Modern Wisdom - #253 - George Mack - Mental Models 104 - Bear Or Bull?

Episode Date: December 3, 2020

George Mack is a writer and a growth marketer. If you imagine your mind as an operating system, mental models are apps that you can install to give yourself extra functionality and improved decision making. Expect to learn about our brand new game Bear Or Bull, how you can use anchoring to get laid, why numeracy is a superpower, whether remote working is a blessing or a curse and much more... Sponsor: Get Surfshark VPN at https://surfshark.deals/MODERNWISDOM (Enter promo code MODERNWISDOM for 83% off and 3 Months Free) Extra Stuff: Follow George on Twitter - https://twitter.com/george__mack  Get my free Ultimate Life Hacks List to 10x your daily productivity → https://chriswillx.com/lifehacks/ To support me on Patreon (thank you): https://www.patreon.com/modernwisdom - Get in touch. Join the discussion with me and other like minded listeners in the episode comments on the MW YouTube Channel or message me... Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/chriswillx Twitter: https://www.twitter.com/chriswillx YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/ModernWisdomPodcast Email: https://www.chriswillx.com/contact  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Hi friends, welcome back. My guest today is current modern wisdom record holder and old-time friend George Mack. He is the human that tempted me to go out to Dubai, or maybe we egg each other on. I'm not sure. Anyway, he's the person who has spent the last month with me out in Dubai and at the very beginning of that trip, we recorded Mental Models 1-04, the Bull or Bear Edition. If you imagine your mind is an operating system, mental models 1-0 for the bull or bear edition. If you imagine your mind is an operating system, mental models are apps that you can install to give yourself extra functionality and improve decision making. They've been popularised by guys like Charlie Munger and Shane Parish from FS.Blog and today George takes us through another batch of his favourites.

So expect to learn about our brand new game, Bull or Bear, how you can use anchoring to get laid, why numeracy is a superpower, why remote working is a blessing, and a curse, and much more. But for now, it's time to teach you about Bear or Bull, I am I'm so excited with the wise and wonderful George Mack. And joined all the way from Dubai by the man himself, Mr George Mack. How are you? I'm not too bad, I'm not too bad, how are you? Well, how could we not be well on the 25th floor this beautiful Dubai Marina apartment? There's worse places to do a podcast isn't it? Yeah, it's contrast to Newcastle Manchester, right? Or Sky.

Or Sky. Yeah, and all Sky, yeah. The year of Zoom finished up in Dubai. So yeah, not not bad Big year 2020 lots of stuff happened What's some of the main insights that you've realized in 2020? Oh, it's a good question. Um, I Think in obsessively about Remote work and the effect that that has on location. I'm sure brain even the fact that we're here

Quite a good little little AB test of that, and proofs in the pudding, but it's going to be very, very interesting because we was saying like, are you bullish or bearish on people moving? In particular, the UK, because the UK has very poor weather. And for me at the minute, I'm thinking, if I move abroad, what would it be? Or if I want to remote? And as long as it has good weather, good time zone, and like relatively good economic social activity, what does the UK have that, you know what I mean? Like the UK for me is only viable for a few months of the year

and it's going to be very interesting to see how many people leave on mass, or if they do leave on mass. And I think as well, that's probably not just going to be for the UK. Everyone thinks the place that they grew up, unless it's unbelievably good, is probably a bit crap.

Yeah. Everyone's disparaging about their hometown, even if your hometown was divine arena. It's just what you're used to. It's not cool or different anymore. So yeah, I wonder whether you're going to get mass swapping of populations from different countries. I think once you've opened that door, even though I do think it will depend on when we'll swim back to the more and more office-based stuff, once you've

opened that door, there's some people who are going to refuse to go back. So it's very, very interesting time to be living through. And whether, because you've got two thought processes that run in your head, you've got obviously, a, the vaccine comes out, things go back to normal, but even then you potentially got B, which is you have mass migration at levels you've never seen before. I was trying to somebody in the property business

and they said when COVID happened, they expected everything to come tumbling down, but actually they had the busiest two months that they've ever had. It was like the equivalent of a year. Because I've got this idea that I've been thinking about, which is you have, throughout childhood, you've kind of got very clear events. You've got this idea that I've been thinking about which is you have throughout childhood, you've kind of got very clear events.

You've got primary school, you've got year one, you've got year two or grade one, grade two. And then you go in the UK, you've got GCSE, you've got A levels, you've got your degree. But then in adulthood, all you've basically got is house marriage, kids, death. I think that's the secret. Covid now in a vent that exists.

So like there's people who are like, are pre-coated and then post-coated. So it causes a lot of behavior changes, really fascinating to see. Well, think about what the UK's trying to do at the moment. They've called it a circuit breaker lockdown. Now, why have they called it a circuit breaker lockdown? It's because they're trying to create a job in the system.

You know, they've just added another little module in, just a little bookmark. And you're correct. People live their life in the system. You know, they've just added another little module in, just a little bookmark. And you're correct. People live their life in epochs. This is what I learned from Tukamaks. Live your life in epochs. You're the sports guy for you. Like the football free-styleer is a kid.

You're the university student. You're the young entrepreneur. You're the young mother or father. You're the person who's in a relationship and retired somewhere, you know what I mean? That's how we break our lives up when you correct. Maybe this is going to be one of those bookmarks in life for people.

Mm. Yeah, why are you talking about? I mean, we flew out here on three days. No, it's too, while we just decided on, like, 48 hours notice, got a PCR test, you drove across Manchester to get a PCR test off some guy in a pair of tracks with buttons. He should have done my throat.

Yeah, he did. Yeah, he did, you have to pay extra for that usually. Yeah, and then he did the PCR test. He did. He did. All right, so everybody is here for mental models. Big pressure, one, two, and three were wildly successful online. What have you got for us today?

Yeah, we're rocking forwards my favourite film. So I'm a big fan of the fourth episode of things. I've got a cumbersome heat. So late last night I was reading through poor Charlie's almond attitude, sort of Charlie Munger's collection of all his essays. And I originally found out this thing from Ben Francis the guy who's the founder of Jim Shorke I was watching one of his vlogs and he said within this book, Paul Charis Ammanak, there's a Less and an essay slash lecture on Coca-Cola that's at the best thing he's ever read

And it's sort of Charlie Munger. He says in the book afterwards that he kind of regretted doing it because nobody really understood it Or it was too complex or it was politically correct or whatever but when you go through it it's like Jesus Christ. So the context of this talk is Charlie basically says if you're in 1884 and you have all the sort of base mental models or academic principles in place and multi-illionaire geological obstacles along and he's got a competition countrywide and says pitch me basically a new drinks beverage idea that if I give you two million dollars in 1884 by I think 2024 or 2034 it will be worth two trillion

So how do you turn two million into, I believe, two trillion? And basically, Charlie says you could have predicted everything that Coca-Cola did and how it succeeded by just base-level mental models. So he goes through and goes like, okay, what's my checklist to begin with? Like how would I explain it to this millionaire to get investment?

And what's fascinating about this is the context is Charlie Owens Coca-Cola, all I've booked, you have a way basically own Coca-Cola now. So you can tell that he's mentally gone through this and looked at every single moment. The fundamentals of how this business is highly invested in. It's why it's being so effective, yeah. He basically says this is the issue of academia, they don't teach it like this. So he said, there's five things to go through when you're doing it. So number one, decide like a big no brainer question, the big no brainer

stuff. Number two, use math to help explain the world. Number three, inversion. So think problem three, reverse. Number four, the best wisdom is sort of elementary academic wisdom. So he comes on to like classical conditioning, operant conditioning from psychology. And then number five, how do you get big lolliposer of effects where it's all these things tied together? So he says to begin with for the no brain side of things. We're never going to create something worth too trillion by selling some generic beverage. Therefore, we must make your name Coca-Cola,

because he says that if you call it George Glotz, he's drained. In order to get global appeal, you need a name that appeals globally is the first thing. So this will require developing a product, having universal appeal, because it's harnesses powerful elementary forces. The next thing he goes on to, he goes on to a few more no-brainers, but uses maths to explain the world. And this is one of the things I probably struggle with,

because maths is, I think, the way they teach in school makes you think it's very, very boring but when you actually understand that maths is the only thing that's probably true, like when you really think about it and I work in obviously the D2C e-commerce space which is blown up right now and I'll have calls with founders each week about how they want to scale things and everybody's very, clear about their brand values and their brand guidelines very often in this vision that they have but nobody knows their margins nobody knows that LCD nobody knows the scale they have to hit why do you think that is too far what I think people or some people just naturally ignore numbers from bad experiences at school and then two numbers

Is reality and I think we try and avoid reality where we can as well. Yeah, I wonder how much of it perhaps is just that you can win Brand values and marketing and creative ideas if you turn up to a meeting and you don't know your LTV or you don't know your bottom line, you can't just make it up. Like it's either there or it's not there. There is no in between, whereas you can turn up to a brand meeting and be like, right, brand values and just create something on the spot.

So I think the shallot and the shallot and the shallot and the shallot and the shallot and the shallot and the shallot and the shallot and the shallot and the shallot and the shallot and the shallot and the shallot and the shallot and the shallot and the shallot and the shallot and the shallot and the shallot and the shallot and the shallot and the shallot and the shallot and the shallot and the shallot and the shallot and the shallot and the shallot and the shallot and the shallot and the shallot and the shallot and the shallot and the shallot and the shallot and the shallot and the shallot and the shallot and the shallot and the shallot and the shallot and the shallot and the shallot and the shallot and the shallot and the shallot and the shallot and the shallot and the shallot and the shallot and the shallot and the shallot and the shallot and the shallot and the shallot and the shallot and the shallot and the shallot and the shallot and the shallot and the shallot and the shallot and the shallot and the shallot and the shallot and the shallot and the shallot and the shallot and the shallot and the shallot and the shallot and the shallot and the shallot and the shallot and the shallot and the shallot and the shallot and the shallot and the shallot and the shallot and the shallot and the shallot and the shallot and the shallot and create something on the spot. So I think the Charlotte's get found out much more with that. So what's next? So on that, so just to sort of hit the, the maths side of things home, it says here, on average, so if we had to get to 3 trillion, we can guess reasonably by 2034,

there will be about 8 billion beverage consumers in the world, so he's breaking down the amount, the fundamental mass of it. So on the new miracle fluency, he then breaks down, looking at Coca-Cola's business model, so the opposite I was saying them, where is my brand guidelines? So if he's thinking of how do we get to 2 trillion by 2034, he breaks down the whole market,

so it understands the total addressable market. So on average, each consumer will be much more prosperous in real terms and the average consumer of 1884. Each consumer is composed mostly of water and must ingest about 64 ounces of water per day. This is eight ounce servings. Therefore, if our new beverage and flavour and otherwise improve only 25% of ingested water worldwide, we can occupy half of that new market therefore he breaks down the numbers

We can sell 2.9 trillion a ounces servings in 2034 and if we can net for cents per serving We will earn a hundred and seventy billion dollars annually which will equate to a net the business valued at 2 trillion So though that numerical fluency that that the base numeracy that people... I'd say... People talk about what's the modern numeracy. I don't think there is a modern numeracy, because it doesn't exist. Modern numeracy is the modern numeracy, if that makes sense, because we very rarely ever think in numbers.

There's a result. It seems there that you're deciding the direction of where you're going to lay some paving with that value. You can't hit the number that you want. And all of the other stuff, the taste, the marketing, everything else. That's the traffic signs, that's the road markings, that's the particular way that you manage the traffic. But in terms of road, this is what we need to hit, this is what we're starting, that's

where we need to finish. How can we apply that to something which is a little bit less abstract, so that a billion trillion dollar drinks brand? So, well, there's a good example. One of my favorite ones that, again, it's so easy to know, there's things that sometimes hard to tell,

because you just catch yourself your own bullshit. Keith Roboi, who, I think he's taken more companies public than anybody ever. He's part of the PayPal Mafia. I think he was involved at YouTube, LinkedIn, Square, a lot of companies, really good follow on Twitter. And he did a talk at Stanford called How to Operate. And he says the biggest thing with like elite level CEOs that he does like the biggest breakthrough exercises He'll say what's like your priorities at the minute and they'll say Number one priority is recruitment number two priority is sort of marketing and sales and then number three is XYZ and he goes of course he gets them to write their priorities down

And then he gets them to track their time for a week and then at the end of the week Goes through and just purely like a numerical basis, it goes, so recruitment was your number one priority, yet 5% of your time was allocated to that. So I think even time just as a way of measuring things is something that you very, very rarely use. How would you class the model that we're talking about here? So, I mean, how you describe as a model is just basic numeracy, like basic arithmetic,

like taking principles from mathematics and applying it, because so few people apply basic arithmetic. And I find that when I chat to people who are starting brands online, the biggest difference is that there's always one person who uses basic numeracy. And if they don't, if there's not one there, it never works. It's guaranteed to fail. Because it makes sense because of that is if you're trying to build a successful business, it's underpinned by numbers. And if you don't even look at the fucking numbers, you may get a few edge cases where it's a Kylie Jenner,

but even then I imagine she's got a guy or a girl who's crunchy the numbers. Yeah, what's next? Oh, we got this. So then just moving through that, he then talks about like operant and classical conditioning. So if you was looking at, you just says how you could explain Coca-Cola.

So you've gone through the numerous, you've gone through the no brain questions, and then let's look at the operand slash classical conditioning that you use. So number one from an opera conditioning, which is basically rewarding people for behaviors, and then classical conditioning is sort of Pavlov's doc. So when they associate a certain thing.

So what's fascinating when like looking at Pavlovian conditioning, he talks about why, and this is interesting, he says, you should not let anybody have the name Cola because as soon as you do, you lose that association with you all brand. So other people can start having it. They can hop on your classical conditioning and it's, he doesn't numerous points in here that Coca-Cola broke and how they almost ruined it. So another example is when Coca-Cola changed their how they almost ruined it. So, another example

is when Coca-Cola changed their recipe and he's Charlie Mungolotti shit about it, I think. And he was almost killed the company he argues. And so the two things you can't do in the speech looking at it from classical conditioning is one, let anybody have to trade Mark Coca-Cola, which is why they enforce it so hard. But even then you got that roller- collar and you've got all these not popular. And you've got, I think the damage that's done to their business model is huge. And then changing the recipe, like a recipe that people have built up and associated over the years of having this reward,

having this reward, the damage that can do. And then you understand how interesting, slash nuanced Coca-Cola as businesses by a classical conditioning. So they used, he talks about in the speech of, you want something that never has a negative feedback loop, you want some of it that can never have negative classical conditioning. So with a good example of that, or maybe even negative operant conditioning is, you start drinking the drink and the more you drink it, the more sick you get of the drink.

But cola removes all sort of taste memories, built to remove all taste memory, so people can drink it like water and just keep ingesting it, keep ingesting it. So that's part of one of these principles for how it can become so big, is that you can never get sort of a negative operand conditioning loop going or a negative classical conditioning loop going.

So it's just constant, positive reinforcement. And then you break down, okay, using classical conditioning, using operand conditioning, do we go for a hot drink, or do we go for a cold drink? And he basically looks at the world, going back to numbers, looks at the world and says, it's much easier to provide something that cools people down.

Therefore, go for a cold drink because on average, people want something that calls them down, rather than heats them up. And the people will drink Coca-Cola in the morning. But hot drinks, people tend to at certain periods, whereas the cooling effect, people then associate, so when you're hot and you drink Coca-Cola, you have that cooling effect, you associate with something positive. So it's just fascinating that seeing all these principles intertwine and it even gives examples with the trademark and with the, the almost changing the recipe as ways where Coca-Cola almost fucked up, but their business

model is so good based on these mental models and these principles there, they're still getting their slash have got there. Do you think how much of this do you think was thought through and how much of it is emergence and look? Good question. Well, he argues that you could have thought it through. And I guess that's why you've asked the talking shit out there. He is post-rocketing the shit about, but's basically arguing is, is these elementary principles still exist?

So even now, like let's say for example, you're sitting down and trying to come up with certain ideas, using those fundamentals will still be incredibly, but whether you can come up with Coca-Cola, obviously there's so much luck involved. And this, I mean, you've got to go through the whole talk and you see how much nuance there is to the way he's thinking about it, but I would say those elementary principles of mathematics, stuff

like that you shouldn't avoid. He's saying like, we should always avoid letting people have our trademark, letting people do this. Classical conditioning, operant condition. If you actually then begin to look at so many different brands, you just see these fundamental principles beneath them. One of the interesting stories that I had about Coca-Cola was, I remember the world's first portable water distillation unit. It was about three times the size of a refrigerator. And they were trying to look at different ways to get clean water, it was this philanthropist

guy, engineer. And they were looking at different ways to get it to people and they were trying to look at different ways to get clean water, which is the philanthropist guy, engineer. And they were looking at different ways to get it to people and they were thinking like, how on earth are we supposed to deliver something like this, of this size, to the back waters of Africa, to places where there's no roads? And as they're there, they're sat outside of a little kiosk cafe, you know, like a classic sort of, uh, third world cafe type thing. It's just plastic chairs and they're looked and

it's got Coca-Cola branding above it. Now, like Coca-Cola has access to give people Coke where they can't get clean water. And that really is just notoriety. It's interesting when you think about that when you really zoom out, you realize that the world isn't notoriety. It's interesting when you think about that, when you really zoom out, you realize that the world isn't that big. It's massive for an individual perspective, but from a market perspective, like there's only one Coca-Cola. Pepsi are also big and there's other drinks brands

that are large like Red Bull and stuff, but no one's Coca-Cola. And there's only seven billion people. There's no room for another Coca-Cola until you kill that one off. You couldn't have two running in parallel, but you could imagine another universe in which there's an earth with 35 billion people on.

Is there room for competition that you know what I mean? But yeah, that's interesting. One of the mental models that we haven't spoken about yet is anchoring. Yeah. And I'm a about yet is anchoring. Yeah. And I'm a big fan of anchoring. And I was reading, not long ago, about, it was from Rob Henderson's newsletter, about how people can use anchoring to get laid.

So, can you explain what anchoring is first? And then I'll, anchoring, we, I think we mentioned it the other day when we was chatting actually like this example. Oh yeah, in business negotiation of sort of almost stating a certain, I frankly Trump says it's not in the art of the deal. So he'll state like a price that's super high to begin with, which means that then when he, let's say for example, he wants five million, he will state 10 million, because now he's anchored them around 10 million. So when they barged down to 5 million his actual price he's anchored it to this 10 that they feel like they've got a deal

But he's got what he wanted where as he became in at 5 maybe they'd say one because you realize a lot of these negotiations That he's just people put in their finger in the air and then I mean that's high-spite I just like fork on the idea is this idea of like reflex reflexivity and how much, do you know what reflexivity is? The model there. I think George Soros, I used to like obviously the huge, people go mental about it. He's the guy behind everything bad, isn't he? He is Alex Jones, he's arch nemesis right?

In Alex Jones's head. Maybe he isn't the real one as well, right? I don't know. So, but he has a very good essay on reflexivity. And the best example I got from reflexivity is, I said you have two standup comedians. You have one standup comedian that tells a joke, another standup comedian that tells a joke.

I saw him as the parallel universe. One where he immediately apologizes for the joke afterwards, gonna, I'm sorry, I shouldn't have said that. And the other one who just kind of laughs it through and moves on to the next one, Dave Shapel style, even though they taught the exact same joke, and they're the exact same person, the exact same environment, the exact same crowd, how they react to it influences the way the crowd reacts, and you can then see that a lot. So I found that, like if I have a

friend who's, let's say they're broken up with somebody and they're like really depressed about it then I then like I start reacting to that if that makes sense and then I'm like thinking about them more but if they're just like super you just kind of constantly looking at other people's facial expressions yeah so that's more like a psychological mimetic anchoring exactly in body language body language. That's really interesting. I haven't even thought about that. But my favorite example of anchoring is that everyone that owns a restaurant should have quite high price, platter, as one of the first things that people see when they look

on the menu. So some sort of special appetizer sharing platter deal thing at the top. And if you say that that's 45 pounds, the starter that 11 quid but should be eight, actually looks like a great deal. So there's a famous example from the economist that many people listening may be familiar with where they play around with prices and you see

by changing nothing other than the anchor, you can increase the value of the customer by like 50% which is mad. And the example that Rob Henderson gave, which again is a psychology one I suppose, is you can use anchoring to look more attractive when you're going out dating. So what you want to do his argument is, is find a friend that looks kind of similar to you. What is uglier? is find a friend that looks kind of similar to you. What is uglier? And the reason for that is that people will use that way.

That's what you're saying, Robert Maynard. Yeah. They will look at them and you as within the same lead. You know, like if someone was to say, this is how much the appetizer is, but that car over there is worth this much money. That kind of doesn't really work. You're not anchoring within the same category. So if you go out with an Asian friend who's like any pick your attractiveness level,

it's like, why can't you don't like Asian? Like, so there's no point in doing it. So yes, if you want to get laid, find a friend who looks a bit like you, but is uglier, and you can do that. And also, I've got some buddies, and I'm sure that you find attractive is that so like my issue with that is My crowd would be like the busted Lie side of things. Yeah, it's not it's not my not my tiger. Yeah, no Interesting. We've got next power loss. So I wanted to get this up hand-wise on my phone just then so power loss comes from statistics and I'm not going to try and go through the actual like a quage inside of things but a power law essentially

is kind of like the way you can explain monopolies that basically was the line from the the film where it's like first prize is a like first prize is a, what is it? It's first prize is a car of some sort. Second prize is a set of steak knives. Third prize you've fired. So Facebook's a good example of that, but basically a power law is something where the more you win, the more you win. So it's like a non-linear relationship. So for example, the best example of a power law

I've found is all the, you see it now to some extent like all the wealth, like look at Jeff Bezos as a power lot, like the more wealthy house, the more wealth he's getting, you can easily end up with scenario where Jeff Bezos has like 50% of the world, right? Because he just keeps compounding year after year and he's compounding on the compounding. So who can keep up? And like a weird nuance once I've done a lot, previously in social media and different brands, marketing, etc. And you'll see with social media managers, I have this thing where 95% of them shouldn't get paid. They're useless. They don't add any value. If anything

sometimes they're just taking up your payroll, they're posting that on Instagram posts that nobody fucking sees, apart from them and you. It's just useless, but for like 5% of the social media managers, or maybe 1% of the social media managers, we saw one recently with Tesco where it was like saying, if you can quote tweet this and get zero likes, we'll give you a free meal. And obviously everybody's trying to quote it, can't do it. When we checked yesterday after about 12 hours, I think it was on 130,000 quote tweets. Exactly, so this is what, and then you think about the individual behind that,

the value that they provide, they should probably get a 10x raise in that salary. So all the distribution goes right towards the end of the scale, if that makes sense. So that's what a power law is. And it's very interesting that the higher up you get, the more the rewards are. So even if you look at that sport like the UFC, like the difference on salary between Connoble Greger and somebody 10 places down from him is so astronomical. But the difference in skill actually isn't that high.

But it's high but it's fascinating to see how these power laws play out this why in Silicon Valley they always talk about how can you get a monopoly because you get a monopoly you earn the world basically. How can people utilize that? Is it just a case of moving quickly? That's a good question. I would say one probably do something that it's hard to get like specific advice for everybody without having so much nuance to their their situation but I think from a power up perspective of finding out what you sort of super unique to you and then doubling down on that because you if you you come to one percent of something the returns are so so great and so high that that's where I think the focus should probably be like. I think that makes sense we were talking about this the other

day that the difference between the person that comes first in the 100 meters and everybody else in terms of effort. Actual time is not a lot but in terms of impact is an awful lot. And when you get to the far-flung reaches of performance, we spoke about Coca-Cola. But once you've got that distribution network, you compound and compounding. So yeah, I like,

well, you've got to think that they can get, a few of models of they can get, more network effects, so more and more people, the more word of mouth marketing you have, the more word of mouth marketing you have, the more word of mouth marketing you get, the more Coca-Cola bottles you can produce, the cheaper your margins get,

so as soon as those parallels being into kick in, you can get cheaper advertising, cheaper products, higher quality models, like everything, everything, and it's just nobody can keep up with that stage. Do you think that there's a... There is a challenge in a society where we're trying to bring up people, we're trying to have more, not,

we're trying to have fewer have-nots and everybody be part of the haves. Is there an issue with that, with how laws, because inevitably you're going to end up with winners and Everybody else. Well, I was hearing Alex Beck of YouTube were talking about he's very sort of the battalion very entrepreneurial And he was like saying fucking hate Jeff Bezos because he's gonna create a scenario where the rest of the world Extremely resent the rich because if you actually if you look at his style He's obviously not paying any tax. He's got round that and you're gonna have a build up of people

Really hating him, but he's untouchable. I try and get Jeff Bezos. He's got everything around him He's got arm guard and can't get near him So the end up going for the moderately rich, which is where he is, right? And that's where he's based off Avatar Exactly, so and that's who gets screwed with tax that's who gets screwed with everything else. So Yeah, it's a fascinating argument of where government should intervene versus where they shouldn't intervene like the whole libertarian debate versus the sort of Keynesian debate.

It's a fascinating, even now like you, I think you look at, I thought a lot about this, you because of COVID and everything else that's in there to be happening. Even if you don't fully buy into the whole AI debate, there's obviously going to be some jobs that are automated. And for me, I'd be fascinated to see, again, I don't know the numbers, I'm probably going void on my previous point, but if the government offered a stimulus right now to, let's say you took the top 50 job shortages, software engineering, UX engineering, everything that's going to be very, very future-proofed, and there's going to be more demand for it in the future, and offering a stimulus for people to drop out of their current job to retrain for a

year or 18 months and pay them and pay the company to do it. Of course, there's a hit in terms of taxpayer money there, but the value to that economy over time would be, I wouldn't it, if one country did that, would they be the world's leading economy 30 years from now? Because right now, let's say for example, you're doing a regular job that may get automated soon. If you want to drop out and become a UX engineer, you've got to do it in your own time, take huge financial risks. And that, as soon as you get to a certain age, that's just almost unfathomable for most people. So offering that pre-built in would be very, very interesting. Do you

think Amazon should be broken up? Is it too big? Fuck no, it's like I think one of the fascinating ones is sort of John, John Rockefeller's biography and you begin to learn about that, how they they broke up his businesses. I think because of the parallel distribution they're gonna end up where they own everything but what's interesting from this Charlie talk? He says when you go through the inversion list, one of the things that stuff you should avoid is to avoid envy. And he says the psychology textbooks, if you go through them, there's nothing on envy, which is crazy because in the Bible it's like one of the first things

that I've shown on envy and how big of a thing envy is. And he says the way to kind of get around envy is to deserve it. So people are a lot less resentful if you have like a wall class quality product. So he says, in here, we've so much success coming. So when he's talking about Coca-Cola thing, we must avoid bad effects from envy, giving a prominent place in the 10 commandments because envy is so much a part of human nature. The best way to avoid envy recognized by Aristotle is to plainly deserve the success we get. Therefore, we will be fanatic about product quality, quality of product presentation and reasonfulness of prices, considering the harmless pleasure it will provide. And Amazon have kind of done that. So they still get a lot of envy, a lot

of resentment, a lot of hatred, but nobody's boycotting them. And people from people who are messaging off funds charged by why is they bought on Amazon? Exactly. And then they're going on to Twitter or they're going on to Instagram complaining about it on an AWS server. Right? So that's the thing about Amazon. Everybody I know who resent Amazon for the tax adder things and how much they're monopolizing everything still uses them. So it's kind of, yeah, I don't know, it's a very interesting question. I've watched, we both have watched some interesting Amazon documentaries over the last few months. And I started to see just how beastly that operation is. And he realized that there's probably going to come a point

pretty soon where that growth and the amount of impact that they have, especially when they start to ramp up automated delivery, perhaps with drones or with driverless cars, that you'd be able to do that one hour delivery, remote warehouse to customer without anyone intervening. you'd be able to do like one hour delivery, remote, warehouse to customer without anyone intervening. Well, the craziest thing about Amazon is that AWS was or it still is profitable,

as profitable or more profitable than Amazon. And nobody really knows what AWS is. So that's another business that's Amazon Web Service. Amazon Web Service. So anybody almost let Netflix, for Amazon Web Service? Amazon Web Service. So anybody, almost like Netflix, for example, will use Amazon Web Service. So you can imagine the amount of bandwidth

that they flow through, right? And that's basically what's fascinating about Basel's is very similar to Musk, in the sense that I think people can get so complex with it. I understand why. But, and obviously these two adgenious is that not everybody can imitate or mimic, but he has one galloping principle

that every decision goes through. So for Bezos, it's just, we just care about the customer. That's what, if it can enhance the customer experience, let's do it. The basic, if you look at every decision Amazon make, if you go back through the book, the everything store, every decision he makes is more this enhanced the customer experience. Rather than like profit margin, it's just long-term, long-term, long-term.

More this enhanced the customer experience. So, he says this example of 10 years from now, will people say to me, I won, slow deliveries and a higher cost. He's like, no, nobody's ever going to say that to me. They're always going to say, I love the fact thaties and a higher cost. And he's like, no, nobody's ever gonna say that to me. They're always gonna say, I love the fact that it's a right next day, I love how cheap it is therefore I double down on that.

And then Elon Musk, there's an interview on Lex Friedman show where I forgot who it is that worked with him and he said that Elon Musk, for as complex as an individual as he is as intelligent he is and how much he understands. Every decision goes through, will this get me nearer to Mars or not? Yes or no? And it's very like crazy how somebody is complex,

sophisticated, new, what's as that, has just one guiding thing that shapes every single decision, whereas a lot of us are like, oh, I've got this part of my life, I've got this part of my life, I've got this interest, I've got this, whereas for those two at the scale, they're right, the be assuming you have to make it just, will this enhance customer experience or will this get me nearer to Mars? Yes or no? What it makes for when you've got a chaotic world with an awful lot of different decisions, you need a simple guiding principle. And I wonder whether

in a world with far too much stimulation, people with poorly defined goals, goals that they've adopted from their family, from their culture, from what they think they should want, it's not surprising that people struggle with decision-making, because the single guiding principle that they have isn't theirs, and there's 40 of them. Yeah, they have, they're being pulled in a million different directions which comes back to direction of a speed, right? Or just have a direct, before you even think about speed, just get a direction. And yeah, that's a, that's a really interesting insight. I wonder how people can try and find a guiding principle in their

life. It's too tried to say, just do what makes you happy. You just sit and masturbate at home all day. Maybe that's your guiding principle, right? Fantastic, that we work. What else have you got? Any others? So this is what I've made up.

I don't think we've been through it before. We may have done. So it's called Opportunity Cost Blindness. So OCB, play on sort of OCD, where this is really hard to explain about experiencing it, but just how blind we are to the amount of opportunity cost there is. So often when I found, I mean, I've not had that many relationships,

but when you're in a relationship, it's either them or single them or single them or single. And it's so hard to actually realize that it's them or single or 8 billion of people, you know, it's so, but it's so hard to know that up to you. It's same with jobs that will, will those people where they're miserable in a job and it's either, okay, job or leave job and unemployed job or leave job, so there's only one opportunity cost but they forget how much there is because they have a lot of large numbers I think we really struggle, or I really struggle to just comprehend how much else exists

and you can only see the options that are available to you and you only realize that in hindsight when you're fucking house, like in this job for four years, and I was like having this argument with my boss every single day in the shower. How much, now I'm in this other opportunity, you know, how laughable that was, and how serious I took that,

because you don't even comprehend the amount of opportunity out there. So I think almost having a filter of, I right now do not, I've got such opportunity cost blindness, I cannot even fathom how much opportunity there is out there. And to start from that base level filter, it's probably a smart thing to do, which is tough, it's very tough.

It's really shurying. You know, when you've got a difficult decision in front of you, but how many times have people obsessed over what they're going to, I don't know, I'm scared about breaking up with the relationship that I know is wrong or leaving a job that I don't enjoy or moving to a new city or retraining, starting etiquette, whatever it might be. And then as soon as you do, you realize, I'll hang on. Like there's so many more paths down here. I just thought it was this or that. For instance, our trip away to Dubai. We decided to take a trip away and like, oh god, I don't know whether I should go, there's all of this stuff and you meet a

little bit of resistance. But once you overcome that initial inertia, you realise once you're out here that the one thing that you had written as go to Dubai during lockdown actually consists of a million different other routes that are in there. So yeah, we certainly bundled together blocks of opportunities into individual sections which can make for a more simplistic worldview in a way that blinds us. Well, I think even I was trying to get a call at Adam Townsend on Twitter and he's got some fantastic stuff on this and he talks about how like we're so addicted to work. Like you almost get over that he said I just need to take three months out and you just completely realise like there's just so much more there but you need the time and the

space and often the different opportunities like since we're now here, we were just saying how you're just in a different news cycle. You didn't realize that you're constantly, this news cycle is just in your software, just running all the time. It's just, I don't know about you, but when you have like dodgy software on your laptop, and you only read those, you've got loads of it. It perks the dark web.

So you've got all these dodgy, and it's just eat in your bandwidth, but you don't know it until you're out of it. And I do think there's so much opportunity cos blindness there, even if you can pre-build in like, okay, I'm not sure if I want to break up with somebody. Let's just do like three weeks over here with my, and building these AB tests.

So like, okay, if I try this, what happens here? If I try this, what happens here? Scotland has this hilarious bit of, I fucking love Scott Adams. He says in his book, the mistake people make of seeking jobs is they wait until they're unhappy in their job to seek it. And the odds of the perfect job existing when you're ready for it, he's actually quite slim.

So he says as soon as, you should always be looking at new jobs, like just scheduling like a day or weeks to just go is a new job, is scheduling like a day or weeks to just go, is there a new job? And does it pay better, does it have all this? Because you know what, the perfect job for you might be within two months of starting this job. And he says that that's the key

that got him up the corporate ladder before he went off into cartooning. He would just constantly be, what's the best paying job or what's the best ROI for me personally. And not wait until they're unhappy. Because it's so true that people will wait three, four years and they go right. I'm at breaking point. So psychologically they're done and now you're

searching for new jobs and you've got two-week windows to do it. And the chances of that two-week window being perfect for you is going to be slim. Isn't it interesting how we map our model of relationships onto jobs. So in relationship, it would be frowned upon to still be flicking through tender and hinge whilst you're in relationship. Because, well, if this goes wrong, I, what, what if something better comes on?

You can't really do that. And I think people treat their jobs, the level of loyalty that they have to their job. In a way like that, and I'm not sure because it's a business owner I want my employees to be loyal, but as a growth minded individual, I want everybody to maximise their happiness and utility. And I think if you're a boss, it's probably not a bad idea for your staff not to be doing that because you turn over, it's going to be significantly lower. But as a human, I think, yeah, that makes a lot of sense. We'll be able to get that sort of the principal agent problem, which I guess another mental

model of, how do you get agents to act like a principal? How do you get them to different? Well, a principal is somebody who sort of owns it and has direct skin in the game by the performance of the thing and has so much care over it. So somebody who owns the business, if it performs, they make more money, if it doesn't, they lose a lot of money. Whereas an agent could just be somebody who's nine to five on the clock, I get paid,

regardless of performance pretty much, I just gotta do the bare minimum to get away with it. And being able to, how do you shift agents to principles? I think Nebalt says he works with like, he always wants to work with one person. So rather than working with like a huge agency, it's like how can I just work with one person? Because they're direct and responsible.

It's so much more difficult to sort of shriek responsibility, whereas there's 10 people in the room, it's like, that's might be that bits, that guy's job, that bits, that. So it means the total thing, the outcome of it. There's a lot of agents who like don't really have any personal ownership over it whereas if I'm working directly with Chris and it fails, it's Chris's fault and if it succeeds, it's Chris's success. So it has been able to solve that principle which is why so many

startups give equity. I've seen people who, even though the equity game, yeah, there may be a few percent of them win. Like 95, 99 never make anything. People who will justify working are crazy out because they have one percent of the business. So being able to pivot that to a principal mindset is a very interesting thing. What mental model do you wish that more of your friends and family knew?

I don't know, I don't. I wouldn't wanna put something on the friends and family. I guess it's inversion, so. Stop hanging out with me. No, I don't. I don't know. Ha, ha, ha.

Yeah, so that's some really tough one. I guess it's so, that's the issue I have with, even like a lot of podcasts and a lot of advices, it's just so fucking nuanced and so subjective to the individual. And I think you've seen this with Dieter as now, right? I know people who have knots and they die, right? Johnny. Johnny, yeah. Shout out to Johnny, whereas I have knots and I'm fine, it's like,

so then to have like one or, which one kind of meant I'm one or something, you can take different things from it, you can just just put in an apply it. But what is like, you should do X or you should 10X, right? I just think that's Bollocks, because it's so subjective and nuanced the individual. I think we chat about this previously, like, even the word entrepreneur, I have an issue with it, because there's so much microcosms within entrepreneurship. Joe Rogan is so different to Jeff Bezos. If you put Jeff Bezos in Joe Rogan's shoes with flop, if you put Joe Rogan in Jeff Bezos

shoes it would win, but we're told these two people are still entrepreneurs. For me it feels like it's so different. There's so much subjectivity out in the world that I think the only thing when it comes to advice is to look at again the fundamental principles, the fundamental foundations. So Gary Vee has that, the dirt and the clouds, the clouds are these big mental models, and the dirt is so specific and tactical to your field. That something like me going, chatting to a machine learning engineer or chatting to somebody in physical retail, it's just a bot like, yeah, there's a few overlying principles that may help that compound interest, power laws.

But there's so much subjectivity to each individual that I think is so neglected by self improvement in the self-help sector, because it's as nuanced as your diet, as nuanced as your genetic code, I think. Yeah, what everybody's trying to do is find a commonality that Permits one piece of advice to fit many like one size fits all

Advice right, but I would say I certainly think that a lot of my friends and family would do with Contrast like I think I think there's very few people Why do I talk about myself? I can always feel that as soon as I talk about somebody else, you don't know them as well as yourself. Whereas at least I know me very well. And I think that you can easily be in a situation where you give other people advice, and you're just so detached from it, you see it like so much online,

I just think it's a bit. What mental model do you wish that you could implement? Oh, that's a bad question. Um, leverage. Leverage, Because I'm a work colleague by trade like, like, so like my, and I was like, 11, my dad bent me up and do 10 kick up to the football. I then spend five years training five hours a day doing kick up to the football. It was a great 10 to do 10. I got a lot better.

So I started that game like there's a little mini job when I was young. But that taught me that power of working hard and growth, my insects. It was super valuable in that aspect. But it also means that I will then try and do a hundred responsibilities, and I won't understand necessarily the power of leverage as much. So having more people working for you, having more code, working for you, having more media working for you, having more media working for you is a

An unbelievable tool that I'm only beginning to wrap my head around What was that quote that you gave me about like lazy people make the best employees because they'll find shortcuts to do work Exactly. So you that that's the like I've said this before if I could you know what to talk about friends and family, I wouldn't give them any advice or that's how to think so. So, new words to them. The only thing I'd say is, get working knowledge of Zapier. Because if you have a shape, if you have, and the reason why it's because of leverage in your own, I think Zapier, if you, again, going back to government stimulus, if Zapier said we will pay for your five-day leave to learn Zapier, if the government said that, the value to the economy would be up. The amount of people who

right now are going on emails, copying something, putting it in a Google Sheet, or going from a Facebook garden, putting it into a different document, all Zapier is, is every major app connected. And this isn't a sponsorship, by the way, I'll do this before I connect it. I genuinely think, if you talk people about no code skill, the ability to automate things and almost become like a developer of 18 months in like a space of three days, the productivity for the economy would be amazing. And the first time you have a Zapier thing

that works for you and you can just see this flowing. Like now I've got Zap's running. It's the best thing ever, I know once our chat's done, it's gonna have taken a hundred people from different Facebook ads And it's already automated and sent them an email. Whereas previously I'd have to go and get the CSV send that so Zaferia for me in terms of an apply mental model of leverage is the best thing for somebody who can't code That's interesting. That is really really interesting. I That is really, really interesting. I like, I was taught this by my first ever boss of events company, is outsourcing.

I know that Navalza, a big fan of if something costs you less than your hourly rate to do it, then either outsource it or just throw it away. Yeah, that's a great nuance point. If it's the hourly rate to everything, but sometimes I will see it with certain businesses that I work with, where they outsource too much, and then they become, they become foreign to it, and they just trust people who say their experts are there. Like one of the best D2C guys I've met

was Gaggot Danny Book on Twitter. He said to me, he went into direct to consumer and decided to do all the ads himself. Obviously he outsourced like learning and he does hire consultants to come in and train them, but he said this is the most fundamental part of the business, I'm not outsourcing it, or as I've seen so many other businesses just like, this is the most fundamental part of our business, boom, pass it over there. So it's really interesting like how that balance between outsourcing, but also how do you not get bullshit by the people you've outsourced

to. So you almost need enough base level knowledge. And maybe that's like, applying mental models for like knowing basic numeracy. So when they say certain things to you, you can check things off. But that's an issue that Charlie talks about, that you need this fundamental mental model in place, because if you do outsource,

you need to be able to have enough knowledge of that field to be able to call bullshit. Otherwise, you can just, somebody can sound smart and just trick you. I wonder how many people lie on the side of the spectrum where they outsource too much versus how many lie on the side of the spectrum where they do too much. I would say based on my experience more people are on the latter and that might be a selection effect from the type of friends that I've got, but worker-holics, people from a classic working-class background, they will tend to look to save money

where they can. And on top of that, I think the neuroticism that you have, the fear of something not being done correctly, and the time investment it takes to teach someone how to be George Mac. .X. Like writing that manifesto tough is such a huge hurdle to overcome. And you think, right, okay, I could do that and automate my life, but I'd have to take three months off of my life to do that. And I see so commonly in business, like one of the most frequent bits of advice that I give people is you should not be doing that. That's not your job. That was your job seven months ago or seven years ago.

And for some reason, you're still doing, you're still replying to the Instagram DMs. Or you're still dealing with the level two customer inquiries over email. The first person that it gets up level two is you after the person that deals with the customer. Like no, that's not your job. Was there a one specific thing for you where you maybe held on for too long and then delegated it and he was like,

oh my god, I can't believe how good this is. Everything in my business. Any specific was there one thing where it clicked and he was like, so the main one, the most stupid thing that I used to do was set up the nightclub on a Saturday morning so I didn't miss Saturday at my first weekly event Voodoo for 204 weeks or just shy of four years and the only reason I missed like the 205th was because I had a chest infection that had me bed-bat like strapped to the bed, bed bound

other than that hung over fresh, ill, what every different iteration of life for four years, I was there outside the same club for four years. Now, I used to spend my Saturday morning into afternoon 11 till two or three setting up the club. And that was just hanging up in Flatables And you only's ever been to a nightclub and notice the extra decor most of that make sure the decks are right do a sound check Peace up you could have paid a couple of students 30 quid each

They would have got more value out of it because they need to 30 quid more than I need to lose three hours of my time and I would have Retained because we're working every night as well But for some reason I was terrified that the cable ties were going to be put on wrongly. Oh well if the cable tie isn't that way and it came from a catastrophic mindset that I presumed if the cable ties were on wrong that would be the beginning of the avalanche that collapsed the business. It's born out of working in an industry which is very fickle, very, very fast moving. Everyone knows what it's like.

The cool spot to go to last week is nobody even goes there. It's like COVID just hits one venue at once and everybody dissipates. And that creates a level of ambient anxiety that pervades through the source code of the industry. that pervades through the source code of the industry and that was maybe made worse by my own personality and When all of that got pilot together. Yeah, I struggled to let go of so much sort of setting up the venue Was one of them doing the accounts was another one. I didn't need to sit and watch the accounts. Oh my god Here's another one. So we used to have the way that the guest list was set up for our events.

I used to take the plus number. So George Mack plus three. I used to take the plus number and put it in another column. Why? Why on earth? Like, I don't need a fully justified number column. It makes no difference between seen by one guy in the front door. And that guy's me. But I don't need to do this but I would take and get this list with 300 names, 400 names, doing 1500 people a night. And I would be going through, I wouldn't have done a macro for it, I wouldn't have like automated it, I would do it manually and it took until that one day and I was like, what am I doing? So that very much I think is sweating the small stuff and obsessing over things without perspective, one of the problems of being an entrepreneur or a business

person, someone that has a hobby that you care about, is when you're this close to it, when you are in the dirt, very hard to get perspective and look at where should I be, where am I adding the most value, right? Opportunity cost blindness, again, isn't it? Really, you don't have the ability to step out. I know it's interesting that the reason why,

it always happens to you, it's because you said you want you in the open hospital, you got got ill it's crazy that you get to the stage Well imagine if that never happened you probably still be doing it right before you probably wouldn't be here right now like for it's it's weird It's very well, so maybe the the new ones between what I'm saying up don't delegate too much what you're saying people need to delegate more is And there's that I think I don't know if it's parish on a ballot who but If it involves judgment or creativity, or at least the highest priority thing, then I have 100% obsessive ownership over it. And if it's something that doesn't involve that, if it's just like manual task or stuff

that you can train somebody for, then outside or something, immediately. One of the things I've been thinking about a lot this year is mental masturbation. So I think people who enjoy the mental models world can often become too cerebral around finding their solutions for it. You can think that all the answers to your questions just lie at the bottom of being able to recite poor Charlie's Almanac. And that's the compliance and the ability to deploy that actually makes all of the difference. It is multiplying by zero if you're not able to do it. So how can people that are listening, perhaps,

fourth episode deep in this particular series, have you got any ways that you ensure that you don't just mentally jerk off with this sort of stuff and that you actually try and apply it. So hard again without knowing like, but how do you do those objectives? It's a good question. I definitely, I've got a lot better at it. I think it's much easier when you've committed to certain things and then there's people that hold you accountable to them. So if it's just you working on a project, it's much harder.

But I think as soon as you're like quite public of that you're working at something or you've got a partner to be working on something or you've got employees, you have to do it for. Then, I don't know, you can't just go like, all right guys, I want to turn up some money morning meeting because I'm gonna go and read for five hours. You've got to then maybe schedule you're reading for a certain time

and then you have to execute. So I think that's great. And then I think going back to numbers as well, I think you just can't treat numbers. So if for example You I guess you'll know this better than me but my the gym side of things you can't treat the numbers So if the numbers aren't changing are you whatever your metric is whatever you decide on is your metrics Whoever that's money or whether that's I don't know weights lifting the or whatever it's calories consumed or whether it's a number of times I'm seeing my parents. Revenue.

Whatever you can basically, I know this sounds very like people feel that you can sometimes over quantify life, I'd say, on the most part people don't do it enough. So if you quantify things and it doesn't improve, start changing variables, and I think that's it. Again, the whole thing about that answer there, like the whole mental masturbation, if you then start mentally masturbating over the answer, it's just a fucking, it's just a random answer.

I'm still on a thing. So I think get a number of a thing that you want to change and throw variables in. Does it change if not why change a variable again? And just keep doing that, and then just keep a track of that number. So it's very simple. Has the revenue gone up?

Has my time spent on this activity gone up? Has my e-load score at chess.com gone up? Yeah, has it? It has indeed. Nice, nice. At right, we are going to play a game of bull or bear. Okay. And bull or bear is something we've been doing

in our WhatsApp chat for a little while, which is where one of the guys will post anything and everyone will reply with an emoji ball on there. So you can play long at home. Ball or bear, faith in the voting system. Oh, look, faith in the voting system. So all that's really hub. I'm bear on the way it currently is,

but I'm ball on the way, my way, it's where it's just. What's your solution? So, I thought about this. Talk about an elephant in the room. 2020 will be remembered as the year where pens and paper were redundant unless it was deciding the most powerful person in the world.

Or people counting numbers repetitively on low wage jobs were redundant unless it was deciding the election. And imagine if you go to your bank, I know, let's say you have 20,000 pounds in your bank, bank, and let's say you have 20,000 pounds in your bank, let's say you have 10,000 pounds in your bank, and you go, how much money do I have in my bank, rather than having it automated by computers and robots doing it for you. It's a guy in the back room who goes, right, give me a, give me overnight, and he goes there, pound coin by pound coin, going, oh, one pound, one pound, one pound,

oh, 10P, 10P, 1010, and he comes back with that number. That number will be false. There's no way about that, whether you're a Trump founder, Biden founder, whoever you, whatever country you're from, having the system of people counting things, and it being done via pen and paper, he's fucking looted by it. It's, it's, no matter your side, it is wrong. It, like, the number will be wrong. Yeah.

Because when the only reason, the only reason it could be right is by the errors on one side, fixing the errors on another. Like if you somehow won in a billion trillion chance, they were all correct. It wouldn't be because they were accurately counted. It's because lacquered on one side. So what's your solution?

Blockchain. So it's so obvious, right? You you can just everyone has an incredible key if You submit it therefore you can go you can everybody can go back and see theirs It's stored in a blockchain nobody can interfere with it the amount of votes that will go up as a result of it Because people can do it from their smartphone rather than having to go to a polling station and catch something you can't she There's no that it's very hard for electoral electoral fraud to happen. Obviously, whether the technology is there, you have to be able to do it. The issue is very few government, they're so backwards in their thinking, but that seems inevitable. It seems so inevitable after this year that

you can't have pen and paper any, why is pen and paper so important? Why are humans still counting numbers as ridiculous? So let's say that pen and paper gets disbanded, but blockchain doesn't get brought in, are you bearish or bullish then? That's good, I mean, so if you wanna go down a rabbit hole, the best guy content is called a guy called George Hots, and he hacks into, is the first guy I think

to hack into the iPhone, the first guy to hack into the Sony Play Station, so he'll hack into anything, and he'll show examples of how easy it think to hack into the iPhone, the first guy to hack into the Sony Play Station, so you'll hack into anything, and you'll show examples of how easy it is to hack into your iPhone, just turn your camera on and start recording you. He can hack into, he shows how you can hack into cars. So if you think the government IT team,

very mind like in the UK, the government NHS is the largest buyer of facts machines in the world, how backwards they are. I reckon even I have a bit of HTML and 5 hours on code academy could probably hack into it. So I'm pretty bearish on that, unless they're being the best people in. So I still think it's going to be a shit show for a while, yeah. That's not great. Brian Rose, for London Mayor, bearable. Massive ball. Yeah, massive ball. Are you? Are you really? I don't know. I think it's the favourite. I know you're probably a bit...

I don't really have a opinion. I'd probably say, can you 2020 for bearable? Bear, because if you could win Republic on a Democrat, then I'm a bit bald, because they might do a tron, but I think you'll have to be independent. I just don't see that happening any time soon. Yeah, the thing about Kanye is that going on Rogan and getting asked hard questions and then sitting in silence for 30 seconds, like so many people are seduced by artistic capacity in one domain and presuming that it means genius across the mall. It's like there's not that many polymaths out there and

they're kind of like bizarrely they're quite easy to spot like you hear Eric speak and you're like yeah yeah yeah. He'll move seamlessly from cephalopods to classical Latin music to like complex physics to whatever Stephen Wolfram. He'll hear him move between crazy different areas it comes back to that kind of blagging it mentality. Fashion's very easy to blag as well, like fashion is filled on the trouble I get to get. It's full on reflectivity it's just how people react to things so yeah I listen to that

wrong thing and my mind's a pendulum of genius man man who just swit it would just switch like and so hard to say, right? It's so hard to knocky success at the same time. Peribol, sex robots. Personal or anxiety? What would it give us? I mean, probably, probably, ball I think is the way it ends up as coughs go down.

The only thing that I can see, the only thing that happens, potentially before, then is the printing viruses, I think is probably inevitable. So we'll get, okay, so you get a virtual sexually transmitted infection. No, no, no, I just think we could get, I think we could just get killed off before then.

But then again, if we do have a printed virus scenario where, so George Hotsworth, is this a nanotechnology thing? Well, that was this into George Hotsley. He does this five hour Python streamer He's just coding things and he's just like the most intense man ever and he's talking about he'll pull up Google Really fast he was how many base pairs are in the coronavirus 10,000 base pairs? He goes how much does it cost the printer base pair? It's like three dollars It costs me 30,000 dollars to put up the kind of virus could you imagine whether future technology is gonna be and he's kind of looks at the camera like that

I'm like oh fuck yeah, he's so right, isn't he? Like if the 3D printing technology is going to go down, you can access the genomes of all these things and just take the base pairs. But then again, if we all keep doing these pandemic lockdowns then sex robots are going to... Sex robots are going to go. No, one of the interesting things I read, it's Jeffrey Miller's other half, the woman who's scientist on sentientist on Twitter, and she was talking about how in a society, an increase in freely available sexual satisfaction actually turns down sexual assaults and overall aggression. And the reason for that is that most of the sexual assaults

are born out of people feeling like they can't win in the normal game, but by gaming the system, like it doesn't matter that you couldn't win in the real world, but you get to win in the fake world and that doesn't fix it, it's like, we're able to hack into our own programming so fairly easily and that's one of them. So watch a movie and see how that works, yeah. Paul does exactly the same thing. Final one, remote working for the majority of a workforce. Let's consider here before you go into it, people who need contact around others who require that

working environment. It's tough. I'm thinking about this hiring and do be higher. So on one hand, if you hire a remote, you have access to so much more talent and sometimes at a more affordable price. So I said, remote work is the best thing possible to happen to talented people in the developing world and the worst thing possible to happen to talent those people in the developed world. Because there's so many things where there's somebody in another side of the world that can do it for a quarter of the price, 10X the work ethic and 5X the brains. So I'm pretty bullish on it certainly for the developing world and the wonders it's going to do are following money out there.

But I do have concerns that for people who have talentless in the development of I've no talentless is a strong word but aren't as skilled in the developed world what that does for competitive versus income. Yeah so I think it's the pendulum's going to obviously shift a bit further back to where it was But it's never going to go back that way just because there's some people who I know that will refuse to take a job that is in an office now Really? Yeah, there's definitely people who will I think the ideal at this talk about this where like these big tech companies who are shutting down their offices and now just having like we work spaces that people can drop in do meetings But then they live around the city. I think that's probably more likely, but I said this when

all these tech companies that work in from home, I go, that's a hack, it's fucking dream. Because now you've got so many people at home, Wi-Fi, it's an Alexa device that you can hack into, and then you look at the Twitter hack that happened, they're all working from home, and it came, I remember at the time it's been definitely something that worked. You know where it came up, it was a couple kids right and but it came from I think And obviously it's the classic. They're pretending to be security and they got in that way But they said that it was way easier because of the fact that we're working from home So if you want a trillion dollar idea of cyber security for remote work

Christ Yeah, I mean what the level of security that you have that gets built into offices, that's part of the thing that people don't realize that you just presume your office is the brick walls, the air conditioning and the cafeteria downstairs, but it's not. It's all of the infrastructure that permits you to do your work in a secure way as well. The log stuff that's got cloud storage, it's constantly updating, that, you know, yeah, you're really correct, that's terrifying. There's probably some industries in which remote working just needs to. Let's not decentralize the Pentagon, you know,

let's not have the nuclear football be available on an app on like Trump or Biden's phone or something like that. Yeah man. Well look that was awesome dude, I'm so glad you're over here with me and really happy to go through this as well. I think if people are keen I reckon that we can do some much longer episodes playing bear-one get some submissions through. If you're full on bearable send the bear emoji. Yeah that's it. Where should people go? They want to check out your stuff and also what you're doing now people might want to know what something in your life gives the elevator pitch. Yeah so mainly blockchains sex robots. If you want to fire me Twitter's usually the best place I want to know a little

bit, which is George underscore underscore MACK. And then in terms of myself, primary e-commerce, D2C, HC, so paid social, Shopify builds, custom acquisition, text message, SMS, and then looking at our own products as well. So if you've got products that you want to scale, or you should have a conversation, that's not. Peace, dude, it's always a pleasure to have you here. Thank you to everybody for tuning in. Let us know about bearable.

I think it's a really cool idea, and I want to do more of them, and it's funny. And yet, we're gonna grab another coffee, a little bit of sun, do enough in the work. Looking forward to it. Peace! Oh! You're not feeling the work, looking forward to it. Peace. Oh.