Pivot - Fact checking Trump on Twitter, SpaceX privatizes space, and a Listener Mail question on mental health apps and big tech

Episode Date: May 29, 2020

Kara and Scott talk about Twitter's responsibility in fact-checking and regulating Trump tweets as they slap their first misinformation label on one of the president's tweets. They also discuss the future of a "private" space as Elon Musk prepares to launch his SpaceX rocket. Meanwhile, Amazon is having its annual shareholder meeting and some people are hoping they can push the company to be transparent about data around covid-19 deaths of warehouse workers. Plus we hear a listener mail question about whether big tech and mental health apps. This episode contains an audio clip from former Friend of Pivot Andrew Ross-Sorkin and his CNBC show "Squawkbox". Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Support for Pivot comes from Virgin Atlantic. Too many of us are so focused on getting to our destination that we forgot to embrace the journey. Well, when you fly Virgin Atlantic, that memorable trip begins right from the moment you check in. On board, you'll find everything you need to relax, recharge, or carry on working. Buy flat, private suites, fast Wi-Fi, hours of entertainment, delicious dining, and warm, welcoming service that's designed around you. delicious dining and warm, welcoming service that's designed around you. Check out virginatlantic.com for your next trip to London and beyond and see for yourself how traveling for takes forever to build a campaign. Well, that's why we built HubSpot. It's an AI-powered customer platform that builds campaigns for you,

tells you which leads are worth knowing, and makes writing blogs, creating videos, and posting on social a breeze. So now, it's easier than ever to be a marketer. Get started at HubSpot.com slash marketers. Hi, everyone. This is Pivot from the Vox Media Podcast Network. Get started at HubSpot.com slash marketers. All right. Hold on. Hold on. I mean, let's just start off with the brand. I know we have more serious issues to talk about. And that Kara Swisher's at the center of all of it, which I'm sure you hate. But anyway.

No, you know what? You're just jealous that I can make things happen. Go ahead. Go for it. But you are Anderson Cooper's boyfriend. That is. Hi, Anderson. I'm going on tonight. You're not his boyfriend.

You're his like, you're like his mentor. You're like his professor. You're his professor. Let me just correct that. You're not his boyfriend. You're his professor that Let me just correct that. You're not his boyfriend. You're his professor that he's always wanted. He's dreamy. And Sanjay likes me, too.

Anyways, back to the brand architecture of HBO. It's as if the company was purchased by a telco. Oh, wait, it was. This is literally. I've got them all on my phone now. I don't know which one to click. What are they thinking? Literally, what are they thinking?

Can you help our listeners? What's the difference between Go, Max, and the other one? Well, that's the problem. Nobody knows. Brand architecture is supposed to be an organizing principle that creates a whole that's greater than the sum of its parts. It makes sense that when Old Navy launches, it gaps Old Navy to give it some credibility. Then if it gets its own wings, it becomes Old Navy from Gap. And then it leaves the nest and becomes Old Navy. Morgan Stanley, Dean Witter. So the Dean Witter customer base follows up to Morgan Stanley. Over time, they drop it. Brand architecture is super complicated,

super important in an era of consolidation in M&A. But when you are doing product development and competing with super smart people with tons of capital that have very simple brand architecture like Netflix or Apple TV Plus, and you start going HBO Go, HBO Now, HBO Max, HBO. They got rid of one of them, didn't they? They're all on my phone. Explain. Do you know the difference between them? I have absolutely no idea. One is if you're a user of them.

One of them doesn't work at all. This is, okay, so first off, this is the beginning of the end for John Stanky. Because if the CEO can't get his shit together around basics such as brand architecture, around what I believe is the crown jewel of the Time Warner empire, HBO, you're going to see HBO's streaming network, which just launched, which is just a shit show in my viewpoint. It's everything from Bugs Bunny cartoons to, it cartoons. It has absolutely no clarity around what it is. Apple TV Plus is moving into taking their luxury position,

and HBO Max is going to be, or whatever they're calling it, it's going to be a big disappointment, and that's going to be the string that not only unwinds Stanky as CEO, but unwinds, pulls the curtain back, and shows that they overpaid for Time Warner. And Time Warner's CEO at the time was incredibly smart to punch out and sell it at an all-time high. And the investment bankers are going to get to work and AT&T is going to spend Time Warner within the next 36 months. This just isn't working.

It isn't working. It does. Anyways, I'm sorry. You know who we have to get on? Listen, you know who we have to get on? You know who we have to get on? Richard Plepler. I'm going to give a call to the Plepler who ran HBO beautifully for so many years and knows all from the brands. Although he did start all those goes and nows, and I remember complaining to him at the time.

But there wasn't this big a deal with HBO Max. I don't know if I have a subscription to HBO Max even though I pay like a fortune for HBO. That's the thing. I don't even know if I can use it or do I have to now pay another bunch of money. It's like crazy. It's really quite crazy. Well, this is what happens in every marketing meeting. I was thinking that last night because I want to watch this Anna Kendrick thing about being a millennial, like the new Sex and the City.

And I don't know if I can. What's that? I like the sound of that. Well, it was reviewed in the Times. It's called – I don't know what it's called. It's Anna Kendrick who's just adorable. She's adorable. And it's about – it's like a series about modern love, essentially.

And you follow her through like 10 boyfriends or something like that or nine, whatever. There's a voiceover. It's very Sex and the City, but apparently it's quite good. Apparently it's quite good. But I don't know if I can, I'm not going to pay $14 for it. Anyway. So back to real news. Yes.

You have set off a firestorm. Firestorm! Oh, my God. Yeah, I heard you were just on the phone. I still got it. Anyway. So, look, back to real news. You have set off a firestorm. Firestorm! Oh, my God. Yeah, I heard you were just on the phone. I still got it. You do still got it. You never lost it, baby. I didn't lose it. You never lost it. I still got it. Seriously, you are all stalls and no chip. Can I just say boom? Sharks have an hour a week on you. Can I have, can I say boom? Can I take your boom? 100% go. Boom! Oh, my God. I am not liking the way this is turning out. Anyway, so I'm going to go back. So I'll give a little bit of a script here, and then you tell us what happened. All right. Okay. So, Cara, you catalyzed, or you were the spark in a firestorm. You called this a Gordian knot in your column, this whole Twitter controversy. Give us a rundown on what's happened here.

I wrote a column in the New York Times about how President Trump amplified a false story about a deceased woman. I'm not going to go into details about him, but he's proliferating a lie. She died of a heart condition. She fell at her head. According to Trump, he is pushing a debunked lie that she was killed by MSNBC host and former Congressman Joe Scarborough. What I did is I had a letter from the widow of this woman, and it had a lot of emotional impact. I did not focus on Joe Scarborough in this case,

because it's not the point. This is a conspiracy theory that's been going around the Internet, and I'm sorry he's being accused of murder, but I focused on the widower of this woman who's being impugned by President Trump because he didn't just recycle the conspiracy theory. He made all kinds of weird allegations about it and in the process, you know, dragged a dead woman across the national stage for his own political gain. And so I wrote that. I wrote that.

So what's interesting about this is that it then led to Twitter to take action somewhere else, which was around mail-in ballots. They didn't think they had him on this one, I guess. And so they did mail-in ballots, and they put just the most baby step of a thing, saying learn really more about mail-in ballots. But it did link to stories that debunked what Trump was writing about mail-in ballots. And it also labeled it potentially misleading.

They couldn't even just say misleading, but they said potentially misleading. And so then Trump, of course, freaked out because he's never been. What's really important here is that he's never been punished on this platform. He's never been stopped. Even though Yahoo does this all the time, Facebook does this all the time. So the whole thing is just a mess. And then he's putting out this executive order that is trying to get rid of 230. Senator Josh Hawley and others are trying to put legislation around it.

And they're doing sort of the dumb version of tech legislation, which means tech will not be legislated. It's because it's a react, you know, Trump didn't get his rocket, Elon didn't put the rocket up for Trump. And therefore, on the way home on the back of an envelope, he wrote an executive order that's so badly done. I've talked to so many people all night last night, that it's going to ensure that the allies of really good tech legislation are not going to join with this. And therefore. What are they proposing, though? I know it's already bifurcated into good legislation, bad legislation. But what are they proposing? They talk about an executive order?

Yeah, he's making legislation via executive order. And essentially it says if you do, if you're an editorial publisher, which we talk about all the time, we think they're editorial publishers, you don't get the protections of 230. But it's so confusing, and they can't get... I was talking to lawyers. I'm not a lawyer. You can't overturn a statute. You've got to do it through legislation. My whole point is 230 needs to be looked at again. But to do this and do it in this way means that it will have court challenges. It will mess this thing up. And good legislation around what should be done about tech liability will not be explored because Trump has having a tantrum and the Republicans rush, you know, yes, sir, yes, sir.

And so apparently it's written badly. It has all these legal references, this thing called Pruneyard and Parkingham. They're the wrong references. And what it does is it does by fiat what needs to be done legislatively by our congress and that's the that is and it's done out of peak because he has to be able to drag a dead woman around the streets and and and and abuse her memory i i i don't even i can't even begin to see how the republicans will get allies with the democrats who are their natural allies.

Yeah, but they're coming at it from different—they both hate social media, but for different reasons. Democrats and progressives think that social media has absolutely no standards around committing libel or slander that impacts people's lives unnecessarily with no fact. And then outside bad actors weigh in and just pour fuel on these terrible, heinous statements on Twitter and this abuse and hate crimes and all this shit. Whereas the Republicans believe that the social media platforms are demonstrating bias against conservative values, right? Well, yes, that's their outside thing. I think they're the most cynical people on earth, all of them. And I think one of the issues is, first of all, they don't want to focus on data regulation. They don't want to focus on privacy where they're really going to get hurt.

And instead, they'd rather have this ridiculous cultural debate, which is an important debate. But there's so, like, the whole idea that I can, free speech, free speech, which Trump put in caps. The Constitution doesn't guarantee free speech if it's Twitter. It just doesn't. Well, they're not obligated to. They're not obligated to. But he's trying to, like, he's conflating all these different very important things because he's

having a giant baby Huey tantrum. And that's my issue, is that this is, it's not that these companies, I believe in sensible regulation of tech companies done in the way that it will stick. And not this bullshit is really what it is. I mean,

some people like Senator Josh Hawley, who is not unintelligent, although he's, you know, a little too far down the conservative bias line for my taste. But nonetheless. Yeah, but he's definitely one of the more reasonable. I think Senator Hawley, I know you know him well, but he strikes me as at least he's thoughtful in trying to figure this shit out. He is, but now he's on the Trump bandwagon. He looks like a toady. He looks like a toady. He is a toady.

Isn't he one of the younger Republicans? Isn't he like 93? Yeah now he's on the Trump bandwagon. He looks like a toady. He looks like a toady. He is a toady. Isn't he one of the younger Republicans? Isn't he like 93? Yeah, he's young. And then he like attaches Matt Goetz to this bill. Matt Goetz. I know. The biggest, like literally the most chucklehead of a congressman who doesn't know a thing. And then he's got this thing.

The guy with the gas mask? Yes. Hot takes with Matt Goetz. Let me tell you about tech. I was like, no, thank you. I'm not going to call him names, but I would. Let me just say. So he has Matt Goetz involved in it.

So it's just like, here's what it is. If you're going to shoot at tech, you better not miss, because these people are going to come at you with lobbyists. Thousands of lawyers. And what's really interesting is there's obviously a break here to take advantage of. Mark Zuckerberg went on Fox News to sort of insult Jack Dorsey, saying he doesn't want to be an arbiter of truth, which that is not what Jack Dorsey is trying to do. And if Facebook thinks just by having Joel Kaplan swan around with the Trump administration, they're going to get out of this, they're not going to. Okay, see you last

minute. I just want to cut through. I want to propose something and you tell me. To me, you go to the root cause. I mean, this is symptoms and we're trying to figure out a way to treat the symptoms. Isn't it the end of the day that the thing causing all this problem is the business model, that it's based on advertising, which is based on engagement. These algorithms have figured out the greatest way to get engagement is rage, even if it's from falsehood. So it's not First Amendment. It's not a First Amendment issue. The issue here is that crazy, oftentimes damaging messaging and narrative gets more oxygen than it would get organically because the algorithm

has been trained to give oxygen to anti-vaxxers and white supremacists. So wouldn't the most effective legislation be to figure out a small way to tax every message that sponsored a penny and force these guys to move to a subscription model, which would A, probably result in shareholder value creation and get rid of all the rage, turn off the rage machine? Well, you know, it was interesting because there was a great Wall Street Journal article about this, which Facebook, of course, tried to shy away from, that they actually had all these studies showing this is exactly what this business does. And then there's some people within the company

who Facebook is calling disgruntled, who didn't like that Mark didn't want to take action on it. And so, of course, anyone who actually wants to do something about it. But it's a pretty damning piece by the Wall Street Journal in that Facebook is like, I hate to say the word quizling, but they're quizlings in this. And they're trying to strike a deal with Trump so that they get out of this and they're throwing the rest of tech. Well, they're co-constructors. They're corrupt. They've realized that let's circumvent laws,

let's circumvent decency, and let's cut a deal with the orange man and keep on printing money. But I'll go back to the, I think the most elegant legislation addresses the externality, but also ideally unlocks shareholder value. We live in a capitalist society. Money is a great thing. When we broke up AT&T, it unlocked tremendous shareholder value and it did away with the monopoly, which had negative externalities. So my question is, and just as a consumer, I think you and I would pay a decent

amount of money monthly for Twitter. I think a lot of people would pay for Instagram. And it might not have the global reach, but it would probably, it would have recurring revenue, which gets valued at a higher multiple. So if they held on to 20% of their user base and had 700 million instead of three and a half billion, but they were each paying $1, $3, $5, $10 a month based on the servicing, I think you'd end up with a company that's more valuable. They didn't have the rage machine trying to pit us against each other. Netflix doesn't get weaponized. Netflix doesn't make us hate each other.

Twitter makes us hate each other. Well, it may be the nature. What's interesting, I just got a text from a very smart person, a lawyer. I can't say who it is right now because I haven't asked for permission, but this person wrote, this is wrong on many levels. Corbin Benson from LA Law? Yes, that's right. An executive order cannot amend the clear language of 230 nor change the longstanding First Amendment jurisprudence on private companies versus public forum. It is most likely the case that Twitter does not have the immunity for the flags, Twitter or any of these companies does not have the immunity for the flags, Twitter or any of these companies, does not have the immunity for the flags it puts on user content, but it should not make it responsible for third parties' content.

This is an act of intimidation against platforms and a crass distraction for the rest of the media. And this is the important part, which I think is key. It would be great to have a reasoned, nuanced conversation on how to build a right public policy for content moderation and disinformation in general, but it's hard to see this EO as anything other than a political distraction from the milestone of human suffering we face this week. And the last part, which is interesting, Twitter may be responsible for the added content, get the facts, but under Section 230, it's 20 years of case law and the First Amendment, it clearly has the right to remove Mr. Trump's personal account. That is, at least as a legal matter, the cleaner solution, but probably not one he wants. I mean, I'm just, this goes so many ways and it's been done on literally the back of an envelope

because Elon Musk's rocket ship didn't go up when he was there. I don't know what else to say. Yeah. So again, I just think you got to go after, you got to get the virus to stop replicating. And I don't see any other way or a more elegant solution than figuring out a way to encourage them to change their business model. As soon as it goes from advertising to subscription, the world becomes a better place. And I think they're worth more. Yeah, absolutely. And so we'll see what happens. I think it'll not survive a court challenge from what everybody tells me. And it'll go, like most of his things, it'll go by the wayside. And we will not get the kind of tech legislation we need.

And by the way, we need it around privacy, around data, and everything else. And, you know, it was interesting. Someone on Twitter last night was like, you're just against it. You were for the getting rid of 230, which I never actually have been. I've thought about reforming it is what is important because Trump did it. No, I'm not for it because this imbecile has allowed the real shot at regulating tech to go away. And that's what I'm furious about. Which imbecile are we talking about, the president?

Trump, Trump, yeah. And his minions all over the place. And just the way they're using it. And, yeah. And his minions all over the place. And just the way they're using it. And of course, it's all used for two things. One, a political game, which is to get his base up, saying he can't say what he wants. And by the way, he can't. And secondly, it's 100,000 deaths from COVID. And that's what this is really about, isn't it? It's that let's distract from the real point, which is this incredible, horrible landmark for the United States being number one in coronavirus deaths. And so just as a journalist, I'm just sort of

curious, what happens when you, you publish that article and it's created a decent amount of controversy. I know senators have reached out to you. Does it create a lot of, like, what happens to your inbox? Do you feel pressure? Do you feel anxiety? Like, what happens? Do people get angry at you? Do people support you? What's happened? What's going on with Kara? What's going on with Kara? I, you know, Chuck Todd calls me a lot, but... Chuck Todd calls me a lot. That's the weakest flex in the world. Well, good for you. No, but I mean TVP. Well, good for you. TVP.

You have to do a lot of stuff. That's besides the point. I'm joking. Howie Mandel wants to have drinks with me. Top that. Listen to me. Don't even start. Chuck Todd called me.

You have Anderson Cooper, so you win. You win. I'm just saying. That was a joke. Well, smell you. Not all of us can be Anderson Cooper's favorite professor. Why does that make me happy? I know. It really does. Chuck Todd smell you. All right. Listen to me. Not all of us can be Anderson Cooper's favorite professor. Why does that make me happy? I know.

It really does. I called you. Listen to me. Listen. It was a joke. You hit the big time. Listen to me. No.

I'm actually going on Stephanie Ruhl tomorrow. You're a favorite person. Now, that's something to brag about. All right. Okay. I do a lot of talking about it. Here's what it does. I really did focus on this, because I want these discussions to happen. I don't feel pressure. I don't know what the pressure is. What happens is Trump. He may, in fact, have been doing this so that he could pick a fight with these people.

But I think what my worry is, is that in calling attention to this, bad actors like Trump get a hold of it and misuse it. And that's really, I think, what's most disappointing here is that we're not going to get the kind of legislation we need to control big tech. And I think they'll emerge. They will unleash their army of lobbyists. They will send their money. They will make sure that they are not included in this kind of stuff.

And therefore, innovation suffers. So that's my great worry is that you have one shot at these people, and this is not the shot. You need to get Elizabeth Warren involved. I don't see Elizabeth Warren jumping in here, and this is her natural, you know what I mean? Because it looks like intimidation and retaliation. You don't do legislation as punishment. You just don't.

Even though it feels like you should, you do it thoughtfully. By the way, you need to do it for the good of tech, too. You don't want this industry to be hobbled. You want to work with everybody in a way that everybody's interests are best served, especially consumers. And that's my goal as consumers. So I agree legislation is warranted across the whole industry, and we need to update this 23-year-old legislation. There's no doubt about that. But even before then, there's a layer of governance called the Board of Directors at Twitter. And what I don't get is,

I think it's time that they would put together, their standards are basically have become a flaccid piece of paper to occasionally try and defend themselves. They don't apply it uniformly. There's no consistency. They're not standards. I don't think you can, but go ahead. What I understand is why don't they come out with some basics and they announce in two weeks or whatever, look, these are the general standards we're trying. And they list 11,000 accounts and one of them is the real Donald Trump and they kick him off. The people who follow him, I believe, you know, good people, bad people, but I don't think they're worth a lot to advertisers. And what I don't understand is just from a business standpoint, starching their hat white, I won't even say starching it white, but taking it from

black to kind of light black, I think they would get a lot of kudos, and I don't think they'd lose that much. I don't think. I think a lot of people would rally to their support. It would create some consistency between this whole namaste bullshit perception that Jack puts out there that is totally hypocritical. And also, at the same time, advertisers don't. The 80 million people that are following Donald Trump, quite frankly, are not who advertisers want to reach. I don't think it would hurt their business that much. Well, it also has a lot of its bots.

But, you know, you're right. We have to move on because – but this is going to be an ongoing thing. It just is like it would be really nice if Josh Hawley and Elizabeth Warren can get along here. And I can't imagine she's going to enter this fray. She's going to wait. She's going to bide her time. And she's going to be the one that does thoughtful legislation, which is going to go nowhere as long as Republicans control the Senate. Exactly. Anyway. All right, Scott, we're going to go to a quick break and come back to talk about SpaceX, Amazon's annual shareholder meetings and a listener mail question.

Fox Creative. This is advertiser content from Zelle. When you picture an online scammer, what do you see? For the longest time, we have these images of somebody sitting crouched over their computer with a hoodie on, just kind of typing away in the middle of the night. And honestly, that's not what it is anymore. That's Ian Mitchell, a banker turned fraud fighter. These days, online scams look more like crime syndicates than individual con artists. And they're making bank. Last year, scammers made off with more than $10 billion. It's mind-blowing to see the kind of infrastructure that's been built to facilitate scamming at scale.

There are hundreds, if not thousands, of scam centers all around the world. These are very savvy business people. These are organized criminal rings. And so once we understand the magnitude of this problem, we can protect people better. One challenge that fraud fighters like Ian face is that scam victims sometimes feel too ashamed to discuss what happened to them. But Ian says one of our best defenses is simple. We need to talk to each other. We need to have those awkward conversations around what do you do if you have text messages you don't recognize?

What do you do if you start getting asked to send information that's more sensitive? recognize? What do you do if you start getting asked to send information that's more sensitive? Even my own father fell victim to a, thank goodness, a smaller dollar scam, but he fell victim. And we have these conversations all the time. So we are all at risk and we all need to work together to protect each other. Learn more about how to protect yourself at vox.com slash Zelle. And when using digital payment platforms, remember to only send money to people you know and trust. HubSpot. It's an AI-powered customer platform that builds campaigns for you, tells you which leads are worth knowing, and makes writing blogs, creating videos, and posting on social a breeze. So now, it's easier than ever to be a marketer. Get started at HubSpot.com slash marketers. Welcome back. SpaceX was scheduled to launch its rocket Crew Dragon into space this week, but the launch was delayed due to weather.

They'll try again this Saturday. The president went down there and had to come back, as you saw in some of the news reports. If they're successful, the launch will catapult a private company off of the Earth for the first time in history. They'll make Elon Musk the first American capitalist to expand beyond the planet. So this is really, I do think it's exciting and their suits are pretty nifty. So is the future of space exploration going to be privatized? And there's obviously profits here. Where does this leave NASA, who's working with Elon Musk and Bezos and Blue Origin? And of course, there's Richard Branson and others. So

how do you look at this? Because you're a longtime Elon Musk critic, but pretty cool stuff going on here, I think. I don't think there's anything around it. It's inspiring. And the fact that they can put a gallon or a pound of material into space for what appears to be a fraction of what the cost government has been able to put it into space and innovation and a new space race. I just worry, though, I don't know. Privatization. Pardon? Privatization.

Also, I'm a guy who remembers when I was four or five years old getting excited. I had that picture of the astronauts of Buzz Aldrin in my room, and then I had the commemorative Franklin Mint coins of the space shuttle. And so NASA was always sort of heroic for me. NASA was pure and heroic. All of us. I think all of us.

And they did a good job at PR. I hate to say that, but there was a lot of the movies and things like that. By the way, they had one of the best websites initially, NASA. And also all the movies, the right stuff. And, like, they had a whole thing going. They had a whole thing going. So I always think, well, I mean, so for example, the original content budget of Netflix, Amazon, and Apple is going to be approximately this year the budget for NASA.

And I think, okay, maybe capitalism isn't working. Yeah. So like a space race, innovation in space, you know, I think there's more interesting things around putting solar panels in kind of near space than there is around trying to colonize Mars. I think colonizing Mars has always seemed like just a crazy thing, although I would like Newt Gingrich to be the first man on Mars. He seems to be a fan of it. Let's leave him there. Drop him off. I've never really understood that, but I think it's exciting.

Well, there's a lot of people like that. You don't want to go to Mars? You don't want to go to Mars. That's interesting. Most, like, dudes... I don't want to leave my house. Drop them off. I've never really understood that, but I think it's exciting. Well, there's a lot of people like that. What do you think? You don't want to go to Mars? You don't want to go to Mars. That's interesting. I don't want to leave my house. Go to Mars. That's true.

I don't want to go to Publix. You're unlike a lot of people. They all want to go up and do that. I don't have any interest whatsoever. That would be crazy. I don't even want to go up for this short flight to look back at the Earth. I know that's, it feels like I'll vomit a lot. It feels like a lot of vomiting.

That's what I, you know? I want to watch the right stuff and go to sleep. Have an edible and go to sleep. Boom. Done. I think two things. I think, as in many things, Elon Musk is innovating here, just like with cars. I don't think all the car makers would have moved without Tesla.

Whatever you think of the valuation, he has caused things to happen, right? Caused important, by the way, important things to happen. He's a genius. He just has, in my opinion, fairly mediocre character. But anyways, but I'll give you an example. I think the more exciting thing that he's doing, as we're glomming on, is the tunnel they're building in Vegas. I think the Boring Company is more interesting than SpaceX. I do, too. I do, too. He invited me to see it, but now he's probably mad at me.

But think about, this is an enormous opportunity. And that is, coming out of this pandemic, it's not only about what will be different, but what will we leave behind? And one of the things that I think we would, and I am not an environmentalist, but I would like to leave a lot of these emissions behind. And I feel like we should, as soon as possible, pave over highways. And in some regions, they've done that. They've just gone to all pedestrian areas. And what if we were to, I think Elon Musk saying, okay, these are the 12 busiest routes in the world, and we're just going to build tunnels between downtown Chicago and O'Hare,

between Midtown and LaGuardia. I still can't figure out why we don't have a nine-minute subway between Midtown and LaGuardia. But I think that actually has a lot more impact on people's lives. I agree. The next trillionaire is not going to be about putting a man on Mars. It's going to be about giving you a year or two years of your life back from shit like watching advertising or managing your kid's diabetes or commuting to work or the airport. That's the opportunity. That is a big frigging thought.

I agree with you. I think here's my worry, privatization of anything that I think should be public. This is something for the all of humanity and I think the idea, you know, I keep going back to the Arnold Schwarzenegger movie about the guy who ran Mars. Like, you're going to have people selling oxygen and

this is how much it costs. So the privatization of anything that is, I think, there's certain things that are public. Public goods. Public goods. And the idea that Google or SpaceX or anybody else controls space and controls satellites and controls this and that without very serious government involvement seems, and here they are involved in everything else. But it's just the, you know, the proclivity of some in our government to want to privatize everything is dangerous. And you can see it happening with private prisons, which abuses happen.

It's just there's some things we have to do as a people, as a group of people. But, you know, we can't even wear masks at the same time. But a lot of it just comes down to funding, and that is we have consistently decided, all right, let's pay for wars and let's pay for tax cuts on rich people. As a result, we have to defund government. And when you defund government, the best and brightest don't go to work for NASA any longer. They go to work for Bridgewater. So if we want government to be more competent, if we want, and I do think actually government is a lot more competent than people give them credit for. Agreed.

But we have to fund them. So the best lawyers in the world, the best, the guys and gals who come out of NYU Law School, come out of Bolt Law School, need to get better pay and have a more prestigious career going to work for the Department of Justice than being a lawyer who draws up investment memorandums for private equity firms. I do think the Justice Department, except until Bill Barr has been a place where people do want to go and punch their ticket, for sure. I don't think that's lost.

But NASA used to get the best in bridles. I'm not sure. I think most of them go to Google now. Yep, they do. Or work for Elon Musk. In any case, we're going to move on to the next story this week. Amazon will be holding

their annual shareholder meetings. A group of Amazon shareholders are using the moment to urge the company's board of directors to release more data about its efforts to protect workers. The Los Angeles Times had a devastating story about this, by the way. Amazon hasn't disclosed how many warehouse workers have died from coronavirus. The company also hasn't provided a total number of workers who have fallen ill from the virus.

So these shareholders meetings, I have covered lots of shareholders meetings in my long life as a reporter. And there used to be, as you know, Evelyn Y. Davis, who used to come to meetings, all kinds of people. Does this work, these shareholders? To me, they're just kabuki shows. But will the shareholders be able to do anything about this? I think not. But what is your take? Absolutely nothing. The only reason Twitter is under fire is because what is worse than creating despair, creating shame, creating anxiety in people's lives for, you know, so more people click on Chobani ads, which is essentially what Jack Dorsey, under the governance of Omid Kordestani as the chairman of the board, when they decide that an extra nickel is worth the risk of really ruining people's lives, that is bad.

What's worse in the eyes of a capitalist society is when you have poor shareholder returns. So Amazon can largely get away with almost anything right now because their stock's going up. And at the end of the day, a shareholder meeting is for shareholders. And so you're basically inviting the biggest fans in the world to his. It's an agora. It's a celebration because there's just no getting around it. If you had purchased $100 of stock in Amazon, it'd be worth $11,000 right now. And you have a lot of people showing up who,

because of Jeff Bezos' leadership and vision, their kids have better healthcare, they get to go vacation at almond resorts, and they have a broader selection set of mates. And so they might say, yeah, that'd be great. But at the end of the day, we love this guy and he's delivering. The Twitter shareholder meeting will be more interesting because you can be, it's like dating in New York. I know a lot of guys in New York who are really despicable, but as long as they're making a lot of money, they're fine. It's when they stop making money that people notice how despicable they are. And that's what's happening. Isn't that nice? And that's what's happening with Twitter. Look at dating in the modern age.

Twitter's crime isn't being despicable. It's being despicable and not showing a return to shareholders. And Amazon has not committed that crime. Amazon continues to deliver in spades. And this guy right now, he's going to go down, in my opinion, as the most visionary guy in business. Vaccination of a supply chain. They're just firing on so many cylinders. Even if you compare them against, there's big tech and then there's Amazon,

and Amazon is just kind of running away with it. So that shareholder meeting, yeah, there'll be some people in tie-dye barking at the moon. It's not going to mean a thing. I hate how you don't love democracy. You hate democracy, don't you? Barking at the moon. They're saying their piece. They have free speech. Capital letters you don't love democracy. You hate democracy, don't you? Barking at the moon. They're saying their piece. They have free speech.

Well, the problem with democracy is the demo. The problem with democracy is the people part. And that is democracy. Did you just pull some Latin out on me? Well, here's the thing. Did you just Latin at me? Democracy on, hold on. I want to know, did you Latin at me?

I did Latin. I went Latin. I went all Latin on your jungle cat. So, look, democracy on. I want to know, did you Latin at me? I did Latin. I went Latin. I went all Latin on your jungle cat. So look, democracy is so facto, go ahead. It's hugely flawed. What's the innovation in democracy is a liberal democracy. And I don't mean liberal in a progressive way, but the fact that we've been smart enough to insert institutions so we don't have mob democracy and we slow the demo down. And that is we have courts. We have laws. We have regulatory agencies. We have media that says, okay, let's really look at this issue before we start pulling people out of cars and hanging them giving them money, even though that's gone away with Citizens United. The innovation here isn't democracy. The innovation is a liberal democracy that inserts institutions to play on our slow thinking. So I don't like democracy.

All right. Okay. All right. Well, here's the deal. I think it sounds like a Kara Swisher column. Maybe I could set something up. I think they should release the names. If they're going to have this vaccinated workforce, they might as well own up to how many people are sick there. That's my feeling. All right. I think they should produce it. I think they should say how many people have gotten sick, how many people have died, and what they're doing about it. I think that would be such an interesting way to do it and to handle it.

I think they should get it. Oh, my God, my new hero. We've got to talk about this before I forget. We're not doing this because we've got to get to Listerman. Okay., my new hero. We've got to talk about this before I forget. We're not doing the details. We've got to get to Listerman. Okay, absolutely my new hero. Very quick. Biggest gangster, Andrew Ross Sorkin. Did you see the exchange between him and Joe Kiernan?

Oh, I did, yeah. I was just texting with his wife. Rebecca, let's cue the exchange between Andrew and Joe Kiernan. Hold on. I'm not going to do this with you, Joe. Every morning, every morning, you try to question the questions I'm asking. These are questions that investors are asking every single morning. I am just trying to get through some of this clutter. I may be right. I may be wrong. Investors may be right. They may be wrong. That's

what makes a market. But it doesn't make people a good person or a bad person. It doesn't make it right to act the way you are. I'm sorry. Oh, my. That guy, I thought he was just this nice Canadian spy. By the way, he's not a Canadian or a spy, but I'm convinced he is. That guy, he literally described the baton of the next generation of leadership in media. Oh, he really did. That was good. Joe Kernan. Team Andrew.

Powerful. Team Andrew. And he just made Joe Kernan look like this ridiculous fossil, like out of touch. I've been saving – and Joe Kernan and CNBC perfectly epitomize what is wrong with America right now, and that is if the human species – If the human race gets wiped out, that would be bad. But what would be worse is if the NASDAQ goes down. That was his defense. I've been saving people from selling

shares at the bottom. That's his defense. Let me just say, I read the whole thing, and I'm on team Andrew 100%. But he did make a point. That's right, he did. And I think one of the things that he put about is, how do you not panic in this? But he wasn't making a smart argument. He was making a venal argument. He accused Andrew of panicking about PPP, and I went back, and all Andrew did was highlight that doctors and hospitals couldn't get basic PPE. That's not panicking. That's bringing to light how fucked up and how American exceptionalism is not that exceptional anymore. I thought he was great. It'll be interesting to see when they get back in the studio. That's all

I have to say. I have never enjoyed talking to Joe Kernan when I'm on that show. Joe Kernan is, I think Joe Kernan is actually very bright. I think he's a good analyst. But when he starts berating a fellow co-host because, you know, such that he can get a call from his buddy, President Trump, and I can go, way to go, Joe. I mean, and meanwhile, Andrew's like, Andrew made a point like, okay, you know 100,000 people have died, right? Yeah. Yeah. Okay, Scott, we've got a listener question.

Roll tape. You've got. You've got. I can't believe I'm going to be a mailman. You've got mail. Hey, hey, Scott and Kara. This is Zeta calling in from Massachusetts with a question. I've been noticing tons of mental health platforms and therapy-based apps popping up everywhere.

You have BetterHelp, Ginger, Regain, Talkspace, Headspace, Mood Mission, et cetera, et cetera. No doubt that this country needs to confront our mental health crisis and we all need to talk about our feelings more often, but what's the longevity of these platforms and where do you both see this market going next? I mean, is tech entering into mental health going to help or hurt us? Well, that's a great question because some of them are our sponsors. I think BetterHelp is our sponsor. We've had Headspace, obviously, as a sponsor at one point. But here's the deal. I didn't even know about Mood Mission. I've never heard of that. I don't think it's a bad thing for people to seek mental health wherever they can. And so the question is about confidentiality, about data, about things like

that. But I don't necessarily think it's a bad thing that more people avail themselves. There's been so many recent stories about how depressed this country is. I think a third of people are in depression. There was a story I saw run by the other day in one of the newspapers. So, Scott, what do you think? This is your biggest area. So, Scott, what do you think? This is your biggest area. Well, just as we used to hide the disabled because we were ashamed of them, and FDR had the confidence towards the end of his presidency to be more transparent about his disability, and we became more comfortable and more empathetic about people with disability.

And then we started talking about cancer openly and that it wasn't shameful if you had breast or prostate cancer. It didn't mean there was anything bad or wrong about you. We started talking about cancer more openly. That gives us the resources and the ability to start to deal with these things and also brings people out of the shadows so they don't feel shamed and live lives that are worse than they need to be. And the same thing, the wonderful unlock here is that over the last, I would say, just five or ten years, we've started talking openly about mental health. And so I think the marketing and I think the profit incentive here is actually a good thing. And the larger trend, though, is that I think two of the biggest unlocks, if you will, that COVID-19 is accelerating is what I would refer to as the great dispersion. And that is, can we deliver certification in education, even if it doesn't have the experience of a college degree or college, without running it through the filter and the constraints of a campus?

The biggest unlock is probably the dispersion away from hospitals and doctor's rooms, having realized that 95 to 99.9% of people that contracted, survived, and developed antibodies for COVID-19 never went into a hospital, much less a doctor's office. So the ability to take the- Telemedicine, yeah. All this telemedicine. One medical- Would you invest? Yeah, would you? One medical will likely be, it's stock's of substantial, but I think one medical stock is going to be one of those five or 10 baggers

over the next three years. What about any of these meditation? Would you buy into these therapy ones? I mean, obviously I'm sure you've been approached. Yeah. So I have been approached by those. I think the meditation that Sam Harris has won, I think that stuff is really powerful. I think it'll be a feature, not a standalone product of something bigger. I think the stuff that will create tremendous shareholder value is the harder stuff, and that is figuring out HIPAA compliance, One Medical. I think it's multi-channel. I think it's a mix of clinics, brick-and-mortar clinics, and smart cameras, and the ability, if you're camping and your kid gets a rash

and he was in poison ivy you immediately want to pull someone up on your phone and then have them give you the security to say okay you need to pack up the tents and get here or say no you're fine tomorrow drive into town and get this steroid ointment and i've already written a prescription and it's been electronically there's just so much a lot of these things are patterns like a lot of things people get i i do that with my dermatologist now almost completely. I go in because I'm really obsessed with the idea of skin cancer. But I definitely center, we do it a lot through photos, like look at this. Yeah, 100%. And it works just fine. It works great. And then when we go in, it's always the correct diagnosis,

which is really interesting. And I think you're right. If you could actually touch it and then they could get a sample, there's probably ways to do that someday, sort of Star Trek-ian, but a lot of stuff for sure. And people have really dropped off going to doctors during this COVID crisis. And I think as a lot of things, it finds you don't need to, you don't need to. One of the problems of this country is that we are constantly like running into emergency rooms and it raises costs and things like that. that we are constantly running into emergency rooms, and it raises costs and things like that. And we don't have things like One Medical, which I think work really well, where you have just a place to go as if you're going to the store, like you're going to a store.

And so it'll be interesting. The issue is that if Google or Amazon start buying these things up and they have all your data, and including this very highly personal data, we need legislators, smart legislators, to make sure that this stuff is not, this data is not abused. Again, in my opinion, it's a DOJ and antitrust thing. But back to online mental health, there's two things we need to remove. We need to remove the shame, and I think we're doing a good job of that. And then the next thing we need to remove is the friction.

So I have a friend who reached out to me who's actually a fairly famous, well-resourced guy and smart. And he called me and he said, my daughter has been struggling, and it's done a number on me, and I'm struggling. Do you know of someone I could speak to? Because you and Kara talk about mental health a lot. And it just struck me that a guy with these resources and this intelligence and Google didn't know where to go, didn't know who to reach out to. Well, we talked about that with testing. Like, what do we do? We were like, ah, we're smart people. But anything that removes the friction such that you can pull up an app and get matched with a

great therapist or someone who focuses on if your child is struggling because of COVID-19 and lacks the structure of school and socialization to be connected immediately with a juvenile adolescent psychiatrist. This is wonderful, and this is an opportunity for technology to remove friction, reduce costs, reduce the shame, do it in the privacy of your own home, not feel self-conscious about going to some building in the Upper East Side or wherever it is you go and waiting in the waiting room and not making eye contact with the person going in and leaving.

I think this is a wonderful thing. Whether big tech gets into it and whether the DOJ actually wakes up from their 20-year slumber and says, sorry, we don't want you in this. You know, that's a different issue. But on the whole, these apps and these innovations around mental health, I think it's a wonderful thing. I do see Amazon moving in here. Oh, yeah. What other than manufacturing cars, I mean, what won't they move into?

Yeah. Here they come. Would you use one? Would you use one? An online. Therapist. Therapist. Oh, I would 100%. And I'm not.

I was about to say I don't. I'm not in therapy. I should be. But I would absolutely use them. And I'm all about my doctor. I go to this, one of these VIP concierge doctors. And the only reason I do it, I like my old doctor, but he couldn't for HIPAA reasons or something because of the clinic. I couldn't text with him. So the only reason I go to see my doctor. That's right, you have to go on those platforms, those weird platforms.

I go to get my prescription of Lunesta refilled. I can't sleep if I'm not in my own bed and I'm not in my own bed a lot because I travel a lot. And they would say, you got to come back in. We got to talk to you. You got to make an appointment. You got to fill out that same damn paperwork again. And so I went to a much higher-priced VIP thing where now, for whatever reason, I can text the guy, and he'll text me back. Yep. I had this situation with my doctor. I had to get on a really kludgy thing to talk to her about something that was simple,

and she couldn't talk to me on the phone, and she couldn't text with me. It's ridiculous. And we went on to this super kludgy thing, and I said, this is just not the way. It was very, it was, and it was something I should have talked to her quicker about. But anyway, it's an interesting topic. Thank you so much, Zeta, from Massachusetts. Thank you, Zeta. It's a great topic.

By the way, I was a Zeta Beta Tau at UCLA, so I feel a bond with Zeta. All right. Whatever that is. You frat boy. That's right. You're a frat boy. All right, Scott, one more. President of the Interfraternity Council,

king of the jarheads, as I like to call it. Okay, good to know. Good to know. All right, Scott, one more quick break. We'll be back for predictions. The Capital Ideas Podcast now features a series hosted by Capital Group CEO, Mike Gitlin.

Through the words and experiences of investment professionals, you'll discover what differentiates their investment approach, what learnings have shifted their career trajectories, and how do they find their next great idea? Invest 30 minutes in an episode today. Subscribe wherever you get your podcasts. Published by Capital Client Group, Inc. Support for this podcast comes from Anthropic. You already know that AI is transforming the world around us,

but lost in all the enthusiasm and excitement is a really important question. How can AI actually work for you? And where should you even start? Claude from Anthropic may be the answer. Claude is a next-generation AI assistant built to help you work more efficiently without sacrificing safety or reliability. Anthropic's latest model, Claude 3.5 Sonnet, can help you organize thoughts, solve tricky problems, analyze data, and more. Whether you're brainstorming alone or working on a team with thousands of people, all at a price that works for just about any use case.

If you're trying to crack a problem involving advanced reasoning, need to distill the essence of complex images or graphs, or generate heaps of secure code, Clawed is a great way to save time and money. Plus, you can rest assured knowing that Anthropic. Clawed is a great way to save time and money. Plus, you can rest assured knowing that Anthropic built Clawed with an emphasis on safety. The leadership team founded the company with a commitment to an ethical approach that puts humanity first. To learn more, visit anthropic.com slash clawed. That's anthropic.com slash Claude.

Okay, Scott, last week you predicted Shopify was going to make a big purchase. I thought that was a really smart prediction. I think there's still time to see if that one comes true, but give us another one. I thought that was really actually very intelligent. And on my other podcast, Prof G, I interviewed the founder of Square, Jim McKelvey, who's got a book out. He was saying that he thought the biggest threat to Square and payment systems was Shopify, which I thought was really interesting. I wasn't thinking about it. He also said something very interesting, that he thought the best payment system in the world was Uber because you just had to get out of the backseat.

I thought that was really insightful. Yep. Anyways, my prediction is that— I got out of a cab the other day without paying. All of us do. All of us do. And they're used to it. They're like, hey, buddy, see, it's yellow. You got to pay. You got to pay us. It's so funny. It's so funny how you get used to things. Anyway, go ahead. Predictions. So I think that, or I predict, I think we're going to have a vaccine later than everyone would like to think. I think these things are hard. I hope it happens really fast. And by the way, all these universities, and I've been thinking a lot about this, who are announcing that their opening in fall is nothing but a CEO talking up his stock because every university needs people to send in their deposits right now. Universities are not going to open in the fall. They're not going to open. Okay. Oh, wow. Oh, don't tell me that. Don't tell me that. Unless we have a vaccine and it's distributed. I mean, just, and I hate to, and by the way,

the people I work with at NYU are super thoughtful, super empathetic, and whatever they ask me to do, I'm going to do just because I trust them. But what I would project is unless we have a vaccine by September 1st, are we really going to send 55-year-olds into a room with 170 kids where the windows don't open? And then on week 12, send them to the four corners of the earth. It's as if we've decided to try and super spread the virus globally again. And the notion that universities just don't work until there's a vaccine unless they're remote. And Cal State and Cambridge have the confidence to say, and the only ones that are being really honest in the sense that they know what they're going to do are the ones who said we're going all online in 2020, and we're going to focus on that. And why can they do that, Kara?

Because Cal State, which is kind of the unsung hero of California, educates 500,000 people. The majority of them are commuters. The tuition is $7,000 in-state, $7,000 in-state, $18,000 out-of-state. So if they give you some education, some certification, and a decent online experience, it's worth it. And everyone creating or continuing this bullshit narrative and acting like their leaders saying we're coming back in the fall, it's because they're protecting their $58,000 experience and adult, a child care system that no longer makes sense. I like your whole education thing, your whole reform education bent. It's a huge opportunity.

I agree with you. Ohio State will educate almost as many kids as the entire Ivy League combined. What an opportunity for Google to go to Ohio State and say, you cut your cost 10 or 20 percent because, let's be honest, some of these tenured people just need to be shed and face the same competitive pressure that everyone faces every day. And we're going to bring the cost per student down 30 or 40 percent using technology. It's going to be a hybrid model. And you're going to educate 100,000 kids. And we're going to go back to where it was when I was in high school, where 40 percent of applicants get into UCLA, not 15 now. We need to reverse this trend. And it's a huge opportunity. I like this Scott Galloway. This is a Scott Galloway I can get behind.

Thanks for that. As opposed to the other Scott Galloways. The other Scott Galloways, I can get behind. Thanks for that. As opposed to the other Scott Galloways. The other Scott Galloways. But that's not even my prediction. I got off on a tangent. My prediction, the vaccine is coming. It's coming out of China. China has the largest espionage network in the world where they send people to graduate schools here. They plant them in the best companies, including the best biotech companies. They leak information back to their Chinese counterparts who are much more coordinated, much more disciplined, and they are going to come up with a vaccine. And it's going to be about a moment or a week of hand-wringing whether we use it, and then we will use it. But the vaccine's coming out of China. Oh, wow. I like that one.

You have some very bold predictions lately. I like your predictions of boldness. I like it. I like it. It's the edibles. It's the edibles. Oh, here we go boldness. I like it. I like it. It's the edibles. It's the edibles. Oh, here we go. There's the other Scott. He's back. Okay.

That's a big one. Chinese vaccine. We will take the Chinese vaccine. Coming out of China. And you know what? No one's even thought of that. We think it's just, we're such narcissists in the U.S.

We think we have a lock on innovation. No, we don't. No, we do not. We do not. Alibaba is more innovative than than fucking facebook or amazon right now i've always said that when i said it's a big mistake to talk about chinese's copycats that may be but they're also good oh no they're thieves but they're smart well they're fantastic at it and by the way that's what we anyways i'm not even

going to go there but corporate espionage is the new Cold War spy versus spy, and they're bed-out espionage. Scott, I like it. I think you're correct, and I think we will probably take—you will take the vaccine, the Chinese vaccine, won't you? Day one. If you had the Chinese virus, you need to take the Chinese vaccine. Day one. I mean, 88% of my toys under the Christmas tree and every chip sensor set in my phone is from China. Why wouldn't I?

I mean, it's so ridiculous to be like, I wouldn't take a vaccine out of China. Your whole life is taken out of China, Bob. Yeah. Yeah. I think it'll be interesting to see if, as in masks, it becomes a political football. It will be for about a week. And then people will decide, well, I'm going to put my politics aside. No, I don't know.

It's one of these things. And it sort of reminds me, I was thinking around the whole mask thing, that some people in the GOP, not all of them, as I said, Mike DeWine and others are really smart, is that they're suicidal and homicidal at the same time. And that's, in this case, if they don't take a vaccine that works, they're suicidal. So that's the way it goes. All right, Scott. Do you have any predictions? I don't. I think I'll leave them to you. My prediction is that I have, I'm going to try to make another splash next week. How about that? I'm going to try to set off a firestorm. I will set off another firestorm. That is my prediction. You're catalyzing a conversation. I think it's important.

I am. I think it is, too. I think it is, too. I do, too. And we'll see where it goes. I don't love every direction it goes in, but I don't have control of serenity now, as the great Jerry Stiller said, the late, great Jerry Stiller. Jerry Stiller? Yeah, he just died. Oh, yeah, yeah, Ben's dad. Just died. The Seinfeld guy. Anyway, Scott, it's time to get out of here. Are you going to watch Elon blast into space for all of this weekend? No, I'm watching myself on Anderson Cooper tonight,

and then my TV show on Vice, which you never pimp at 10 p.m. Oh, I will pimp. Talking about media tonight. Oh, and you're on. You're on. I'm on it. I will pimp it then. Yes, I am.

We talk to each other. What did we talk about? You do a drive-by. You're on. What did we it. I will pimp it then. Yes, I am. We talk to each other. What are we talking about? You do a drive-by. You're on. What are we talking about? In your Handmaid's Tale outfit. Oh, stop it. You need some help.

Amanda, literally, we need a fashion intervention here. Where's Amanda? Do you know what I did? I made her scones last night. In the middle of the night, I was texting and arguing with people, and I made scones in the middle of the night. And she sent me a beautiful picture saying, these are so beautiful. You're so thoughtful. Thank you very much. That's what she's doing. She's eating I made scones in the middle of the night and she sent me a beautiful picture saying these are so beautiful you're so thoughtful thank you very much that's what she's doing she's eating my delicious scones in any case they're not too dry as for Larry David if you'd like one they're very fluffy anyway don't forget if there's a story in the news and you're

curious about it and want to hear our opinion on it email us at pivot at voxmedia.com to be featured on the show read us out please oh today's episode was produced by Rebecca Sinanis. Our executive producer is Erica Anderson. Special thanks to Drew Burrows. Fernando Finete engineered our program. If you like what you heard, please download or subscribe. It's a beautiful day here in Florida. I hope it's a beautiful day where you are. And let's be kind on our social media platforms. And let's ignore and not buy the products of anything, anything near a mean or a hateful tweet. Let's, let's call on our better angels, Cara. Let's call on our mejora Angeles. Terrible Spanish. But you know what I mean? All right. Thank you, Scott.

All right. Thank you, Scott. Support for this podcast comes from Anthropic. It's not always easy to harness the power and potential of AI. For all the talk around its revolutionary potential, a lot of AI systems feel like they're designed for specific tasks performed by a select few. Well, Clawed by Anthropic is AI for everyone. The latest model, Clawed 3.5 Sonnet, offers groundbreaking intelligence at an everyday price. Clawed Sonnet can generate code,

help with writing, and reason through hard problems better than any model before. You can discover how Clawed can transform your business at anthropic.com slash Claude. Stripe has helped countless startups and established companies alike reach their growth targets, make progress on their missions, and reach more customers globally. The platform offers a suite of specialized features and tools to fast-track growth, like Stripe Billing, which makes it easy to handle subscription-based charges, invoicing, and all recurring revenue management needs. You can learn how Stripe helps companies of all sizes make progress at Stripe.com.

That's Stripe.com to learn more. Stripe. Make progress.