decisions based on envy and based on and based on let me and all of those drivers we kind of you know are effectively to kind of related back to these physiological drivers, right? And so like like.

yeah, now two things can be right, what you said can be right. But I think what also can be right is, are we really willing to bet that now there are not fifty individually ambitious, politically ambitious state ages licking their chops, reading the stuff, wondering how many kids in their state may have suffered from a eating disorder or anxiety, and blame IT on one of these apps? Course, we convinced that not a single lawsuit will get filed.

Are we convinced that there's not going to be any class action? And by the way, that's just the united states. What is somebody that sitting around a you know around a table of politicians desks and you know, germany, belgium a france, thailand, uh, they're gonna a find their issue in this treasure trove of content that's being continuously dripped that out to the public.

I guess my point is that this is today's issue. And this success, ultimately overtime and consumer markets will always ultimately be driven by products that have at scale, ilaria effects on the consumer market. And those delicate ious effect will be a result of some sort of kind of addictive or negative kind of consequence that arises when folks use these things frequently.

And the market figures out how to optimize the utilization of products to increase revenue, to increase profit and that what a free market. And i'm not saying it's right or wrong. I'm just pointing out that there isn't, in my opinion, something unique.

And I mean, you know coca cola of the largest beverage company in the world, they sell forty grams of sugar and twelve bounces of water, and everyone buys that may feel great for that. And the sugar creates a addictive problem. Now we've got a obesity epidemic, not blaming cola, but that's the general trend. And C, P, G, over last fifty years.

increasing sugar, increasing salt. And this is sugar, which is a generic compound. This is, for example, no different than when puro farmers started to make ventner.

It's a really great drug. IT has incredibly superior advantages. It's used for a lot of very important things. When that spilled over, knowing lead to a level of abuse. And I don't think IT was a lot of abuse, but there is enough that essentially was overlooked in in the building of the business.

IT started with state ages who stepped in, and then IT basically ultimately drove a federal agreement, state agreements, a master settlement agreement around venti l and then produce essentially discords ing all the profits that they made. So you're right, free markets should act, however, where they're going to act. But when those free market Operators themselves are producing data that shows that oh, shah lld on something could be going wrong here um then I do think that politicians will step in.

Regulators could step in. I mean, what's crazy here is, you know, the fda could actually act like if the F D A is willing to act on dual. What is the difference if the F.

D A says they feel like bluchers assume that somebody in the F. D. A said, we feel like we should have a response ability to think about mental health and eating disorders, but that's the slippery slope.

right? What's the thresh hold? At what point do they say, no, we're not touching this. And what point do they say, yes, we are watching this? Because at the end of the day, any successful consumer product will have some degree illiterate effect.

And this is why we have to have some perspective about IT. So in preparation for the segment, I asked my eleven year old girl daughter, I know jack, I, you don't think I talk to my kids.

but I no job I .

was seeking. Your security.

So the first thing he said is, who are you in the second and after I said, i'm you're dad and and the second thing he said is the second thing he said is, I don't use instagram like, okay, well, what do you use SHE said, tiktok, i'm like the worst so i'm like, what would you use tiktok for? And SHE said, well, I watched dance videos.

I'm like, well, i've been reading articles that say that the only thing on tiktok is sex and drugs and that is, you know, it's bringing to avoid text of that and he said, I watch, I watch the dance videos and then smart a whip, he said, the only people who end up watching that, the ones who keep indicating, shouldn't use your preference. But he basic said that they keep getting that stuff because they like IT, and they keep getting fed more of what they are watching. So look, I think we have to have a sense of perspective about this.

At the end of the day, products like facebook, an instagram, are ways for people to share content and consume content for people they follow. I mean, that's basically IT. Now, is there a lot of bad shit on there? Yeah, because there a lot of bad shit in the world.

And should facebook be trying to control this stuff? absolutely. But I don't, at the end of the day, think it's cigarettes.

If they ban kids from using tiktok and instagram until they were sixteen years old, would you be opposed to that? Because I don't let my kids use and I have an eleven year old were .

near we have a complete mortal .

or no social media are I can't believe you like your kids are social media I mean passing judgment.

I mean like all they use a force to watch the next video so um but I .

think point is interesting one which on what your daughter said that that is effectively what's going on IT IT creates an acceleration of the natural evolution of these markets that historically may have taken in fifty years for everyone to want to watch.

You know mtv didn't emerge for sixty years until you know there there was kind of radio um and television broadcast signals and then everyone said, you know what I want to watch rocker is dancing on stage and go and not. And whatever the kind of consumer demand was that eventually evolved there. What's happening in social media is within seconds, you make evolutionary votes on kind of what you want in the media cycle.

And then all of a sudden, a few hours later, you're getting exactly what you want over over again and you can say no. And that's effectively what digital media generally, social media particular has some nuances to IT. Digital media generally has enabled is an acceleration of the natural consumption trend that we see with humans, which is they eventually want to go to one of the seven deadly scenes, and that's what they .

kind of get stuck with. We've definitely talked about the danger of being trapped in in an information bubble, in a feedback loop. And I do think that is a danger of these products.

But so as cable news, I mean, you know you look at twitter, it's an outrage machine and people get trapped in a cycle and they only want to either follow people to get outraged by them or just because they want to kind of self for doctorate themselves. But that is basic why people watch cable news as well. I mean, IT is an outrage machine.

You're friend tucker or Rachel meta on m sbc, they're both feeding different variations of outrage. And so so my point is, look, I don't think these problems are unique to social media. I think they pervade hollywood and the entertainment industry and even the news industry.

Look, maybe we should put warning labels on them. At the end of the day, we don't prohibit cigarettes. We have a sumption of risk argument. We put warning labels on them. Maybe we need warning labels on these instant food.

And that right you put you put IT behind the counter. And there's a strict prohibition on people into the age of eighteen um being able to use them. And when IT looks like you know companies like were trying to circumvent those things or make IT appear um more valuable basically to hook kids at a Young man in your grade when they weren't capable of making those decisions, um they were held liable. So okay, so there's a really .

interesting topic there which is people under the ages, say sixteen or eighteen b prohibited such products.

Yes.

hundred percent.

hundred percent. Look, if you think eighteen.

six hundred and eighteen.

let's sixty and one hundred percent. Eighteen.

six and one hundred percent. And then up there needs to be a way of opting up because I think sixteen year old are quite sophisticated. But here's a thing, we are living longer and longer than ever. IT is very likely that we're all gone to generally live to our hundreds.

It's not the end of the world for these kids to have to wait extra two or three years until their literal physiology is a little bit Better form so that they had Better anybody's to the ship. And I think that if we, as a adult population, aren't necessarily going to take responsibility for these kids, I think we're doing them a huge disservice. You don't let your kids run around whether they want.

You don't let them hold guns whenever they want. You don't let them do a whole bunch of things that they may think is okay, but you know could have really bad consequences. And so if you know that this stuff is happening, I think it's very different to look at a twenty two year old and tell them what to do or not to do. That's not what we're debating, but what that data was about was about long term systemic health issues to a large percentage of girls. That's really fun and .

a lot of the researchers come out. I dropped a couple links in the chat and I haven't read the studies but um they're starting to share a correlation between suicide rates and depression in Young kids with social media and IT does which females the series uh females are uh more adapt or more frequently in a dynamic or complex social uh situations, in other words cyber bowling type situations where people use the social media. Yes.

I look I think you guys have a real point with respective ages thirteen to sixteen because I don't think you're a .

lot to users from media teen a joke build products that have to a by bike copper laws and we always just kind of laugh at a very shit.

right? I just saying I think you guys have a real issue that needs to be exported around what's the usage for ages starting to sixteen. But look what I worry about, what these things as you're always playing.

Va, all right? I mean, you basically plan social media and alvan these kids because you are very text over. You going to find themselves on text groups and text chats, they'll be in signal, and you are even be able to see what they're doing. I mean.

at least on social media can be the whole point of that. That makes to me because I remember when I was growing up and we all wanted to smoke IT was a pain in the ass to get cigarets. So most of us just said, well, it's not worth IT but yeah, you're write a handful of people found a way to get the cigarettes to sneak behind the school to smoke them. That's fine, but that's very different than jewel walking into the middle of launch room and passing out berry flavor weapons. 我。

Or why should we generally care about joel and not care about sota companies making forty grams per twelve founders of sugar, which is a dangerous .

a the time and then we had .

this kind of know tobacco morritt um that's now kind of free berg.

You said if you said right now covered uh is a disease of the old and the obese, you will be cancelled like somebody tried .

to say that with the guy from no.

what the point is you're talking about like people are very sensitive about the obesity thing and the second you say, like we need to .

monitor to make something, there's also perona freedom. And do you want to drink a good exactly. Why tell talking about money? What are you .

going to do with a thirteen .

to sixteen year old? What are you going to do .

with the and three.

eight last part of your argument, that's the best part of your argument is we're dealing with minors. And I could see the argument for more restrictions and potentially support .

them depending what they are.

I think that something .

what and is not being able to drink soda, you have to be sixteen year old to drink soda. I mean, that actually.

that were most written in this country actually open .

minded to that position. Actually, I know this sounds crazy.

but I think that .

makes the cola makes no sense. If we have a crazy obesity, if we can actually show that.

So please ask the question now. So let me, let me let me ask the second order question about this, which is freeburg is right, that drinking sodas for thirteen rules has got to be as harmful or or more than using facebook. okay.

So why do we never hear about that? I would argue there's something else going on here with this massive amount of attacks on social networking companies. There's a lot of people who hate social networking in the traditional legacy media because theyve been disrupted by facebook, by these social media companies and they're working.

They took their money and they're looking to publicize any article about the negative effects of these companies, which they're not threatened by coca cola. So I publish those kinds of studies. So I just think that there's an argument that perhaps i'm not saying you're wrong. I think there's absolute truth and what you're saying, it's all a matter of degree though and perspective. And I do think that the traditional media has an incentive to blow this out proportion .

little bit because they .

yeah absolutely. And I think I think people power. Look, I think there's a positive thing about social networking.

I mean, if you ever said one positive thing about IT, okay, social networking overall enables us to stay in touch with people we care about friend's family and allows us to receive information for people we want to follow. Okay, we never talk about those positives. I find IT an incredibly convenient way to, okay, so we never talk about that.

But but here's why is because social media is funding a democratizing force, right? IT enables people to coordinate in a much more democratized way than they ever had been able to before. I do think that is threatening to people in power. And given the chance, we'd like to suppress IT. Zakour gave a speech a few years ago about social networks being the, I think, called the fourth of state, with the third day being the press. And in the same way that there are people who want to empower, who want a sense of the press, I do believe that there are people in power on a sense of social networks because they don't like the disruptive democratizing force that that represents. And there is a lot of positive to that in the world.

You I think you're mixing up a lot of things there. So we are you're right. And I don't think any of us are saying cancel these companies and remove them from the internet. I think what we're saying is there are very specific ways in which certain features are built that they are expressed in features that are now apparently according to their own work and exploration are linked to mental health issues.

So I if I think the point is people should now decide whether, to your point, we should ignore IT because the good vastly out ways, you know, what's a third of girls who the fuck cares, right? I mean, they're chicks to whatever. Uh, or you say, uh, actually this is a really big problem.

And so let's step up and fix IT because somebody needs to protect these people. And when you're sixteen or seventeen or eighteen, do whatever you want, like we let people do today. You, anna, drink a coca cola every day.

Get diabetes. You can do that. Nobody tries to stop you, right? You want to smoke a pack of smokes a day, you can do that. Nobody stops you. But we do a lot of other things to try to help kids.

I think, I think for only talking about ages, if were all about the miners, the kids, I think you and I can find agreement on this issue, I think, but but I do think that the demonization of social media goes well beyond that. But luck. I think you've got a great point with respect to the kids.

Do you guys believe this is a theory that's been growing that tiktok, run by the chinese government, is trying to reprogram ethics, morals and doing psychos because there our children.

No, jay, there's big, something big Better than that. I mean, I think all of you guys probably upgraded to eight I O S this week. I hope if you haven't, and everybody listening if you haven't, please go upgraded.

But you know, the israeli spy firm and I so had created A A zero click exploit for the iphone, where you can turn on the camera and the microphone and basically spy our folks completely unaware. And you know, Jason and I were talking about this. And and and I think, Jason, you're the one they said you're like, yeah, we've been living with that with tiktok for years. It's not as if you know nso just licensed IT randomly to the sauty government. I mean, this tool has been available for a while.

So to your point, but do we think that the chinese government, tiktok, are trying to programme children to be more deviant and to create social unrest? And no, you don't think that they are trying to steer them with the algorithm wards bad results because they're not. Their kids play video games.

If you look, what did you see? The water journal le, you guys, well, street journal article basically created a bunch of kids accounts, and then did searches, or what started to go down a rabid hole. And just with one keyword search, you know, these kids went into deep, you know, kk B D S M sult.

This is a, this is a pretty straight forward, waited three algorithm. okay? So like when you start on a branch of a tree and you keep clicking on those things, that's what you'll get. This is no different than how facebook algorithm works, how google search algorithm works for you. Once you start behaving with clicks or swipes or legs, they use that as a feedback loop, and they weight basically weigh the next set of resus David's daughters, right?

If you click on sex, drugs and rock and roll, that's it's not all you're gonna get, but it's gona be a large percentage of what you get because the algorithm in a blood way assumes that that's what you like. 没有。 So I don't not sure that this is repeating anything that so in you know, it's pretty obvious that that's how IT should work if they want to have maximum utilization.

Well, you know the thing that slightly different of my tiktok is, you know in facebook or instagram, you build jersey and twitter and that IT serves IT up algorithmic. On tiktok, IT uses the entire corpus. So if you do one search for a key word now, it's not just a subset of what your friends posted in some rank ughi. It's the entire corpse SE of like long tail. And so what they show in this tiktok is like how quickly a child who just types in one key work can be have their feet by ninety percent drug use and you know a set of matis c whatever you're into, uh, sax, no.

If the content is have scene, then I should be taken down to begin with. okay. And look, my take away from this conversation is that we need to do something different for kids.

I don't know it's it's a flat out prohibition or but but but yeah but look so so the tiktok algorithm thing, if you want to keep seeing more, more content related to something, fine, the algorithm is gna give you more and more of what you want is a consumer. But maybe for kids, we need to be some guard rails around that. And we don't direct, we don't direct kids toward certain kinds of content around you, sex or drugs or violence.

I have to console with my parents like youtube. Kids are not youtube because he was really to crazy, dark places. And there's kids youtube and kids youtube, they add each and every video. Now you still get some of that consumption and boxing of things in. Your kids will have asked you to buy a bunch of stuff, but you're not onna get straight up sex.

violence and you everything. I I put kids youtube about my kids, my four year olds, I D and then the other day he said he saw some like scary horror on there and SHE couldn't sleep and SHE look up in the and night, you know, were not doing our job as parents curing the content, curating what our kids are doing and we're leaving IT to this APP. Ah we're totally after and and that's what I realized.

I did my lady ss in like just thinking like, oh, there was something you want to watch. I put the up on there and didn't pay attention for a few weeks, and all the sudden she's gone down the rab hole. Found something.

I use A, I don't refugee users, but I use an APP called custodio is with A Q Q U S T U D I O. And you can kind of like lock down all these devices. And then at the end of every week, that gives you an email of all the APP usage and all the links that these that my kids click on or just my oldest one could. He's the only one that has a phone.

but that's nice. And you had a discussion with them about that oh the this and yes so tell me know .

I agree it's still super, super heart. But this is why I think you need to have some blunt force instruments right now. And my blunt force instruments are you're not allowed to have um well, the ones that we we they're not allowed to have tiktok, snapshot, facebook, instagram.

twitter. Yes, hard now.

And the only reason we allow youtube is because a lot of the school links are the videos inside of youtube and so you can't lock IT down but that's why I uses custodio APP to see what they're watching on youtube. Even then though.

it's not perfect. By the way, the thing that is came from the pentagon, there's a total friday news drop. I mean, talk about a friday news drop.

I don't know.

U. S. Military, china logic, cobo drone strike killed ten civilians, including seven children. We knew this. There are just confirming something that had been exposed neurons to excelling reporting on the excelling .

reporting by the new york times. That was incredible journalism. I mean, did you guys see that they were like watching frame for frame of, like a video then they were like going to google maps.

They were comparing colors of cars. They were looking at sides of buildings. Uh, incredible reporting by the new york times.

IT was really the, I mean, it's obviously a tragedy, was the final debacle of our afghanistan involvement. This was a foreign aid worker who actually, he was there as an aid worker, and they stay, had him on video, loading up his car with plastic jugs of water, and somehow they thought these were explosives or something like that.

And he was doing his errands, and then he comes home and they hit the the car with, you know, a massive musicle from one of these ripper drones. And IT kills him. As well as its basic ten members of a expanded family, clean seven children.

Now the I mean, I think I understand why this, but we don't exactly know why this happened. And I think that needs to be investigated. Obviously, the military in couple was on high alert because we had just had that bombing at the airport. And IT was the bloody a day for amErica in afghanistan. And I think we had three, thirteen soldiers killed a few days before this.

But but that just shows the .

kind of mistakes that we can make, even fighting drone warfare.

Know the idea the term casualty is a war. Exit for a reason like this is how what works cannot do IT perfectly. It's messy. Everybody, innocent people, dies.

Is why war worst?

How you should .

be the last resort, right? And how do we ever think we're going to win hearts and minds in this country?

We made two interested in democracy, like in the way we want them to be, and the west want them to be by forcing down their throats, is not going to work. We could have maintained to base their theirs. There were Better ways to exit, put.

let's fix the schools in california.

Yeah, I think that, I think that ultimately, I think people are going to forget those images of people on planes and just think, thank god that's over. I think now that there hasn't been twenty year and hofus ly, there's not another nine eleven all right. H let's rap with um alan power rode a piece for the new york times uh up at section section on uh sexism in tech using the Elizabeth metric as uh the main example um SHE was also on tech chek in abc show and discuss her arbed a quote home should be held accountable for her actions as chief executive of the eros and IT can be sexy to hold her accountable for alleged very serious wrongdoing and not hold an array of men accountable for reports of wrongdoing and bad judgment SHE uses travel's colonic and adam newman as examples of men who have engaged in questionable and ethical, even dangerous behavior in tech without magical legal penalty and that they both went to start new companies her main example however bias is tech uh executive Kevin burns who is the former city of jew juul h who helped the e cigarette vapor company raise uh twelve billion dollars but he left jee omits uh a lot of legal blow back and just this past year .

budget cash with .

but yeah I mean. Of course you get you secure the bag on the way out adam .

newman to and don't .

drop .

don't drop the drop .

the yes right um but do not drop the back so we had he meant and other .

stories like a jero, if you guys remember this company um couple years ago yeah the the claim that they made was that .

inside of the packets .

was like fresh vegetables and the things squeaky fresh of vegetables and fresh juice. Juice came out and IT turns out that the bag was just filled with juice. No.

no. I think the bag was fell with shaved vegetable les or whatever.

But you could freeze the bag, did squeak the bag so was already predicted what IT was SHE basically put made the video, put on blur. They had juice in these banks.

and they were some machine.

take the juice.

then took that juice, put in the bag, was support to be fresh.

and sold that as fresh, fresh ables to them. Get juice. 这个 charged .

eight dollars to back for the stuff who invested in that.

who invested in that, who a hundred .

billion dog IT was a huge, like, you know, Better for the planet story. But IT turns out that the hardware didn't work, and then they ended up of faking itself. Make a very similar to their notes in the sense that there was a piece of hardware that made to claim that was not necessarily true.

grated. No lives were at risk in this particular case, but some might argue lives were at risk in the case of jewel. But I think, you know you see this a lot more in these kind of hardware are particularly in life scientists companies.

Um you know there's a business like like emergence a good example, right? It's very hard tech, very deep tech. Uh, josh hofman didn't incredible job fund raising rates of four million dollars around from soft thing to the company public then they go public in a few weeks later.

They're like, oh, wait, sorry, we don't actually have any product or any revenue. And we talked about this a few months ago. A few weeks ago, the stock completely collapsed.

There's another company called berkeley lights, which went public and a yesterday's orpiment capital. One of these short sellers put out one hundred and sixty page or port on these guys showing that berkeley lights is product. Actually, it's a hardware like science is hardware that cost two million dollars.

They've sold IT into all the farming companies and scorpion. And look, this thing doesn't work. It's a total fraught like there's no the machine doesn't do .

what they claim IT does.

Okay, with alien powers point, is there a double standard or not?

right? So these were all run by male C, E. O, and nothing happened to them .

and and is wrong .

um yeah yeah the all bright first .

of all this take the easy on the White ice to the three of like asking .

a qualifying question .

is so here's what I ask .

is why I don't der when IT .

comes to the woman that everyone I think was excited about seeing succeed because he was a woman, IT becomes fraud. And I think I well, there's different things.

Here is a freezer. And there are different things between, you know, where he obviously misled people in a premeditated way and lie to them, like taking their blood sample and then putting him in a fake machine, then doing that in the back on an abbot machine, and then bring the rod sult back and making IT on her. There are no edcon machine. I mean, this is literal wire for our security fraud in these other cases is that people who are ambitious, if you look at the jero, it's kind of like, this is a stupid idea that I got over funded. He put no, have vegetables in the packet and then use, actually not correct.

Watched the video that I live on a few years ago.

I just say you pictures of IT, I mean.

maybe there is a different really, but IT was already squaze. I like, oh my god, like IT was a standard like hardware really difficult. You know, novel hardware technologies is really difficult, you think till in some cases, you launch a product that does even work. Um you know and and then this isn't just in hargis, also in like science and you see this a lot, you ship a product.

I would probably say that if if regulators believe that those CEO try to commit fraud.

they would have .

done charges. Maybe they still will. They should follow up with those focus.

So why do you think they went after Elizabeth homes? Because I think .

there's I think there's one really important. There are two things I play in terreno s, which is different. Number one is the kinds of investors that were involved here um are extremely powerful folks, um not necessarily you know technology capable, but very, very well known, highly uh connected a people in the establishment.

And the second was that they were Operating in a regulated market, which has very strict laws. Look, i've tried to build competing products to the onus. For years.

I've been pretty public about this. I've tried five or six times. They failed every single time. I couldn't get out of the starting line. You know, these tests would never work with out with a single drop of blood adjust to make.

And he sense the only version of this problem that has been solved well is the ability to detect self e uh cancer DNA in blood, right, using a very small quantum of blood. Um companies like gardened and grail have actually done and built a great business out of IT. Uh but IT requires extremely sophisticated machine resulted than by iluma and other.

So if you're Operating in a regulated market, the bar is higher. There is a lot more. And then on top of that, I think SHE compounded IT by including folks and raising capital from folks that may not have actually known and being able to diligence.

And so that's the cycle of fraught. That mayor may not have occurred there and he has to or they had there's a burden to prove that it's very different. I think over here, in an unregulated market worth, you can just kind of build whatever you want. And if smart investors like nick just put in the group chat, so the investors in justo were google ventures, liner perkin's, thrive capital. I mean, these are all very sophisticated folks that um you know made a decision in um you know probably not the case that they were lied.

I understand why they made the usual mistake because at the time fresh press use using hydro rics was a thing and this guy said, that's what i'm going to do, and to use hydro ics, i'm going to school eze the vest, see, get the best stuff. Understand why they fell fit because .

my wife was j.

my wife j was buying that press user juice in L.

Specials and I saw these Prices they use. It's incredibly inefficient, but the juice taste really great. But the thing I have a problem with olympic story is SHE brings up you know uh the uh harassment stuff and uh you know this is an issue of gender acta. But on this week and startups, i've been covering fraud after fraud. And if you so APP any got A C fine yesterday.

What happened? Jason?

I like any, they told people who are using their analytics products, building apps. There's like eight million people that they would never sell their da accept in aggregate and then they went to wall street people and said, here is actually will tell you the data um and you can trade on IT and so yeah yeah so I don't think that inside trading exactly.

but I might be that is the whole point of reg F D. The whole point is if somebody knows something, if you're a financial actor is and and you know something so if all of us were sitting around the table, um you know when somebody said something about a random public company, if that's not public information, if that's not known, two things have to happen. Number one is I when I receive IT must not do anything with IT. And the second, that person who disclose that needed and file and A K and say, oops, I accidentally said this so there .

are now this is an end .

around around things like really A I think that's a really big deal.

And then I guess the question is, like what with people who use planet labs or whatever to, you know, two satellite images of the target parking lot or put people at spotters outside the starter bucks and count the people coming in at public information.

that information service that says one thing, yes, and you're violating that, but then you may also be violating that. So they .

haven't gone after people for on the other side of the trade for security, but they charge my he pays ten million box. I think he's in the penalty box can be, uh, you know wanna be a public officer or for three years. Then we had head spin, I don't.

We saw that last company, but headspace was involved in just basically straight up lying about their house offer. Then you have tether the stable point. They've been banned from new york by the D.

O J. They've been banned by the canadian regulators for the first two cypher exchanges there. And suppose to the D O, J is investigating them. And then there's about five eos in new york that have been prosecutor ready. So I know Allen saying.

like they're not a man.

but i'm seeing them all, all the time. Yeah, they are just not the press is not obsess with them because .

let's face her this with homes SHE was weird.

I mean, the voice, there's a lot of peculiar things about her that you don't see any other folks were boring.

right? By the way you just said is part of the sex claim that made, which is that we talked about her dress and SHE dressed and how SHE talked. We don't talk about that kind of self when IT comes to other trees.

neurons. And of course they did that were talking about him being a hippy walking around with their feet six. Every profile she's wrong. In that case, every profile of andy uman talked about his personal life, and his wife .

is .

married to me.

IT is with homes, make IT relevant by dressing, deliberately styling yourself in the fashion. Steve jobs, with the black turtle neck and the glasses. I mean, SHE perpetrated itself as the next Steve jobs and me.

He was part of the grist. So now, yeah, exactly. Now did did gender play into IT? yeah. But I think not nurses' in the way that things, in this sense, that the media wanted to believe so badly that the next few jobs was gonna a woman, that they kind of look past what should have been staring them in the face.

I may look, if a man had gone out there, were in the black internet, in the hen is they would have said, who is this crown? Yeah, exactly. But they suspended.

Reader, you have to dress up Steve jobs, the expressive .

or how the homes .

for halloween episode but but that's like .

a nested Steve jobs. So like you're going .

to be a Elizabeth, Elizabeth ve. jobs. I think that you're entirely right.

I think I think .

this is the way that gender has played into IT is that there's a lot of people who really wanted the elisabeth story to be true. And Frankly, SHE used that yeah in order .

to perpetuate her fly.

SHE have used that.

But SHE was definitely influence.

I was kind of a controversial question um you know because this story made me think a lot about some of what's gone on in businesses that I know of and where I know that there is to some degree fraud in this representation happening by the C O. And founders and this is a little known secret in sick valley or a little spoken of secret, uh, which is that you know more often than not, if you know about fraud and a company silk valley, you're encouraged to keep your mouth shut because the idea is is at the end of the day, if they're gaining lots of capital, uh you know more capital float all boats and more money will rush into that market.

So there's businesses that you're competing with that are committing fraud rather than raise your hand, which mean people say, hey, look, if you're going to raise your hand and claim fraught d and talk negatively about another company, people going to start doing that about you and you're onna start doing that about your porfolio um and so you guys know that right? Like you're discouraged from calling out these sorts of moments when you see them in silent valley because there is the perceived kind of, look, we're all in the club together, all in the together. Be careful not the talks.

MaaS and capital will stop coming in. People will come after you. And we're much more of kind of the support of oppen communities.

But there are you guys here.

I have at least two companies in the last year. You not kept my mouse t because and by though I don't think that is necessarily on going on, but I know of this representation, but the investors are like, look, we'd love to see these guys succeeded because that would be good for you in this way because then you would be more money flowing in. And you and there's always a narrative and why you don't want to do this, what you don't want to call these things out.

I call IT out. And now i've got a crazy founder denounce few years later I mean, look, I who has .

an ncc enforcement against .

him yeah exactly a sanction um so yeah I mean, look I you you're right freeburg that there is very little off shot to doing IT um but luck I hate but we have to distinguish between fraud and sort of puffing okay, here's a thing that I think elyse is kind of missing is when he criticizes all these founders or divisional and evAngelical and and promoting something that ends up not working, that is not fraud.

I mean, every start up we ask the founder how you going to change the world? What is your big idea? What is the big dream? And then they lay out this really pretty unrealistic set of things, unrealistic in the sense that that comes true maybe one out of a thousand times, right? Every start up their founding mission is a bit of an overpromise.

And just because IT doesn't come true doesn't make IT fraud. I think that a lot of people out in the non silk valley investing world would IT interpret that is fraught because the founder told them something that ends up not happening, not ends up hundred. And this is why you really is very dangerous to take money outside, is slow king about, because people don't really understand this distinction.

okay? Just because IT doesn't work out and what you said ended up not being true does not make IT fraud. What is fraud is when you lie about life, said before when you lie about the past.

And what elise with homes is accused of doing by these prosecutors is, again, lying about the present day capabilities or product, actually falsifying documents. He actually falsifying documents. That is the fraud. That is the line you cannot cross.

They change blood test results. Listen, said another way, sex. Elizabeth me's vision of taking less blood and let in in doing more test with that, in being more efficient, is a completely valuing to pursue.

Chao just said he pursued five times in, completely felt tens of million of dollars burned in a park. But what we all buy into here is, what if he does work one thousand times? He lied about the results because SHE lied about the results. SHE lied about real people's blood test results like actual civilians.

Well, I have some empathy for eliza's jobs in the following way.

When I was told.

when I was, when I was told, when I was to, when I was told, I think I told this story。 I I was asking an investor, hey, what's the hottest company around this is an, you know, twenty thirteen or fourteen. He said us, and there was no way to get to connected to the company.

So then I was like, you know, I had heard just the bullet point, one drop of blood full characteristic of your, you know, be able to do a blood test sector. I thought this is an incredible idea, but because I had no way of getting connected. Now, thank god that turned out to be a good thing.

I was like, fucker, i'll just start my own version. I figure out how to do this. And and Jason, as you said, IT turned out to be much more charger than I thought.

And five different iterations, five different teams. And you know P, H D from M I T stanford, everything, we couldn't. Cl tech, we couldn't figure that out. So it's not wrong to want to believe that something is possible and is not illegal to do that. Uh but as David said, the minute that you tried that you tell lies about the past in order to basically then change the future in a way that shouts happen. That's that's really unfair.

Yeah yeah it's a what do you think of the defense that bowani uh the sanli defense I saw a cros swisher and some new york times reporters and other reporters were basically not buying IT um and so we think yeah yeah I just rest of .

your have been following me try I I I .

think it's hard for somebody who .

in the moment took credit for every decision for every piece of press for claim to be the job sy and micro manager all this and now turn around and say, no, that wasn't me making the decisions I was under the spell of somebody else. I think that's a tough argument .

to make also I think, uh, you know that this is going to come out but SHE actually fired by ani. So if he fired him, how was SHE here?

Hard to do the strand goi defense, I think .

um well.

maybe guilty or at least will close on this male champ has sold to into IT for twelve billion dollars in the largest boot tract acquisition ever. Um we all know male champ ah and we all know quick books. It's a huge deal.

I have one issue with this and I don't know if it's true. Not, but apparently none of the employees have any equity.

Yes, and that was what is about to get to employees didn't have equity, however um and I have no melt chip for a while um for over a decade but using the product and know the founded among the pocket before.

have they been a sponsor of your pot?

They sponsored in the first year I think or two um and .

were you Angel vester?

I was not I tried to be and he said we're never going to ever raise money and .

he also said he was never ever gona .

sell and he was also never going to sell. I they gave a billion .

reasons to change his mind exactly.

behave him. H the twenty percent uh my understanding was employees got a twenty percent cash bonus and they were among the highest paid um you know in the industry. So their plan was instead of giving people some big reward of the ending.

they were distributed cash.

cash. If had hundred fifty k developer, you got thirty count.

That's not an unreasonable way to run a business that has no outside investors that employees know that going in, they didn't go with the expected of that. They in with the expectation of a high salary bonus and they got IT.

I do that as a few companies, few companies that I own, I do that. But what I also do is I let them buy into the company every year. I just think that it's a good principle to have like an ownership in the business.

I think you should be paying a lot of money and we should pay cash bonuses for for achieving results. We do that. But then what we also says, if you want to buy equally.

come and buy IT. But you're probably write from a performance perspective that I don't think it's necessarily moral obligation to do that, right, how the guy wants run his business up ah and people that work at your house, you don't give them back in your house, right? I an you the house you .

catch or people who play for a basketball team or not allowed to get equity in the team, but in other countries are right thing.

And soccer you can. Yes, I think one of the best things about silicon valley is the fact that there there's a practice of giving bad bed options to everybody in the company. And there is all those great stories about the cheefest google who got rich, and the secretary at microsoft who got rich.

And that is a beautiful thing about the techy. You never, and you never hear about that. When all the oppresses doing writing stories about greedy VC and all that kind of stuff, they talk about VC. But they don't bring up the point that in these non VC companies, the employees never end up with anything.

Someone who came from nothing to afford a beautiful home and have their life taking care of forever because they work really hard at a great company that worked out and that's that's the most common story and it's never reported.

But yeah and by the way, look, there's there's nothing wrong with boost rapping your company. So congrats to this milch and founder for doing that. I mean, certainly.

you know like as a investor, I have no desire explain where boot trapping is.

Sex trapping is just when you don't raise outside money. And he did IT himself and he based profits yeah find of the company with the profits, which is just amazing. But but but here's the thing about that is he did this.

He started the company back in two thousand, and one at the native after the dom crash, and there was very little money going into new stars back then. And he manto create this. So kudos to him.

But the environment now is very different. If you look at the amount of funding that goes into start up, I mean, it's now in the hundreds of billions every year. And so if you're of this mentality of i'm in a bootstrap IT, you're probably going to lose your competition who simply willing to raise money and pursue that same idea with more funding.

Now look, i'm not in the business of shing money on people who don't want IT. I'm just saying realism. The times are different. Now if you can boost up a business, great go for IT. But I do think that if you're in competition with someone who can raise VC money.

you're going be a disadventure .

ge hard to compete yourself. No, what about lc, what he worked to the matt gala tax the rich SHE wrote SHE were a tax the rich dress to the madgin a porn porno.

I had the best tweet about this, which is she's about to go have the best night of her life, parting her ass off with all these rich people, and she's wearing taxi. Rich, it's total hypocrite. Y this is classic socialism, where they do this a virtue signal while being friends and hanging out with the the people the owners of capable they're reporting to deride. And Frankly, it's just like the mass things. I mean, you've got the servant class working at the metgod wearing mass while every while all the guess of the the gala or don't have to wear a mask.

I mean, please, again.

SHE also drops a merge. You can buy a tax. The rich.

There's an official A O C team. I can't believe that he goes to a .

fifty eight dollar switcher. Uh, twenty eight dollar. Dad had a ten dollars sticker pack, twenty seven dollar took back and twenty day for, oh yeah, tax rich. That rich? Wow.

I don't know. Dad hat was a category. No, dad jokes and dad bods.

I've never found dad hat. Dad hat, the fantastic. Yeah, I thought that was kind of a gross.

Is IT wrong to buy some of this. I I think that kind of cool, actually.

I mean, the tax, the rich hat is pretty funny. And oh my god.

if you were a tax, the switch, I think if the best thing is, if I bought switcher .

world around, if you wear a taxi, rich hat and C M B C, that would be peak your month.

I think that would be peak. great.

Get a sign by, or anybody got any plugs? Anybody had plugs.

The crazy thing about that day, portioned tweet was a coffee check. Can you believe that I got that checked. I mean, he was just mind blowing that this .

is what you say. Fact check. They put A T, C.

put a warning below. Got so warning.

warning liberals and socialists at twitter don't agree with the street.

right? No, exactly. Warning somebody in the out cwd dave porter oy is criticizing somebody in the in crowd that by definitely important.

I definitely to see that .

all he is the macon fake story, uh, from Rachel matter is that that tag checked now SHE posted .

some up data other but but druga ly presenting other information. But me this story should have been completely retracted and IT wasn't.

No, i'm just curious whether there's a fact check double stand?

No, there absolutely. There is no fact check on that for some reason. The Rachel metal tweet, when on fact check, as much as I know .

they're still, in fact, cheat. You know what you should wear, get the .

rich hat and then get your .

by the hampton.

I see you guys a great piece of yes.

but can I say I don't know much for the big APP. I I don't look good in hats. No, you don't know. No, I wanted to wear a had for a long time, but I not. good.

Good is my favorite emerge, which is somebody .

made my first fabulous.

absolutely great. Going to say, by the way, there's a person that did make a best merch site. None of us knows who is, but there's an incredible thing that he tweet at us, right, jacco, which is he's paying his way through college.

He puts a note into IT. He told me he made like five grand over the summer. So you know he's probably making like thirty grand a year off of merch.

if you're any, anybody's interested in some best he's merch. We don't make a single dime from IT, but there's a Young hard work and dude paying them paying his way through school.

I don't know it's a best to Aaron.

He's best of right, a perl .

best of paradox. M we don't really want to encourage too many people to go crazy doing this, but this is our guy, I guess and I made made his way through skirt for him yeah and I think they did um you know the the shirts that people wore on their all in barkal came from them um but I really want to do the I want to do this the rich and .

buying this tax the rich sweaters, red boys and the t shirt and the sticker pack i'm going for all of IT you got me a he got me on the hook.

Do they have A A man's bike? I, uh, with taxi rich .

on the back side always.

We have to buy speedos s the next time where in italy, and we have to do our best to walk from peer to peer on the beaches of italy in the speed. Can you maine, if that image got the.

I did, I did the best walk with tax a boys. I got to go. I to eat lunch. You guys take care.

your.

World, man.

We open sources to the fans .

and crazy with.

我。

一定 去。

给你 咖哩。